DQ or not...

[sperman]

Just to explore all possibilities:

10.3.1 A competitor who commits a safety infraction or any other prohibited activity during an USPSA match will be disqualified from that match, and will be prohibited from attempting any remaining courses of fire in that match regardless of the schedule or physical layout of the match.

10.3.1 doesn't say who has to witness the safety infraction, only that if an infraction occurs, the competitor is DQ'd.

10.3.2 Does state that the RO must record the reason for the DQ.

10.3.2 When a match disqualification is issued, the Range Officer must record the reasons for the disqualification, and the time and date of the incident, on the competitor’s score sheet, and the Range Master must be notified as soon as possible.

[frag316]

All I know is that I won't call a DQ I didn't see.

[aztecdriver]

Just to explore all possibilities:

10.3.1 A competitor who commits a safety infraction or any other prohibited activity during an USPSA match will be disqualified from that match, and will be prohibited from attempting any remaining courses of fire in that match regardless of the schedule or physical layout of the match.

10.3.1 doesn't say who has to witness the safety infraction, only that if an infraction occurs, the competitor is DQ'd.

10.3.2 Does state that the RO must record the reason for the DQ.

10.3.2 When a match disqualification is issued, the Range Officer must record the reasons for the disqualification, and the time and date of the incident, on the competitor’s score sheet, and the Range Master must be notified as soon as possible.

I'll play - consider the following, slightly altered, reality based scenario.

I was testing my magazine fit at a safety table. I had two mags that were not dropping correctly and I needed to find out which one after I shot a COF, so I had all 6 and was messing with them - empty - in the safety area. After I finished and found the culprit, I went back to my bag and topped up my mags. As I'm finishing, an RO walks up and says I was reported to be handling ammunition in the safety area. I said, no, I was using empty mags.They said the witness saw the loaded mags and that I was DQ'd from the match.

I'm hearing you about the seriousness of the concept of that severe of a 180 break. We still have to deal with the rules, as they are. There is a reason an RO needs to witness the act. Theirs is the only witness account that is not contestable - and as outlined in the above example - for good reason. They are supposed to be trained and experienced in being aware - and supposed to know the rules.

Identify the problem, fix the problem. The problem is the RO situation here. The guy should have been DQ'd. He couldn't be because of the RO's not doing their job. We've all had situations where we had shooters that are not anywhere near aware enough of their situation that they do things they don't think they've done. Ideally a match staff person would witness and this wouldn't be an issue. Ideally, the guy would hear that he pointed his loaded weapon at someone and would do the honorable thing. The one thing I'll caution against is attempting to make the right thing to happen by doing the wrong thing with the rules. If we start allowing DQs without an RO witness of the safety violation, it could snowball into the situation I stated above.

[waktasz]

If this happened and I saw it and the guy was going to continue the match just because the RO didn't catch it I guess I'd have to file a 3rd party appeal, right?

[aztecdriver]

If this happened and I saw it and the guy was going to continue the match just because the RO didn't catch it I guess I'd have to file a 3rd party appeal, right?

Put yourself in the role of the arbitration committee. How does that go down?

[waktasz]

Everyone else saw it but the RO, right?

[sperman]

If this happened and I saw it and the guy was going to continue the match just because the RO didn't catch it I guess I'd have to file a 3rd party appeal, right?

Put yourself in the role of the arbitration committee. How does that go down?

When 5 witnesses come before the arb committee, all stating they were well up range and were swept by a loaded weapon, I would have no problem upholding the DQ.

Assume you are the RM, and you get called to a stage because one of the competitors thinks another competitor should be DQ'd for breaking the 180. I can see it going down a number of ways.

Scenario 1: The RO says he was watching and the competitor didn't break the 180.

End of story, the competitor stays in the match. The RO says it didn't happen, then it didn't happen.

Scenario 2: The RO says he was out of position and didn't see the alleged violation. You've got one guy screaming bloody murder, bet everyone else on the stage says they didn't see it or they aren't sure.

That's not enough evidence for me to remove the shooter.

Scenario 3: Everyone who was in the bay, except the RO, says the competitor broke the 180. The RO admits he was out of position and doesn't know if it happened or not.

If I've got a large group of people telling me a blatant safety violation occurred, then I'm going to DQ the competitor. If he chooses to take his chances with the arb committee, that's up to him. I will be collecting the names of the witnesses in case he wants to go down that path.

[aztecdriver]

If this happened and I saw it and the guy was going to continue the match just because the RO didn't catch it I guess I'd have to file a 3rd party appeal, right?

Put yourself in the role of the arbitration committee. How does that go down?

When 5 witnesses come before the arb committee, all stating they were well up range and were swept by a loaded weapon, I would have no problem upholding the DQ.

Assume you are the RM, and you get called to a stage because one of the competitors thinks another competitor should be DQ'd for breaking the 180. I can see it going down a number of ways.

Scenario 1: The RO says he was watching and the competitor didn't break the 180.

End of story, the competitor stays in the match. The RO says it didn't happen, then it didn't happen.

Scenario 2: The RO says he was out of position and didn't see the alleged violation. You've got one guy screaming bloody murder, bet everyone else on the stage says they didn't see it or they aren't sure.

That's not enough evidence for me to remove the shooter.

Scenario 3: Everyone who was in the bay, except the RO, says the competitor broke the 180. The RO admits he was out of position and doesn't know if it happened or not.

If I've got a large group of people telling me a blatant safety violation occurred, then I'm going to DQ the competitor. If he chooses to take his chances with the arb committee, that's up to him. I will be collecting the names of the witnesses in case he wants to go down that path.

Here's my problem. In order to get to arbitration on an issue, there needs to be a ruling that must be either upheld, or overturned. As under rule 7.3.2, if no match official witnessed the occurrence, there's nothing ruled upon, and nothing to arbitrate. 11.1.2 states that the match officials witness account is not challengeable. He didn't see it - regardless if it's admitted to be out of position. As far as issuing a match DQ, I'm having an issue with not having a match official issue a DQ, under the match rules.

HOWEVER, that being said, there may be another solution that is preferable. Rule 6.4.4 states:

6.4.4 An individual may be barred from participating in a USPSA match, atthe match director’s discretion, if the person:

a. has demonstrated an inability to safely complete courses of fire, or

b. has demonstrated behavior which would or may disrupt the match, or which would bring disrepute to the sport.

Though, this might be argued that this rule was intended to be used for accepting entrants to a match, I don't see where this can not be applied during the match, with the scenario 3 that you illustrated above.

With 5 people in the gallery claiming they were swept, I think that counts as demonstrating an inability to safely complete courses of fire.

Maybe the course is setup in such a way where it's extremely difficult for the ROs to maintain safe control of the course. Maybe it's the ROs were out of position to witness the proper event. These all have remedies - we can arbitrate the course prior to shooting it to have it removed. We can have the RM address the staff. But when it comes to issuing a match DQ through arbitration when no match official witnessed the event, I have a problem. We open doors to things that we don't want to deal with.

[sperman]

I agree with and understand your reservations. I really don't like being put in that situation, but at the end of the day I'm going to put the safety of myself and the competitors first.

Range Officer's Creed

As a USPSA Range Officer, I shall conduct all competitions with the safety of the competitors, spectators and fellow Range Officials first and foremost in my thoughts and actions.

I hope that Troy on another RMI comes along and tell's me I'm right, or tells me that I'm wrong. Until that happens, I'm going to err on the side of safety and DQ the shooter.

As a point of order, the CRO/RM would still be the one issuing the DQ, it would be based on the testimony of competitors.

See you on Friday.

[aztecdriver]

I agree with and understand your reservations. I really don't like being put in that situation, but at the end of the day I'm going to put the safety of myself and the competitors first.

Range Officer's Creed

As a USPSA Range Officer, I shall conduct all competitions with the safety of the competitors, spectators and fellow Range Officials first and foremost in my thoughts and actions.

I hope that Troy on another RMI comes along and tell's me I'm right, or tells me that I'm wrong. Until that happens, I'm going to err on the side of safety and DQ the shooter.

As a point of order, the CRO/RM would still be the one issuing the DQ, it would be based on the testimony of competitors.

See you on Friday.

I'd look forward to hearing Troy or another rmi post as well.

I wish I could see you. I'll be on the way to Florida to watch my girl play some soccer. First ga state I'll miss in 5 years.

[sperman]

I hate to hear that. Have fun in Florida.

[Nik Habicht]

I agree with and understand your reservations. I really don't like being put in that situation, but at the end of the day I'm going to put the safety of myself and the competitors first.

Range Officer's Creed

As a USPSA Range Officer, I shall conduct all competitions with the safety of the competitors, spectators and fellow Range Officials first and foremost in my thoughts and actions.

I hope that Troy on another RMI comes along and tell's me I'm right, or tells me that I'm wrong. Until that happens, I'm going to err on the side of safety and DQ the shooter.

As a point of order, the CRO/RM would still be the one issuing the DQ, it would be based on the testimony of competitors.

See you on Friday.

There's always another solution for that situation: "I'm sorry, based on what we've seen today, we don't feel safe competing with you. We'd like to wish you a safe trip home and refund your match fee."

[EkuJustice]

Allowing non RO's to issue DQs is a very slippery slope