Is a DQ for a finger in the trigger guard while

[Nik Habicht]

Is a DQ for a finger in the trigger guard while clearing a malfunction too hardcore? Some folks today suggested it was a "lame reason" for me to DQ a shooter. I'm o.k. with the call I made under the circumstances, but I'm wondering if anyone else has experience with issuing these types of DQs..... at local matches? At Area's or Nats?

[EricW]

At first I was going to say to be more lenient, but the reality is we all need to have the discipline for our fingers automatically clear the trigger guard the instant we go from shooting mode to any other mode. Not doing so is just an invitation to a future problem. Yeah, it's going to hurt someone's feelings, but it may be the only wake-up call before they either get DQ'd at a big event or have an AD. You did the right thing, and knowing you, you did so tactfully and fairly - just like a good RO should.

[JMD]

No one likes DQ'ing someone, however as long as 10.5.8 is a rule...

we enforce it. You might not like the role of "hard ass" but it was a

learning experience. The shooter may appreciate it upon reflection.

Joel

[rhino]

I'd have made the same call.

[Nik Habicht]

FWIW, the shooter was new, inexperienced, marginally safe --- and the recipient of a finger warning on the field course that came before. The only reason he didn't earn the DQ on the field course is that it ocurred at slidelock, after he dropped the mag and before inserting the new one and he corrected the moment I said it. After Unload and show Clear, we discussed it and he was advised that the next instant of that would result in a DQ. I was comfartable with that only since the next four stages were "stand in a box" classifiers --- and I made sure I was in position to watch him like a hawk. While clearing a jam, he stuffed his finger onto the trigger again --- and that was that.....

[mactiger]

You made the correct call. It was the only call you could make, under the circumstances.

Troy

[D.carden]

Nik,

It was a good call, I was Dq'd at a club level match in June just before the IRC

for the same thing.

It was an "eye opener" (BE AWARE OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING ALL THE TIME).

It changed my awareness 100%.

Dont beat yourself up, the shooter will learn from it, as we all do.

Dan

[MikeFoley]

It is necessary to draw the line. If it gets fuzzy we risk the integrity and safety of the sport. I hate adverse calls worse as an RO than I do as a shooter, but you did the right thing.

[Nik Habicht]

I've been comfortable with my decision all day. I half expected that I'd need to DQ the shooter after I issued the warning --- and I took my responsibility of watching the shooter seriously. The shooter took it as well as can be expected --- and may be back. It's entirely possible that he doesn't have the right temperament to play this game --- time will tell, and we'll make every effort if he returns to train him.

The hardcore comments came from a couple of other shooters --- from whom I've learned much about both the game and about ROing. When I told them specifically what went into the decision, they both agreed that it needed to be done. I was just curious if anyone else had that take --- and since this is one place where I can tap a lot of experience with a single post, I threw the question out there. Thanks for your help --- and the support.

My take on DQing shooters is that it's a service primarily to the shooter, then to everyone else. I have no ego when it comes to that --- but I'm new enough at ROing that I still learn a lot at every match.....

[Tri Burst]

You made the right call and don't every think you didn't. No matter what anyone says.

Those other shooter would be singing a differnt tune if there was a AD and someone got hurt, including the shooter that had the AD.

It simple that is the rule and if you want to play you have to play by the rules.

[JFD]

I'd think a person is more likely to have a ND clearing a jam than reloading (or anything much else). I'd give you a slap on the back for doing a good job.

What gripes me the most is the idea some folks have that a local match should be RO'd differently than a "big" match.

Our MD at a match a few years ago wanted a towel under his gun for a table start. Of course he got the gun and towel intertwined somehow and blew a hole on the table an inch in front of the gun. The bullet impacted maybe 4 feet in front of him. This was simply blown off by the squad, who joked they were surprised his "major" load penetrated the table at all. It was probably my 2nd match and I could only think to myself "It's going to be IDPA all over again"... In my first IDPA match the MD fired a round over the berm and continued on with the match.

Thankfully, except for the occasional break to the new shooter who fires 10 rounds with his foot over the fault line, and gets a single procedural, the rules seem to be followed the vast majority of the time. We have good ROs to thank for that.

[stingerjg]

I still havent taken the RO class yet. Im scheduled to take it somtime in Dec. I still do the job of the RO at our local matches. The problem i have is that i feel like im crowding the shooter if im to close and if i back off a little bit i cant see if they put their finger on the trigger during a malfunction or a reload. If im close i can give them a warning or stop them. But if i back off a bit i can see it but im not close enough to do anything about it.

[Vince Pinto]

Nik,

Stop beating yourself up - you made the correct call. This is IPSC shooting, not golf, so there are no "gimmes", especially when it comes to safety.

I also have no doubt that you handled the matter professionally.

[Scooter]

What, no citing of the rules?

10.3.10 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard while clearing a malfunction where the competitor clearly lowers the fiream down from aiming at the targets.

[Skywalker]

Nik,

sometimes here in Italy issues like this are debated among ROs.

There are some old-timers ( ) ROs that will let it slip by saying "...well, until there's no AD I'd let him go..." ( ) and there are some new-breed ROs (me included) that think there's no reason for doing this and for giving up on some very basic safety issues.

I guess at local level it might be seen as beeing a bit hard on the competitor, but to me it's some sort of educational matter: would you slap your son for giving you (or whoever else) a rude answer, thus teaching him to be polite, or would you let it slip by saying "...he's young, please excuse him, he'll eventually learn..."?

[Vince Pinto]

What, no citing of the rules?

I feel so ashamed of myself

Thanks Scooter - ya done good!

[Garfield]

No excuse for having a finger in the trigger guard while clearing a malfunction.

I do not like to DQ anyone, but sometimes it has to be done. Good call.

Sky: nice comparison ! (having three kids I can relate to that !)

[Jim Norman]

The correct decision was made in this case.

Another situation that arises is: A shooter has been DQ'd at a particular club on multiple occasions. The same shooter has also been DQ'd at other clubs in the immediate area. What courses of action can we take and what rules can we cite?

Can we require remedial training? Can we tell a shooter that they are not allowed to shoot at a club until they have taken and passed, what? Can we require an additional safety check.

I ask this with the understanding that where my and my fellow competitor's safety is invloved, I would refuse a shooter access to a match if I were deeply concerned about the skill level of a particular shooter. Action Shooting is not where you should be learning basic gun handling skills.

That having been said, since this person has firearms, I would rather he/she continue to come around and hopefuly be taught and learn to handle them safely. After all, just because we send the person away, doesn't mean they will suddlenly learn firearms safety and gun handling. They could be considered a loose cannon if their level of safety awareness is not increased.

Keep in mind that many clubs are not all that comfortable with action shooting so we don't want to go to the club's boards and ask for a suspension of a shooter's access to the range or any other action. That could set a very bad precedent of allowing people that do not understand what we do and how safely we do it to obtain a postion over us with respect to our rules.

Jim

[Garfield]

Hi,

Here in NL a shooter gets banned from participation in IPSC matches after 3 (?) DQ's in a year, until he (or she) has passed the basic training & test again.

But that does not exclude this shooter from participating in dynamic shooting at his/her own local range, for instance practice sessions held NOT under IPSC sanctioning.

[blackdragon]

I have Had to make the call as well. In my experiance a shooter especially if they are new, when they encounter a malfunction, thier focus is every where but where the muzzle is pointing. Like many have said, Some times you have to do the safest thing for all the shooters. Good Call!

Ivan

SCS Vegas

[ivanhu]

There are some old-timers ( ) ROs that will let it slip by saying "...well, until there's no AD I'd let him go..." ( ) and there are some new-breed ROs (me included) that think there's no reason for doing this and for giving up on some very basic safety issues.

My only match DQ in so far was exactly that, my finger was in while clearing malfunction. It happened in the Netherlands - I hardly could go any farther for a DQ here in Europe (save Spain, perhaps). I learnt my lesson then, and take extra care since, for that I'm actually grateful.

Funny part was, that it happened during the pre-match; two squads of ROs went together, and someone from the one squad officiated for the other squad. When I was DQed, I was the last shooter from my squad, and the RO who DQed me was the first shooter of the other squad - and it was my turn to officiate!

Having said all the above, when it comes to safety, the earlier we might cut off the deviances, the safer we'll be. I mean, shooters learn from the DQs, and after that, we don't have to wait the AD to happen - waiting it to happen is apparently more dangerous, because then a bullet will fly (over the berm right to the next road, for example).

Nope, when it comes to safety, zero tolerance is the only "safe" solution. Excuse me the pun..

[Neil Beverley]

Hi,

Here in NL a shooter gets banned from participation in IPSC matches after 3 (?) DQ's in a year, until he (or she) has passed the basic training & test again.

But that does not exclude this shooter from participating in dynamic shooting at his/her own local range, for instance practice sessions held NOT under IPSC sanctioning.

Arvid

We operate a very similar procedure in the UK except that it's 2 strikes in any 12 month period and you have to re-rest.

The effect of having to book a re-test creates a suspension period.

[Flexmoney]

Nik, good call.

Jim, for those dangerous shooter types...I don't think we have anything in our rule book that covers them. Perhaps a "Section" could have something written into their by-laws that would allow for tracking this...and dictate whatever action might be needed?

[ANeat]

As a new shooter to USPSA I would have expected to be DQed under the same situation. I feel like the RO is there for my safety as well as everyone else's. If Im doing something wrong and am warned about it that shoud be a wake up call right there If I keep doing it I need to be DQed since it apparently isnt getting thru.

If someone isnt mature or responsible enough to realise this they need another hobby.

Adam

[davidwiz]

Nik,

If you're referring to the person and circumstance that I think you are referring to, then you made the right call. That guy gave me the willies. You'll have to tell me who complained, so I can stay far, far away from them.

USPSA/IPSC's safety rules, unlike the saftey rules of a lot of other "action" shooting sports, are built on the belt-and-suspender layered approach. Meaning, you really have to break a lot of USPSA/IPSC saftey rules before you or someone else gets hurt.

That being said, a finger on the trigger while doing anything other than aiming at a target and/or shooting is per se unsafe.

-David