DQ or not...

[Paul-the new guy]

U shaped course of fire. Each leg ot the U has 3 firing positions one on each leg has a port you have to open. The RO stays in the middle as the shooter is moving up range so he can't really see what is happening. Shooter moving from the base of the U to one of the legs breaks the 180. Not bad but a lot of people saw it the RO didn't see it and din't stop the shooter. Moving to the next position to open the port the shooter breaks the 180 badly, I am talking 90 degrees. The RO is behind him and doesn't see it. Someone in the gallery screams stop and a bunch of BS goes down. The general thoughts are no one has a right to stop a shooter but an RO. I was on the "for a serious safety violation anyone can stop a shooter" team. One guy said if the RO didn't see it then it didn't happen... What is the call?

[motosapiens]

DQ the RO for not being in a position to see the shooter's gun and control the situation.

Seriously, I don't see anything in the rules that allows a shooter to be disqualified by anyone other than an RO assigned to the stage.

I think it is perfectly OK to yell 'stop' when observing a serious safety violation, however I suspect that if it's a non-official doing calling it, a dq may not result.

Since I'm always trying to learn more about the rules, I'm interested to hear what more experienced and learned minds have to say on this one.

[CHA-LEE]

Where is the "Clip Board" RO in this situation? If the stage was setup in a "U" formation essentially trapping the timer RO on one side or the other, the Clip Board RO should be monitoring the shooter while he is on the other side and the Timer RO can't see what is going on.

Per the rules the peanut gallery shouldnt be yelling out range commands or anything else for that matter during a stage run. But in this situation it seems appropriate for a non-RO to call out STOP when a blatant safety rule is being violated and competitors feel like they are at risk. Nobody likes having a gun pointed at them and we should always error on the side of safety.

Edited August 26, 2013 by CHA-LEE

[CHA-LEE]

As for what call should have been made. That would be up to the Range Master to figure out. At a bare minimum the shooter would have to reshoot the stage. The RM should have been able to assess the situation and noticed that there was not appropriate RO coverage to observe the shooters while navigating the stage and at least fix that issue by mandating that the Clip Board RO monitor the shooter while he is on the opposite side of the wall from the Timer RO.

[rmerritt]

2 RO' s, one with timer, one with clip board, the one with clip board also has to watch, but may not be in position to see a 180 break. If they didn't see it, then no DQ. Kinda like a fan in the stands calling strikes or balls, only the umpire can make the call...

[jeremy kemlo]

If the ro did not see it then there is no dq. Can someone else yell, STOP! Not really (not in the rules). If someone would have been shot, then everyone would have wished that they had said something. I would have said stop if it was going to put anyone in harms way. If it was a 180 violation and know one was in danger then I would keep quiet and then talk to the ro and shooter after the fact.

[Onagoth]

I would of yelled something ...seems to me that breaking 180 by 90 degrees means his gun is pointed directly uprange at the squad.

If no DQ resulted, I'd also have some words for the MD and RO

[Sarge]

No DQ

[MarkCO]

First, the rules. I agree if an "RO" did not see the infraction, a DQ should not be issued. However, I would have no problem if someone in the peanut gallery yelled stop and then took it the the RM. In that case, a reshoot, and a stern talking would be in order.

Second, the course of fire is an RO trap as described, so it should not have been set up that way or attempted with insufficient staff. If, in the instance case, someone was injured or worse as a result of poor stage set-up, there would be plenty of waggly fingers to be pointed. Failure to issue a DQ when a safety infraction has in fact occurred has associated with it increased liability and some other more ominous legal terms.

Conclusion, don't set up or run unsafe stages or stages where the RO can not monitor the competitor action appropriately. I hate threads like these because it points out lack of "something" in the course designer, MD, RM, RO or all four.

[bigfish]

I'm with Cha-Lee on this one, where was the second RO/score keeper on this one? If someone has a problem with someone in the peanut gallery yelling "stop" after looking down the barrel of a loaded gun should be given a chance to look down a loaded gun to see what is like.

[JAFO]

I'm all in favor of squad members calling STOP if there's a serious safety issue that I don't see. If it's shooter related, one of the RO's should see it before the squad. But if it's someone up on the berm, etc, they may not see that.

In this case, I have a question. Per 10.3.2, the RO must issue the DQ, record the reason (10.5.2 in this case), and notify the RM as soon as possible. In case of appeal, section 11.1.2 states "the commission of the infraction as described by the Range Official is not subject to challenge or appeal." I cannot find anything that states that the RO's decision (or description of the infraction) cannot be based on witnesses. I seem to recall reading somewhere that RO's need to rule on what they see, but I can't find the rule stating that. Since the rules allow for witnesses to be heard in arbitration (11.5.4), can an RO's decision also be based on what witnesses see?

[High Lord Gomer]

In a previous thread, it was noted that any match official can issue the DQ.

As MD, RM, CRO, and Senior Stapler at one of our recent matches I DQ'd myself after I finished a stage where several members of the gallery (2 first time competitors and their spouses) said that I broke the 180 as I backed up and rounded a barrel. I didn't *think* I had broken the 180 but the guy who was filling in as RO was in the wrong position to see and I was pushing the envelope on that run. I certainly don't want new competitors thinking that "As long as the RO doesn't see it it is OK".

At our Level 1 matches everyone is a match official (they all help RO, score, and reset). If anyone gets a gun pointed at them I want them yelling STOP.

[CHA-LEE]

I think its pretty obvious in the rule book that the enforcement of the rules are done by the match staff (RO, CRO, RM, MD). There are also several rules that define the pecking order of who in the match staff should be taking care of the situation.

I for one like that the rule book is not all lawyered up to make it drum tight. If it was rewritten like that I am sure that it would be 10 times as thick as it currently is. For the most part the rules we currently have are pretty solid. There are only a couple of scenarios, like this one, that you must rely on common sense and the "intent" of how the rules are defined.

USPSA is founded on safety and the supreme enforcement of its safety rules. If someone in the peanut gallery sees a serious safety issue (pointing a gun stright up range) and yells "STOP" I wouldn't have any issue with this as an RO, CRO, RM or MD. The top priority is to be safe, Immediately rectify the safety issue, then you can figure out how it all plays out within the defined rules.

I offer this perfect example that happened this past Sunday. I was in the peanut gallery watching a friend shoot the stage. While he is shooting I hear a difinitive "pop" instead of a "BANG" and my natural reaction was to yell out STOP!!!. The shooter immediately stopped, the RO looked around confused as to why somone in the peanut gallery called out "STOP" and I explained that I heard a squib and yelled the STOP command. The RO had the shooter unload and show clear and shure enough he had a squib and the next round fully chambered right behind it. If I would have said nothing instead of the squad hearing "STOP" they would have heard a huge "BOOM" as the gun blew up firing the next round into the squib round still in the barrel. To me the possiblilty of someones gun blowing up is a huge safety risk and I don't care if I am the RO or not. If I hear a squib I am calling out the STOP command. Does me doing this go against what is defined in the rule book? Yes. Technically I should have been given a Procedural for interferance. But I would find it hard to believe that any match staff would take a stance of not saying anything and risking a gun blowing up in someones hands. Like I said, common sense needs to come into play when dealing with serious safety violations.

Edited August 27, 2013 by CHA-LEE

[Sarge]

I cannot find anything that states that the RO's decision (or description of the infraction) cannot be based on witnesses. I seem to recall reading somewhere that RO's need to rule on what they see, but I can't find the rule stating that. Since the rules allow for witnesses to be heard in arbitration (11.5.4), can an RO's decision also be based on what witnesses see?

My thought would be NO. What if the shooter was another squadmate's main competition. I can see guys calling STOP trying to get a DQ on him.

RO's need to see an infraction to act on it.

[Chris iliff]

I could see myself, after 10 years of ROing, yell out a command while in the peanut gallery. It would have to be an extreme case, but I could see me doing what CHA-LEE did, kinda a reflex action.

That said, I'd take my lumps and hope the match staff would put safety above all else, understand my interference, and offer a reshoot to the shooter. Safety is everyone's responsibility. Geez, I sound like a poster at work. I think I'm gonna throw up..........yep just a little in my mouth. After 20 years in a manufacturing environment, I'm officially a company toady. Crap, more vomit.

[Paul-the new guy]

All good feedback, sure makes you think. From the safety aspect stopping the shooter was the right thing to do. The gun was pointed fully up range. The DQ maybe should not have happened and a few guys who know the rules well said no way should it be a DQ. I could go with that, I hate DQ's and I know the shooter didn't turn the gun up range on purpose.

[frag316]

I'm all in favor of the gallery stopping shooters for actions they deem to be unsafe. I'm lucky, I guess, in that I tend to shoot with a core group of experienced guys, but we also get to introduce new shooters quite often. We generally take them aside and explain the big safety issues and tell them to go as fast as they feel comfortable, but not to worry as much about the time as negotiating the course safely and getting their hits. In places where there are traps, we show them the traps and give them techniques to mitigate them.

We also are able to put an RO or two (about 75% of the core group are RO certified, and a couple are CROs and I also shoot with an RM quite often) on stages like you describe here, to watch the places where the primary RO might not be able to see.

In a case like this, I don't know that the guy buys a DQ immediately. Unless there is a guy who is also an RO in the gallery (which begs the question "why not put him on one of the legs or have him move behind the RO and shooter to watch the sides more"), I wouldn't DQ just off of witnesses. It would be like making a call on video, which is expressly forbidden.

[GuildSF4]

I agree with MarkCO, CHA-LEE, Chris, and Sarge, 'STOP' safety call, No DQ

[GrumpyOne]

Yell STOP, no DQ. Re-shoot....after finding out what the stop was for and maybe some admonishment to the shooter.

[Flexmoney]

Where is the 2nd RO???

[ktm300]

Yell STOP, no DQ. Re-shoot....after finding out what the stop was for and maybe some admonishment to the shooter.

maybe even more admonishment to the timer RO and clipboard RO. If you can't see what is going on in the stage, make sure someone can, or don't start the shooter.

[frag316]

Where is the 2nd RO???

Or even a couple of experienced shooters to watch the legs--as long as everyone agrees.

I think this one is more on the MD than anyone else. When the stages are designed and set up, the MD should be able to see where the RO traps are and let the ROs know (I don't know how this club does its ROing) where they are and suggest ways to mitigate the problems in the name of risk management (because Yeager says there's no such thing as "safety" ).

[sperman]

If I am at a match and have a loaded gun pointed at me, one of us is going home. If the RM decides he can't DQ the shooter because the RO on the timer or clipboard didn't see it, and the shooter isn't man enough to admit what happened, then I'm leaving. I don't want to be on the range with a shooter that unsafe. The chances of personal injury, or being caught up in the chaos if something were to go wrong is something I don't want to be a part of.

I don't want to be on the witness stand trying to explain that even though several people witnessed an obviously unsafe action, the shooter was allowed to continue, because the RO didn't see it.

[Cy Soto]

A lot of good information has already been posted and the only thing that I can add to the thread is that maybe both of the RO's that were involved in this situation should either: a) learn to postition themselves to better observe the shooter's actions or, b ) let someone else take care of RO duties.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Cy Soto

[JAFO]

I cannot find anything that states that the RO's decision (or description of the infraction) cannot be based on witnesses. I seem to recall reading somewhere that RO's need to rule on what they see, but I can't find the rule stating that. Since the rules allow for witnesses to be heard in arbitration (11.5.4), can an RO's decision also be based on what witnesses see?

My thought would be NO. What if the shooter was another squadmate's main competition. I can see guys calling STOP trying to get a DQ on him.

RO's need to see an infraction to act on it.

Not disagreeing, but is there something supporting this in the rules? I see your point on trying to get someone DQ'd without the RO witnessing something. But if a non-shooting competitor drops his gun and picks it up himself, or handles ammo in a safety area, etc, without an RO witnessing it, but the rest of the squad saw it, I could see some reactions not unlike sperman's if the RO couldn't act on it. Is the limit of the match official's authority in cases like that to find out what people saw and just caution against it?