Don't shoot the hostages

[jlamphere]

The basis for my thinking this was not a PE is that if the shooter were to rack the gun somewhere else in the COF and leave live ammo, I would not call that either. My thought process was to ask what the intent of the rule is and did the shooter comply with the intent of the rule. I think he did and the racked out round was a brain fart that cost him time and potentially not having enough ammo at some point. The reload was clean, he dinged himself in time & ammo lost, did not gain any competitive advantage, so no PE in my opinion. I can see how it could go the other way as well. Call 'em as you see 'em boys, that is all anyone can ask, and when you are wrong, change it and move on. This is a game, let's have some fun while we are here.

[motosapiens]

Gary, Rules are Rules. And, many are written so poorly that multiple interpretations (and Tribal Rules) can result. My post regarding my interpretation of the quoted Rule is just that - my interpretation of the Rule as it is written. "Live ammo" is specifically mentioned in that Rule. "Live ammunition" left on the ground and "not secured" is also specifically listed in that Rule. How do you justify a "live round"... left on the ground... and "not secured" after a TAC/RWR reload?

I always assumed that wording was meant to simply include revolver ammo, since it's not in a magazine. Until today I have never heard of a PE for inadvertently ejecting a live round by racking the slide when it wasn't necessary. That seems pretty silly to me, and probably helps explain why some people make fun of IDPA (not me, of course).

[GOF]

Gary, Rules are Rules. And, many are written so poorly that multiple interpretations (and Tribal Rules) can result. My post regarding my interpretation of the quoted Rule is just that - my interpretation of the Rule as it is written. "Live ammo" is specifically mentioned in that Rule. "Live ammunition" left on the ground and "not secured" is also specifically listed in that Rule. How do you justify a "live round"... left on the ground... and "not secured" after a TAC/RWR reload?

I always assumed that wording was meant to simply include revolver ammo, since it's not in a magazine. Until today I have never heard of a PE for inadvertently ejecting a live round by racking the slide when it wasn't necessary. That seems pretty silly to me, and probably helps explain why some people make fun of IDPA (not me, of course).

The fact that you always "assumed" that the Rule only applied to revolver shooters with a loose round is one of the problems with the Rules officiating in IDPA. Read the Rule. It says "live rounds" It does not differentiate between revolver or semi-auto rounds.

It just says "live rounds". There can be, I suppose, different interpretations of what is... and isn't... a "live round" regarding this Rule (although I fail to see how a "live round' can suddenly become a not "live round").

With any luck we'll get some Rules from the Tiger Teams that are not so much subject to individual interpretations, or " I always assumed" standards.

This is a game. It is scored by electronic timers to within .001 seconds. They declare winners. Based upon that, Is it too much to ask that we have firm Rules that are not subject to multiple interpretations... or "I always assumed"?

People travel distances to shoot these IDPA matches. That costs vehicle gas or air fare. Then they pay a match entry fee. Then they have incidental expenses beyond what their ammo cost them for that day.

All to compete for a place in the club standings, or (at a Sanctioned Match) a $10 or $12 wooden plaque. One or two stupid calls can throw them out of match contention. By the same token, every PE they are NOT called for penalizes every other shooter in that match by the same 3 seconds.

I'd like to see the Rules, and the calls, be a bit more consistent. YMMV

[motosapiens]

Gary, Rules are Rules. And, many are written so poorly that multiple interpretations (and Tribal Rules) can result. My post regarding my interpretation of the quoted Rule is just that - my interpretation of the Rule as it is written. "Live ammo" is specifically mentioned in that Rule. "Live ammunition" left on the ground and "not secured" is also specifically listed in that Rule. How do you justify a "live round"... left on the ground... and "not secured" after a TAC/RWR reload?

I always assumed that wording was meant to simply include revolver ammo, since it's not in a magazine. Until today I have never heard of a PE for inadvertently ejecting a live round by racking the slide when it wasn't necessary. That seems pretty silly to me, and probably helps explain why some people make fun of IDPA (not me, of course).

The fact that you always "assumed" that the Rule only applied to revolver shooters with a loose round is one of the problems with the Rules officiating in IDPA. Read the Rule. It says "live rounds" It does not differentiate between revolver or semi-auto rounds.

It just says "live rounds". There can be, I suppose, different interpretations of what is... and isn't... a "live round" regarding this Rule (although I fail to see how a "live round' can suddenly become a not "live round").

With any luck we'll get some Rules from the Tiger Teams that are not so much subject to individual interpretations, or " I always assumed" standards.

This is a game. It is scored by electronic timers to within .001 seconds. They declare winners. Based upon that, Is it too much to ask that we have firm Rules that are not subject to multiple interpretations... or "I always assumed"?

People travel distances to shoot these IDPA matches. That costs vehicle gas or air fare. Then they pay a match entry fee. Then they have incidental expenses beyond what their ammo cost them for that day.

All to compete for a place in the club standings, or (at a Sanctioned Match) a $10 or $12 wooden plaque. One or two stupid calls can throw them out of match contention. By the same token, every PE they are NOT called for penalizes every other shooter in that match by the same 3 seconds.

I'd like to see the Rules, and the calls, be a bit more consistent. YMMV

Well, I read somewhere that that benefit of doubt should go to the shooter, so I would be hesitant to call PE for something this silly unless I were CERTAIN it should be one. I don't think this incident justifies a PE.

Thanks for sharing your insight. I'm sure you would be a pleasure to shoot with, and I look forward to the opportunity to do so some day in the future.

[Model19]

I'd venture a guess that the "live ammunition left on the ground" was written with revo shooters specifically in mind back in the day. A revo version of leaving a loaded mag behind most likely. Perhaps the powers that be felt that leaving a single racked out live round behind in a case like we have been discussing (quite politey I must add, thanks for that) merited a PE, but I doubt it. I'd bet they intended to penalize dropped partial mags and guys dumping 3 or 4 good rounds from a revo when one or two went "click" and they just dumped the cylinder on the ground and reloaded. But that's just my take on the issue looking back from a historian's standpoint so to speak. I too think that what happened here was penalty enough in time wasted all by itself, and I do not remember being taught in the SO class that it was a penalty nor can I find it specificaly mentioned in the rulebook or the addendum. The reload was completed correctly by any interpretation of the rules before the round was ejected. The judgement does go to the shooter. I may be all wet, but I got broad shoulders and a towel.

[GOF]

I'd venture a guess that the "live ammunition left on the ground" was written with revo shooters specifically in mind back in the day. A revo version of leaving a loaded mag behind most likely. Perhaps the powers that be felt that leaving a single racked out live round behind in a case like we have been discussing (quite politey I must add, thanks for that) merited a PE, but I doubt it. I'd bet they intended to penalize dropped partial mags and guys dumping 3 or 4 good rounds from a revo when one or two went "click" and they just dumped the cylinder on the ground and reloaded. But that's just my take on the issue looking back from a historian's standpoint so to speak. I too think that what happened here was penalty enough in time wasted all by itself, and I do not remember being taught in the SO class that it was a penalty nor can I find it specificaly mentioned in the rulebook or the addendum. The reload was completed correctly by any interpretation of the rules before the round was ejected. The judgement does go to the shooter. I may be all wet, but I got broad shoulders and a towel.

Back to the actual wording of the Rule (assumprions and intentions politely left aside). Noted that "intended to penalize guys for dropping partial mags, or revo shooters dumping three or four rounds on the ground when one or two went click, and they just dumped the cylinder on the ground and reloaded".

In the first case (partial mag) unless a malfunction has occured, you can't just dump it and leave it. I think most are in agreement on that. As for a revo shooter who gets "clicks" instead of bangs... I would say that is a malfunction... assuming 'live ammo'... proper function is a bang instead of a click. If it's not 'proper function' as the gun was designed and intended to function, then it is a malfunction.

And, under current IDPA Rules any ammunition or ammunition loading device that may have contributed to the malfunction does not have to be retained and can be dumped to clear the malf.

A couple of empty clicks in a revo on live ammo would, IMHO, be a malf. Dump what's in there (ammunition that may have contributed to the malfunction... etc... it's in the Rules) reload and move on.

As for completing a reload with a semi-auto and then racking a live round out onto the ground and leaving it...with no malfunction being involved... well, MHO (based upon the wording of the Rule is that the shooter has failed to secure 'live ammo' after a TAC/RWR reload. The Rule says what it says. Guesses, intentions, interpretations, and motives aside. The Rule says what it says.... and in black & white right there in the Rule Book and the Addendum.

[ima45dv8]

Gary, Rules are Rules. And, many are written so poorly that multiple interpretations (and Tribal Rules) can result.

And we have rules here, too. Not so poorly worded, either.

Attitude

Please be polite. Or if not polite, at least respectful.

No bickering. Regardless of the subject matter.

Antagonistic, offensive, or quarrelsome tones are not acceptable.

Calling people a cheat falls in that bucket.

If it continues I'll be forced to close this otherwise useful thread and delete a lot of posts.

Play nice, or play elsewhere.

-Mod.

[jlamphere]

GOF you are right on the letter of rule, but I think you are off on the sprite. The reason for the PE is to keep someone from gaining an advantage. The rules state the reload is over either when the partial mag is stowed (Tac-Load) or when the spare mag is inserted (RWR). If the reload is over, racking the round out is inconsequential.

On the other hand, the apendex says no live ammo can be on the ground when the next shot is fired. So when is the reload over? This makes it so the SO has to make a judgement call as to whether there is some advantage to the shooter due to the live ammo on the ground. Also, what if my pistol does not slide-lock and I do not remember if I have a round in the gun after the reload? If this is the rule, I get dinged if I guess wrong.

If I do a tac load and leave the mag on the ground or if I am shooting a revo and dump out live ammo, I do have an advantage, so I should get the PE. But in the OP's example, there is no advantage, so in the sprit of the rule, no PE.

This has been a good discussion, I appreciate the different views and challenges the rulebook presents. I hope the new book one clears up much of this kind of thing.

[COF]

GOF you are right on the letter of rule, but I think you are off on the sprite. The reason for the PE is to keep someone from gaining an advantage. The rules state the reload is over either when the partial mag is stowed (Tac-Load) or when the spare mag is inserted (RWR). If the reload is over, racking the round out is inconsequential.

Actually the reload is complete once the magazine is seated.

"Reload: A method of recharging the gun. There are three (3) types of reloads allowed in IDPA. See “Reload, Slide Lock”, “Reload,

Tactical (Tac-Load)” and “Reload with Retention” for further details. A shooter is deemed loaded and may move from a position

of cover ONLY when the fresh magazine is FULLY-SEATED and the slide is closed or revolver cylinder is closed."

The magazine must be properly stowed before the next round is fired. That's why the tac-reload is recommended for String 2 on Stage 3 of the classifier - once the mag is seated, you are loaded and can move to the next position.

I have followed this discussion from the beginning and have yet to be able to find in either the rulebook or the addendum where it says "live rounds can't be left on the ground. It mentions several times about a PE for an ammunition carrier or ammunition feeding device being left behind but only once addresses live ammunition on page 42 in Appendix Two "...Failure to properly stow a partial magazine or live ammunition after a Tactical Reload or Reload with Retention prior to firing the first shot after the reload, will incur a procedural penalty..."

Given that the only time you would have live ammunition separate from a magazine during the TR or RWR is when reloading a revolver, to say that someone racking their slide after a reload incurs a penalty because they jacked a round on the ground and didn't pick it up is a real stretch. I've been involved with IDPA since 97, a match director and SO since 98, an SOI since 04 and have never seen this interpretation.

IMHO we are heading the wrong direction from "giving the shooter the benefit of the doubt" to think this rule includes rounds inadvertently ejected from the gun after the reload.

[Model19]

As for a revo shooter who gets "clicks" instead of bangs... I would say that is a malfunction... assuming 'live ammo'... proper function is a bang instead of a click. If it's not 'proper function' as the gun was designed and intended to function, then it is a malfunction.

And, under current IDPA Rules any ammunition or ammunition loading device that may have contributed to the malfunction does not have to be retained and can be dumped to clear the malf.

A couple of empty clicks in a revo on live ammo would, IMHO, be a malf. Dump what's in there (ammunition that may have contributed to the malfunction... etc... it's in the Rules) reload and move on.

So you're saying that because my first two rounds after a reload went click instead of bang I can dump the remaining four on the ground, reload and carry on? Seems to contradict your logic of leaving that one single round behind as the OP did. The other four rounds might have worked if I pulled the trigger again and would in that case be called "live".

This whole debate is full of, I hate to use the term, range lawyer stuff. Takes the fun right out of it. I'll invoke the dreaded "spirit" clause, and ask would you truly waste time scramblng after that one ejected round you had because you brain-f#rted after a by the book reload, while more bad guys are threatening to zap you?

I think not. At least not me anyways. Shoot whatever ammo I have left, throw the gun at them if I run out of ammo before they're neutralized, and then run like hell to safety. I know, fun is not the name of the game all the time. I apologize in advance for trying to enjoy the game. Lord knows becoming an SO really increases that aspect of the sport. .... Not. And I'll add a big thanks to the folks that give me a "thanks for a great match" after we're all done tearing down. It's the only compensation we get and I truly appreciate it each time I hear it. Lightweight rant over. Sorry.

[Ranger6]

I like IDPA. It's a Game. Rules are hard to understand (sometimes) and (unfortunately) arbitrary. A few ardent competitors were running off new shooters with multiple "Failure to do right" and "you would never do that in a gunfight" penalties. A new IDPA Match Director has turned that around and currently our club gets a lot of its new members from IDPA. Now, if someone shows up with a .22, Great - he wins the .22 caliber division. That guy had a good time and plans to be back with a 9mm next time.

Moral - Don't let some rule stop you from enjoying your sport.

"If it's on the internet, then it's got to be true. Like dude, they wouldn't put it on the internet if it wasn't!" A. Lincoln

[GOF]

As for a revo shooter who gets "clicks" instead of bangs... I would say that is a malfunction... assuming 'live ammo'... proper function is a bang instead of a click. If it's not 'proper function' as the gun was designed and intended to function, then it is a malfunction.

And, under current IDPA Rules any ammunition or ammunition loading device that may have contributed to the malfunction does not have to be retained and can be dumped to clear the malf.

A couple of empty clicks in a revo on live ammo would, IMHO, be a malf. Dump what's in there (ammunition that may have contributed to the malfunction... etc... it's in the Rules) reload and move on.

So you're saying that because my first two rounds after a reload went click instead of bang I can dump the remaining four on the ground, reload and carry on? Seems to contradict your logic of leaving that one single round behind as the OP did. The other four rounds might have worked if I pulled the trigger again and would in that case be called "live".

If you reload a revolver with six new rounds, and as you note, the first two rounds go click instead on bang - is that not a legitimate malfunction? The gun is designed and intended to go bang, but didn't. I consider that a malfunction.

Do you know what caused the malfunction? Probably not. What was involved with the malfunction. Ammunition. The current Rule Book clearly states that ammunition that may have contributed to the malfunction may be ejected, discarded and left on the ground. We do know that two rounds malfed, and thus contributed to the malfunction... and do not know that the others may, or may not malf because we don't know exactly - at this point - what caused the malf.. but we do know we have a malfuntion of ammunition in the revolver cylinder)

Yes, the Rule says you can clear the cylinder in an attempt to restore the gun to function, and since ammunition was involved in the malf it may be left on the ground. I didn't write that Rule, I only read it

[GOF]

GOF you are right on the letter of rule, but I think you are off on the sprite. The reason for the PE is to keep someone from gaining an advantage. The rules state the reload is over either when the partial mag is stowed (Tac-Load) or when the spare mag is inserted (RWR). If the reload is over, racking the round out is inconsequential.

Actually the reload is complete once the magazine is seated.

"Reload: A method of recharging the gun. There are three (3) types of reloads allowed in IDPA. See “Reload, Slide Lock”, “Reload,

Tactical (Tac-Load)” and “Reload with Retention” for further details. A shooter is deemed loaded and may move from a position

of cover ONLY when the fresh magazine is FULLY-SEATED and the slide is closed or revolver cylinder is closed."

The magazine must be properly stowed before the next round is fired. That's why the tac-reload is recommended for String 2 on Stage 3 of the classifier - once the mag is seated, you are loaded and can move to the next position.

I have followed this discussion from the beginning and have yet to be able to find in either the rulebook or the addendum where it says "live rounds can't be left on the ground. It mentions several times about a PE for an ammunition carrier or ammunition feeding device being left behind but only once addresses live ammunition on page 42 in Appendix Two "...Failure to properly stow a partial magazine or live ammunition after a Tactical Reload or Reload with Retention prior to firing the first shot after the reload, will incur a procedural penalty..."

Page 42 Appendix Two... the key word is AFTER a Tac Reload or RWR. The reload is completed when the magazine is inserted and the slide is forward on a chambered round. Yes... I think there is agreement on that... but that tricky part of that written Rule is ... AFTER a Tac or RWR.... and that is the way the Rule is written.

AFTER you complete a TAC/RWR reload, the Rule says you are required to "properly stow a "a partial magazine or live ammunition". A single live round, according to the wording of the Rule, jacked out of the chamber AFTER the Tac/RWR has been accomplished is... according to the wording of the Rule... a no-no, unless you properly stow it.... or as the Addendum now states, properly stow it prior to firing the last shot in the string.

Hey I didn't write this Rule. But, as a SO I am required to enforce it as it is written. It is what it is, irrespective of how poorly it is written. When we start taliking about enforcing Rules in "the Spirit" of IDPA, or "I think the Founding Fathers actually meant", then we have what IDPA's 'Bubba' has defined as "Tribal Rules"... and the Rule Book itself becomes somewhat meaningless, since people are no longer adhering to the written word, but 'interpreting' each Rule in the manner they see fit.

Just MHO... but if you make a RWR and then automatically rack the slide to eject a round and fail to pick that round up prior to firing the last shot in a string it is a legitimate PE... according to the current wording of the Rules.

[Kali]

With the current rules, its one of those things that has to be called on the spot by the SO. For example, off the draw, an array (which has a total of 10 shots) has a long hallway leading up to it. An experienced shooter racks the slide on the way so he can go to slide lock after engaging the array. Creative round dumping and maybe a FTDR? The only thing different from the experienced shooter example and a new shooter racking the slide by mistake is the perceived intent of the shooter by the SO. As an SO you really don't know if it was intentional or not. Maybe the shooter legitimately thought he forgot to chamber a round on LAMR.

[GOF]

With the current rules, its one of those things that has to be called on the spot by the SO. For example, off the draw, an array (which has a total of 10 shots) has a long hallway leading up to it. An experienced shooter racks the slide on the way so he can go to slide lock after engaging the array. Creative round dumping and maybe a FTDR? The only thing different from the experienced shooter example and a new shooter racking the slide by mistake is the perceived intent of the shooter by the SO. As an SO you really don't know if it was intentional or not. Maybe the shooter legitimately thought he forgot to chamber a round on LAMR.

Given the way the current Rule is worded, intent only makes a difference in the issuance of a FTDR (and that is a slippery slope!). The "failure to secure ammunition" remains written into the Rule, and as the current Rule is written, it is a PE. Not saying I agree with the Rule, just saying that uniform officiating requires enforcing the Rules as written... not as individual interpretation dictates.

If the current written Rule is a problem... then change it. Until then, enforce the Rule Book as it is written.

[COF]

GOF,

I believe you are stretching your interpretation of the rule - the key here is "your interpretation". I've never seen or heard of everyone interpreting the rule as you do, but hey there are crazier things than this happening in the world so you are entitled to your interpretation until we get clarification one way or another. It seems to me however, that your "individual interpretation" of the rule is not uniform officiating. Let me clarify something. This is not meant as a personal attack on you or anyone else but an extension of your own argument that the rule has to be interpreted the way you do or there is not uniform officiating. Do you have any documentation or clarification that indicates a higher authority has interpreted the rule the way you do? If so, I'll bow out, shut up and color but if not we are still left with your individual interpretation.

[GOF]

GOF,

I believe you are stretching your interpretation of the rule - the key here is "your interpretation". I've never seen or heard of everyone interpreting the rule as you do, but hey there are crazier things than this happening in the world so you are entitled to your interpretation until we get clarification one way or another. It seems to me however, that your "individual interpretation" of the rule is not uniform officiating. Let me clarify something. This is not meant as a personal attack on you or anyone else but an extension of your own argument that the rule has to be interpreted the way you do or there is not uniform officiating. Do you have any documentation or clarification that indicates a higher authority has interpreted the rule the way you do? If so, I'll bow out, shut up and color but if not we are still left with your individual interpretation.

My interpretation comes from reading the wording of the Rule. It does specifically mention 'live ammunition" after a TAC/RWR reload. How long after a TAC/RWR reload is not specified, but if the magazine is slapped in and the slide racked immediately after... in the same reloading process?. I have seen a jacked out round done in the process of the reload result in a PE, if it was not retrieved, at a number of clubs. I didn't write the Rule, and I may or may not agree with it. But, until the wording is cleared up... or clarified... my options as a SO are to enforce the Rule as it is written... or I can just enforce the Rules that I agree with. Or, I can try and figure out what the 'intent' of the Founders was, and try to interpret Rules in the somewhat vague concept of "the Spirit".

I've seen it happen each way... which is what Terry Burba refers to as "Tribal Rules". I wish the Rules were clarified to the point where there wouldn't be 'multiple interpretations'. I believe the Tiger Teams are working on Rules wording and I wish them the best... and look forward to a Rule Book that will be called the same way in California, Maine, Florida, and all points in between.

In the meantime I have to look at the written words in the Rules and operate on the principle that "words mean things"

Edited February 22, 2013 by GOF

[jason237m]

Racking a round out and not picking it up = PE

This seems like an ideal question to submit on the IDPA forum for clarification from HQ

[GOF]

An excellent idea. I will do that.

[motosapiens]

AFTER you complete a TAC/RWR reload, the Rule says you are required to "properly stow a "a partial magazine or live ammunition". A single live round, according to the wording of the Rule, jacked out of the chamber AFTER the Tac/RWR has been accomplished is... according to the wording of the Rule... a no-no, unless you properly stow it.... or as the Addendum now states, properly stow it prior to firing the last shot in the string.

I disagree. I think you are reading way too much into it. The more I read it and think about it, the more obvious it is that the stuff you are supposed to stow is what came out of the gun at the beginning of the reload. IMHO it is pointless range-lawyering to try to extend that to a round inadvertently jacked out after the reload has been completed. I understand your argument, I just think it is wrong, and against the spirit of the rules and the sort of thing that would drive someone away from a club where people get that wrapped around the axle trying to invent procedurals.

[M1911]

Tac reload, magazine in my pocket, but live round on the ground after I racked it.

Still not a PE. And besides, you lost a bunch of time doing it, why pile on a PE?

[Proudprado]

I shot my first league (sanctioned) match on Saturday. Eight stages for a total of around 150 shots (140 minimum). I got another hit on a non target and one PE. The PE was on the last stage of the day and I had lost my mind in the heat ... forgot which target was the one I had one shot on instead of two (limited Vickers), reloaded and put too many in the wrong target . It was damn hot in Pretoria yesterday ... at least 35° Celcius (95° Fahrenheit) and the shoot took almost seven hours. I'm glad I did not run out of water.

[Proudprado]

Not me shooting, but one of the stages on Saturday's course: