the correct option is?

[james h]

First off this is just an exercise to guage opinions.

The scenario.

You the RO have given the unload and show clear, the shooter presents a gun which is NOT clear (or one which you cannot ascertain to be clear) what is your next action and why or why not (please cite relevent IPSC rules)

A. If clear hammer down

B. nothing

C. Tell the shooter they are not clear

D. something else

..

..

This is something that a former IPSC RO and I discussed the other day and i just wanted more feed back.

cheers

James

[Vince Pinto]

James,

While the rules now place responsibility for any discharge during unloading wholly & solely on the competitor, if I noticed that the chamber was not clear or if I was uncertain, I would restate (with emphasis) "If You Are Finished, Unload and Show Clear".

This is a matter of safety, and you don't compromise with safety.

[blackdragon]

I agree with Vince. Safety is the first concern. What would be the reason for the action? I would assume that the competitor did not hear me.

Ivan

[james h]

thats similiar to what i already do but

1. Why is it a matter of safety (8.3.7 "while continuing to point the ****** safely downrange....")

2. By reissuing the command and changing the inflection of the words are you in breach of 8.6.1 and 10.6.1 (coaching) thus laying that time/score open to challenge by a third party ?....after all you are in fact telling them that they must clear the gun properly and in doing so helping them before they complete the stage...

james

[Vince Pinto]

James,

It's a matter of safety because a discharge during unloading would be unexpected, and there's no telling where the shot will go. Sadly I've observed far too many competitors relax their grip and muzzle angle during unloading, because they invariably presume that their gun is clear.

And, no, it's not coaching, because my emphasis on my primary objective as an RO (safety) will not affect the competitor's score for a stage which he's already shot unlike, say, telling him his magazine is not properly seated during loading.

At best, I'm preventing a match DQ, and my restating ULASC equates to me yelling "muzzle" or "finger" for safety reasons while he's shooting, which also serves to prevent a match DQ.

Hope this helps.

[Garfield]

Hi,

I would say "Show clear" again.

To me that's not coaching but preventing a DQ as Vince said.

What were your thoughts and that of this former RO ?

[bgary]

if I was uncertain, I would restate (with emphasis) "If You Are Finished, Unload and Show Clear".

I agree.

I actually find that this is a fairly common need with people who "flip" the round out of the chamber on unload-and-show-clear. They may well have a round in their hand at the end of the maneuver, but *I* have not yet seen an empty chamber, so I ask them to "unload and show clear" again.

Bruce

[james h]

my own thoughts are that there should be an addendum to 8.3.7 to the effect that

"if the RO cannot ascertain the **** to be clear they should state "NOT clear" and the shooter should rectify and re-present his gun for inspection"

the former RO was of the opinion that as there was no permitted command none could be given I would hasten to add that they would not continue as an RO until this was sorted out..among other things

the reasoning was this course of fire ends on 8.3.7.3 when hands are removed ,nothing other than safety warnings may be given during a COF 8.6.1 a shot into the backstop is not unsafe so you cannot warn against it (dont shoot that target the bullet might hit the sand!....) so a shot into the sand on the unload is not unsafe but it may be UGS . It is not accidental as they intended to discharge the round if there was one in the chamber (that is the intent of the hammer drop wasnt it ?)

so basically you are telling the shooter how to operate and clear a firearm during a COF and hence coaching them not to DQ themselves. Although this sounds a little extreme it is a logical and substantiated conclusion if the rules are adhered to as they are written.

I will stress again thie RO would not let this happen and so has given up on IPSC for the moment, me i break the rules by saying NOT clear

perhaps a topic for discussion by others.

Vince et al thankyou for answering i did not think I would hear much variation on replies

j

[Vince Pinto]

James,

Is your friend a "former RO" because he was expelled from his NROI?

No, the intent of the hammer drop is not to fire a round - it's the final part of a four part redundancy to maximise safety (facing downrange, competitor clears, RO checks, pull the trigger).

If your "former RO" friend does not accept the advice I've given, then the alternative is to just stand there and not continue with "If clear, HDH". A pregnant pause might achieve the same end result, namely that the competitor realises that something is amiss, the penny finally drops, and he corrects it. However judging from your comments, your "former RO" friend would prefer to see an unintentional (and potentially unsafe) discharge, and thereafter issue a preventable match DQ.

My advice is to tell your "former RO" friend to remain a "former RO...

Edited November 21, 2004 by Flexmoney

[Garfield]

Take a deep breath Vince, then some pills, maybe some cookies, and relax

[Neil Beverley]

I wouldn't have any problem calling out "Not Clear". This is covered under 8.6.1 and is no different to calling out "Muzzle" if someone looks like they are about to break the 90. It doesn't need a special range command.

James, one day you'll have to tell me his name, it's likely I know him.

[AikiDale]

James,

Listen to Vince. There is a word for the 'former RO' but my mommy won't let me use words like that.

[John Baier]

We all abide the rules, but as Vince and others have stated safety does come first. That being said, I have been known to restated ready positions between LAMR and stand by commands. Have I been taught not to deviate from the range commands, yep, but running a safe and efficient stage takes precedent. example: shooter comes to the line and LAMR and just stands there or they holster their weapon when they should have gun flat on table with hands on X's. and your running 250 shooters, what do you do just stand there like your former RO not say anything or are going to do the right thing. Kind of a no brainer to me.

[scooterj]

How about "I didn't see inside your chamber,could you show clear again, please?"

That usually works for me with the "flippers"

[Skywalker]

I'd second Garfield.

I too repeat "Show Clear" if I didn't see an empty chamber.

I don't think this is an "illegal" command. It's actually the repetition of a 3-parts command, and I am repeating the part that I need to. Besides, it's the most direct and completely understandable thing to say that, I'm positive, any competitor would understand, even in the case of a non-english-fluent competitor.

What's wrong with this?

James, nice to see you hangin' here around again.

[Vince Pinto]

example: shooter comes to the line and LAMR and just stands there or they holster their weapon when they should have gun flat on table with hands on X's.

John, this is actually a bit different to the original question. In the example you've given, the RO is obliged to ensure that the competitor adopts the correct start position, and the highlighted part below is your authority:

8.3.1 "Load And Make Ready" – This command signifies the start of "the Course of Fire". Under the direct supervision of the Range Officer the competitor must face down range, or in a safe direction as specified by the Range Officer, fit eye and ear protection, and prepare the handgun in accordance with the written stage briefing. The competitor must then assume the required start position. At this point, the Range Officer will proceed.

[John Baier]

Vince, Sorry for the drift

[Singlestack]

The first thing out of my mouth would be "stop".

I hate it when somebody closes their slide and drops the hammer while I am still trying to see a clear chamber.

[John Baier]

I would hate to be the RO who knew there was a round in the chamber and still allowed the shooter to pull the trigger

Singlestack - I'm still suprised at how many shooters don't even check to see if the chamber is clear

[Jim Norman]

Excuse me, but I have three things to say on this topic.

One, It most efinately could be considered coaching, If the competitor shows an allegedly clear gun, and drops the hammer BEFORE I can tell him to show clear again, he goes home. So, I am preventing him from DQing, potentially taking a match win from another competitor. That said, Tough, I have and will continue to demand that I SEE the empty chamber. I do this even if the competitor has already beaten me to the punch and dropped the hammer. I want to get themn out of that habit. to not ASSUME that the gun is empty because they have an empty mag in one had and have racked the gun.

I have a friend that DQ'd on the ULSC on the last stage of the day. He dropped his empy mag at a lo port, realized he needed one more shot to take asteel down, loaded, did so, stood up to ULSC, he had picked up the empty mag as he stood, he racked the gun and before the RO could stop him, he dropped the hammer, Match DQ.

Two, In matters of safety, coaching is definately permitted. I can yell finger, I don't wait for an AD, I can yell Muzzle, as the shooter gets tothe 179.9, rather than DQ him for a brain fade 180.1.

Three, Vince, language, please, calling people names is not an acceptable form of communication here.

My advice is to tell your "former RO" friend to remain a "former RO", because we just don't need assholes in IPSC. [endquote]

Jim Norman

[Flexmoney]

I thought I chimed in on this once.

ULASC is a range COMMAND.

You will hear it from my until the actions of the command have been satisfied, or other action is required.

[Vince Pinto]

One, It most efinately could be considered coaching, If the competitor shows an allegedly clear gun, and drops the hammer BEFORE I can tell him to show clear again, he goes home.

Um, that's not were discussing here. Read the opening post.

Two, In matters of safety, coaching is definately permitted. I can yell finger, I don't wait for an AD, I can yell Muzzle, as the shooter gets tothe 179.9, rather than DQ him for a brain fade 180.1.

Um, that's already been stated and it's not coaching - note the words in bold below:

8.6.1 No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course of fire, except that any Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot.

Three, Vince, language, please, calling people names is not an acceptable form of communication here.

No, the only thing unacceptable here are direct personal attacks on identified individuals. Describing a general type of personality is not a personal attack.

[james h]

well things ahve got a bit heated but we all seem to agree that the RO should do something so how about making it official such as "not clear" or "show clear"? Its fair enough to turn a blind eye to unofficial range commands but then unfair to insist that we all strictly adhere to the book.

NO my friend would not rather DQ someone thats why they gave up and wont RO until certain things are sorted out.

Hi Luca , thanks but this si not a regular return to the forum, still got no web access...

james

[bgary]

One, It most efinately could be considered coaching, If the competitor shows an allegedly clear gun, and drops the hammer BEFORE I can tell him to show clear again, he goes home.

That may not be entirely accurate.

Scenario 1:

-- shooter stops shooting

-- RO says "if you are finished..."

-- shooter sees a miss, shoots a make-up shot

No harm, no foul. The clock is still running

Scenario 2:

-- shooter stops shooting

-- RO says "if you are finished..."

-- shooter does a bunch of stuff and shows gun to RO

-- RO says "IF clear, hammer down, holster"

-- shooter drops hammer, gun goes bang

Shooter goes home (see 8.3.7)

Scenario 3:

-- shooter stops shooting

-- RO says "if you are finished..."

-- shooter does a bunch of stuff, points gun at berm, drops hammer

-- gun goes bang.

Hmmm...

*IF* the RO has not yet said "IF clear, hammer down, holster" then, it could be argued that this is more like scenario-1. Assuming (?) that the round went in a safe direction, stayed inside the berm, and was fired as a result of deliberately pulling the trigger (as opposed to "while in the act of unloading"), is this a DQable event? Granted, it will likely have been a *surprise* to both shooter and RO, but... is it a DQ? I'd be more likely to note the new time on the timer, and start the shooter over with "if you are finished..."

Bruce

[Jim Norman]

On scenerio 3, If the shooter aims at a target and pulls the trigger, then I'd say No Harm, No Foul. BUT if the shooter merely drops the hammer as in the act of doing a Hammer Down after unloading and showing clear, ESPECIALLY if he nearly jumps out of his skin, not sorry, DQ, Bye and thank you for contributing to the prize table.

I am sure many of us have got to the end of a COF, Fired our last shot, scanned and as we scanned, dropped our mag, and saw a glaring miss, or a plate still standing and fired a shot at it. Obviously we were not finished. Even if the RO has asked, SHooter Finished? Firing the shot at a target is an indication that we were not. However, When the RO asks and we indicate yes, and he then continues with ULSC, and we do so, but drop the Hammer on a round, Then DQ is the correct action on the part of the RO>

Jim Norman