Available to the General Public

[sperman]

Let me preface this thread by saying that this is not about a particular manufacturer. Any negative comments about any manufacturer, shooter or USPSA will be deleted without notice, and will probably get this thread closed, eliminating the opportunity to discuss this.

I think the recent addition to the NROI production gun list raised some questions regarding the definition of "available to the general public." It would be worthwhile to clarify the current definition, and possibly revise it for the future.

I assume the production gun approval form has a more formal definition of the requirements. If anyone has a copy of the form and is willing/allowed to post it, I think that would be a good place to start.

[DWFAN]

http://www.uspsa.org/forms/Production_Gun_Approval_Form.pdf

[sperman]

Thanks. Not as much clarity as I hoped for.

(2) This model firearm has been available for sale to the public since _____/____/____.

[Flexmoney]

...questions regarding the definition of "available to the general public." It would be worthwhile to clarify the current definition, and possibly revise it for the future.

That does seem to be a sticking point. I always thought those words were fairly clear. So, the question is...

For USPSA, who is the "general public" and what does "available" mean?

[DWFAN]

Unallocated to agency orders and available to be shipped or already shipped to Dealers and/or Distributors. ?

[sperman]

IMO, the general public excludes any agency, foreign or domestic.

Available means just that. They are currently or have in the past been available for puchase. Putting it in the catalog and saying "we'll get to it once we get caught up on other orders" doesn't qualify.

Because it is so vague, I don't see why the President or BOD couldn't tell a manufacturer, "Sorry, but you haven't met that obligation yet." Put the burdon on the manufacturer to prove they have.

[Flexmoney]

Thanks. Not as much clarity as I hoped for.

(2) This model firearm has been available for sale to the public since _____/____/____.

Right off the bat, the NROI form needs tweaked to at least use the same wording in the rule (general public, not just public). However, we can probably do better than that on clarity. The BOD (and the membership) needs clarify the intent, so that the wording can reflect that intent.

[Flexmoney]

Here is what I drafted for the BOD 7 years ago. http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=34686&hl=%2Bproduction

[warpspeed]

To me, General Public is very clear - not LE, not Military not foreign. They certainly can sell the same gun to those groups but not count them as being part of the required production numbers.

As for the mechanism, having the NROI or their designate verify through a "Field Event" the availability should be fine. We can define a Field Event as an in person visit to a gun store or going on line and verifying that the gun can be purchased. Mfg submits the paperwork, NROI inspects the firearm and then proceeds to verify availability.

Based on recent events, it seems that perhaps the manufactures may not understand the whole spirit of Production. I think they get it is a perfect venue to showcase the product and drive sales but need to better understand why it is so closely regulated.

[Craig N]

To add another twist to the "available to the general public" could be understood as not restricted to LE/MIL only. So anything not select fire or with a shorter than 16/18.5 barrel (for 3 gun) would be available to the general public. Then all you need is 2000 of said item produced.

[motosapiens]

sounds like a lot of extra bureaucracy to fix a 'problem' that I'm not convinced is worth that much extra bureaucracy. It seems to me that once 'available to the general public' is defined, you just need some paperwork to show it, like shipping invoices or something. As long as it has been taking for some guns to get on the list, I don't see much point in getting all draconian and stuff.

[Ben Stoeger]

Obviously, there is some lack of clarity somewhere.

Maybe the factory reps that actually fill out the forms might have some input about what on the forms is unclear to them.

[diehli]

A handgun may be approved and added to the USPSA Approved Production Handgun List after the NROI Manufacturer’s Declaration form stating that a minimum of 2000 complete handguns have been manufactured and available to the general public has been submitted and NROI has inspected the handgun for compliance.

What's required are four things, 2 of which are objective criteria, 1 of which is a statement that those objective criteria have been met, and the last some undefined compliance inspection:

-Manufacturer's declaration that

-2000 have been manufactured and

-made available to the general public

-NROI inspection for compliance

Unfortunately, the declaration alone is being taken as the be-all-end-all with no oversight as to whether the two objective criteria are met.

I can understand taking the manufacturer's word on whether 2000 have been produced (although I would like to see some suggestions for how/whether to audit that), but not on availability to the general public.

"General public" is a relatively easy term to find a definition for (as mentioned in the other thread):

http://www.macmillan...-general-public

http://dictionary.ca...-general-public

Those (reasonable) definitions exclude LEO/Mil as a "particular group". Thus, availability to the general public excludes availability solely to military or police organizations.

As an aside, if there are truly concerns about someone from those groups not being able to shoot his or her duty weapon, address that separately, don't undermine the meaning and intent of the base rule. (One way to address it is to make an allowance for military weapons that have civilian analogs that have met the criteria and legitimately been added to the List. Another would be to allow duty firearms to be shot in Production irrespective of whether something similar is available. The requirements for allowing an otherwise unapproved firearm to be shot could be the same for allowing duty gear to be used that otherwise doesn't meet the Division requirements.)

As far as foreign competitors using firearms that are IPSC Production-legal but not on the USPSA Production Gun List, I'd say let foreign USPSA members shoot IPSC-approved firearms, but still ensure that the requirements for a firearm to be included on the USPSA Production Gun List are met using the U.S. market.

Judging whether something is available to the general public can be a relatively easy task in some instances (such as that which is the impetus for this thread), but can be harder in others. Take Kel-Tec's KSG as an example. Although the availability is limited, someone that's willing to pay the steep prices being asked on GunBroker can obtain one. I'd say it's available to the general public, even though I can't go to my LGS and grab one off the wall.

So, what constitutes "availability"? In this day and age, it seems the Internet would be a good resource to help determine that. Checking some of the larger U.S. distributors and/or GunBroker for the model in question would be a good start. It seems there should be some way to distinguish between unavailability due to high demand (which shouldn't be penalized with exclusion from the list) and unavailability due to the manufacturer not making the firearm available to the public.

But as others have pointed out, this is all moot if there will be no consequences for flaunting the Division's requirements.

[Ben Stoeger]

Judging whether something is available to the general public can be a relatively easy task in some instances (such as that which is the impetus for this thread)

I am lost on this one.

[bikerburgess]

I understand the concern over the situation that brought this up but, one thing I keep thinking as this gets discussed is how small of a group we are in the big picture of firearms sales. Uspsa is only 24,000 shooters and if 1 in 50 of us run's out and buys a brand new brand X model Y pistol to shoot production with, that would be a grand total of 480 guns. If we ask them to jump through too many hoops they may say that's too much trouble, we will just find one more medium sized LE to sell to.

Mike

[diehli]

Judging whether something is available to the general public can be a relatively easy task in some instances (such as that which is the impetus for this thread)

I am lost on this one.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=168894&hl=

[sperman]

I understand the concern over the situation that brought this up but, one thing I keep thinking as this gets discussed is how small of a group we are in the big picture of firearms sales. Uspsa is only 24,000 shooters and if 1 in 50 of us run's out and buys a brand new brand X model Y pistol to shoot production with, that would be a grand total of 480 guns. If we ask them to jump through too many hoops they may say that's too much trouble, we will just find one more medium sized LE to sell to.

Mike

Isn't that the whole point of production? It's not about custom guns for competition only, it's about shooting every day guns in competition. That's not to say that some manufacturers haven't gone out of their way to make guns specialized for our sport, but they stepped up and met the requirements for production division. If a manufacturer can't be bothered to make 2000 guns, maybe we don't need them? The rules don't require 2000 units sold to USPSA shooters, or even 2000 units available to the general public. They do require 2000 units manufactured, AND the gun be available to the general public?

[sperman]

I would like to keep this thread focused on the definition of "available to the general public." I've split the discussion on how to ensure compliance into a separate thread here: Both good discussions that deserve their own thread.

[Nik Habicht]

IMO, the general public excludes any agency, foreign or domestic.

Available means just that. They are currently or have in the past been available for puchase. Putting it in the catalog and saying "we'll get to it once we get caught up on other orders" doesn't qualify.

Because it is so vague, I don't see why the President or BOD couldn't tell a manufacturer, "Sorry, but you haven't met that obligation yet." Put the burdon on the manufacturer to prove they have.

Playing Devil's advocate:

So if the FBI for instance orders 10,000 copies of an otherwise compliant blaster, say a gun identical to a Glock 21 but called the Glock 47, which is not available to the general public, you'd be opposed to allowing that in Production, even though 10,000 civilians are carrying it?

[sperman]

I don't think that would meet the current requirements. 10,000 FBI agents don't qualify as the general public. That is probably another part of the current wording of the rules that needs to be reviewed.

[Ben Stoeger]

IMO, the general public excludes any agency, foreign or domestic.

Available means just that. They are currently or have in the past been available for puchase. Putting it in the catalog and saying "we'll get to it once we get caught up on other orders" doesn't qualify.

Because it is so vague, I don't see why the President or BOD couldn't tell a manufacturer, "Sorry, but you haven't met that obligation yet." Put the burdon on the manufacturer to prove they have.

Playing Devil's advocate:

So if the FBI for instance orders 10,000 copies of an otherwise compliant blaster, say a gun identical to a Glock 21 but called the Glock 47, which is not available to the general public, you'd be opposed to allowing that in Production, even though 10,000 civilians are carrying it?

The way the rule is written now would exclude that gun from production... wouldn't it?

[warpspeed]

IMO, the general public excludes any agency, foreign or domestic.

Available means just that. They are currently or have in the past been available for puchase. Putting it in the catalog and saying "we'll get to it once we get caught up on other orders" doesn't qualify.

Because it is so vague, I don't see why the President or BOD couldn't tell a manufacturer, "Sorry, but you haven't met that obligation yet." Put the burdon on the manufacturer to prove they have.

Playing Devil's advocate:

So if the FBI for instance orders 10,000 copies of an otherwise compliant blaster, say a gun identical to a Glock 21 but called the Glock 47, which is not available to the general public, you'd be opposed to allowing that in Production, even though 10,000 civilians are carrying it?

Nik,

Under your description, the Glock 47 is a Glock 21, just engraved differently on the slide, right ?

So, there is nothing keeping me from buying a Glock 21 to compete with. The G21 is for sale.

Now, if the FBI agent wants to use his duty weapon in an USPSA sanctioned match, he could not, as the rule is written but he could buy a Glock 21 and shoot it. Nothing stopping him and since the only difference is the name on the slide, he is at no competitive advantage or disadvantage in doing so.

[Nik Habicht]

IMO, the general public excludes any agency, foreign or domestic.

Available means just that. They are currently or have in the past been available for puchase. Putting it in the catalog and saying "we'll get to it once we get caught up on other orders" doesn't qualify.

Because it is so vague, I don't see why the President or BOD couldn't tell a manufacturer, "Sorry, but you haven't met that obligation yet." Put the burdon on the manufacturer to prove they have.

Playing Devil's advocate:

So if the FBI for instance orders 10,000 copies of an otherwise compliant blaster, say a gun identical to a Glock 21 but called the Glock 47, which is not available to the general public, you'd be opposed to allowing that in Production, even though 10,000 civilians are carrying it?

The way the rule is written now would exclude that gun from production... wouldn't it?

Not according to the current USPSA interpretation.....

And I'd have trouble keeping an M9 or M11 from playing in the division when the 92 and 228 are on the list....

[Nik Habicht]

IMO, the general public excludes any agency, foreign or domestic.

Available means just that. They are currently or have in the past been available for puchase. Putting it in the catalog and saying "we'll get to it once we get caught up on other orders" doesn't qualify.

Because it is so vague, I don't see why the President or BOD couldn't tell a manufacturer, "Sorry, but you haven't met that obligation yet." Put the burdon on the manufacturer to prove they have.

Playing Devil's advocate:

So if the FBI for instance orders 10,000 copies of an otherwise compliant blaster, say a gun identical to a Glock 21 but called the Glock 47, which is not available to the general public, you'd be opposed to allowing that in Production, even though 10,000 civilians are carrying it?

Nik,

Under your description, the Glock 47 is a Glock 21, just engraved differently on the slide, right ?

So, there is nothing keeping me from buying a Glock 21 to compete with. The G21 is for sale.

Now, if the FBI agent wants to use his duty weapon in an USPSA sanctioned match, he could not, as the rule is written but he could buy a Glock 21 and shoot it. Nothing stopping him and since the only difference is the name on the slide, he is at no competitive advantage or disadvantage in doing so.

OK -- I'll play. He could just shoot the 47 as well -- it offers no advantage to your 21.

Now suppose it's 15 years from now, the FBI agent wants to shoot his issued S&W 1006, that he's been carrying since the mid 80s, and you can't find one anywhere in the country to buy....

Should we delete it? Or can we just say that the gun is substantially identical to current competitive blasters on the list?

I'm in favor of an inclusive rather than exclusive list.....

[diehli]

As an aside, if there are truly concerns about someone from those groups not being able to shoot his or her duty weapon, address that separately, don't undermine the meaning and intent of the base rule. (One way to address it is to make an allowance for military weapons that have civilian analogs that have met the criteria and legitimately been added to the List. Another would be to allow duty firearms to be shot in Production irrespective of whether something similar is available. The requirements for allowing an otherwise unapproved firearm to be shot could be the same for allowing duty gear to be used that otherwise doesn't meet the Division requirements.)