Finger in the trigger guard

[wgnoyes]

10.5.9 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard during loading, reloading, or unloading. Exception: while complying with the “Make Ready” command to lower the hammer of a gun without a decocking lever, or while initially loading a revolver with a spurless hammer.

I should just leave this one alone, so I'll state up front I'm not going to get into any arguments over it.

The rule is pretty simple, easy to read and understand. There are no glossary definitions of finger or trigger guard. Those would seem self-evident. There are glossary definitions for loading, reloading, and unloading.

So I get told tonight someone got DQ'ed for finger in the trigger guard at a recent match while initially loading on an unloaded start (scoop the gun and ammo up off the barrel head and go). Okay, I think, stuff happens.

But...

He was a revolver shooter. The cylinder was open. I know, this has probably already been tried in arbitration a hundred times before and went nowhere, lesson is still keep your finger clear of the trigger guard.

BUT....

It was his little finger and it was in the trigger guard BEHIND the trigger. Cylinder open, pinkie behind the trigger, God couldn't make that gun go off!

And I know, you bring this to me as a member of an arbitration committee and I'm going to uphold the DQ as it makes no allowances for wheel guns, cylinders, pinkies, or WHERE in the trigger guard the finger was...

But.... just damn.

Discuss, argue, go back and forth, have a big time. Or ignore it completely. I'm just tossing it out there.

(And the wheel gun didn't have a spurless hammer.)

[grapemeister]

[Sarge]

You are right, the rule is written very black and white. No exceptions. I think it's a DQ unfortunately. If we try to change the rule to say "Trigger finger" then a shooter could have any other finger in the guard and on the trigger. Any finger can make a gun go off.

I would rather the talk among shooters be that DAMN that guy in XXX got DQ'ed for having his pinky in the trigger guard, behind the trigger no less. I would not want the talk to be, well the guy in XXX did not get DQ'ed for having his pinky in the guard why are you DQing me for having my middle finger in the guard? You see, word did not get to everybody that the first shooter had his pinky BEHIND the trigger and was given a free pass.

I know it sucks sometimes but I think when we start individually interpreting rules we make things very unfair across the board.

[StealthyBlagga]

Per 8.6.1, the RO has some discretion to give verbal warnings, such as shouting "finger" when he sees the competitor might be about to do something inappropriate. This is an instance where the RO might have exercised that discretion and saved the competitor from a silly DQ.

Edited November 27, 2013 by StealthyBlagga

[Sandbagger123]

i have never seen a shooter get D/Q ed for the finger. I have seen plenty that should have while in the peanut gallery. Watch enough vids on youtube and you will see the same.

[Skydiver]

Go shoot up in Canada with the IPSC folks. Their RO's have an eagle eye for finger in the trigger guard.

[Chuck Anderson]

I just DQd a guy at the last match I shot for having his finger on the trigger while clearing a jam (from shorting a 9 out of his 40). As an RO it's normally difficult to catch this one. I tend to be a bit behind the shooter and I can usually see the knuckle if it's in but can't guarantee the finger is in. I was also on a couple are committees where finger DQs have come up. No one has won yet.

[lcs]

While it may seem silly to DQ the guy (cylinder open, pinky finger behind the trigger), it shows a lack of control by the shooter. At some point the cylinder has to close with live ammo and the next time his finger could be on the trigger.

I would have to say that is one "eagle eyed" RO.

I have DQ'd several folks for "finger in the trigger guard". If your watching the gun (as we are suppose to), it happens all the time. I will say it is mostly new shooters. I rarely see it with experienced USPSA competitiors. At our local matches and Monday night league, we hammer the importance of keeping your finger out of the trigger guard unless your pointing at and shooting at a target.

[grapemeister]

The RO did the right thing by calling the violation and DQ. If the RO had given a warning, it would have been the right thing. I think we should leave words like silly out of the conversation. The only thing I see that was silly in this scenario was the shooter for putting his finger in the trigger guard. A real friend says to his shooting buddy " damn, putting your finger in the trigger guard sure was silly. I bet you won't do that again."

If we have an RO that is being a bit too picky and has developed a reputation for giving out way too many DQ's, it won't take long before that person is no longer an RO. That kind of stuff should be handled by the club MD and RM, or whatever is appropriate for the situation.

Edited November 27, 2013 by grapemeister

[steel1212]

i have never seen a shooter get D/Q ed for the finger. I have seen plenty that should have while in the peanut gallery. Watch enough vids on youtube and you will see the same.

That's why videos aren't allowed in arbitration. If your watching me from my strong side and I bend my trigger finger you can't tell if it's in it out.

Honestly I'm not a fan of this rule to start with. Very rarely, from my experience, can you be sure the guys finger is really in the guard. Now if his finger is actually on the trigger you can see that pretty easy.

Example, had a new shooter a couple years ago that looked like his finger was in the guard but I wasn't for sure. I would coach him a bit to make sure his finger wasn't in and he was getting all puffy telling me it wasn't...cool ok. So last stage of the match he reloads and bang. Looks at me and ask what just happened. It's all I could do just to get him to unload and show clear lol.

[EkuJustice]

Ya im not a fan of it easier as its VERY hard to tell 100 percent especially when the guy is moving reloading etc and if your not 100 percent sure, no DQ. If he sets one off while doing any of these tasks, thats very easy to call as you can tell what happened. We had one at a match here called that was called while the shooter was running and moving from an RO who was not on the timer and not in a position to see that that caused a good bit of controversy If i don't see it hanging out the other side or one isn't set off I don't call it.

Edited November 27, 2013 by EkuJustice

[Sarge]

Ya im not a fan of it easier as its VERY hard to tell 100 percent especially when the guy is moving reloading etc and if your not 100 percent sure, no DQ. If he sets one off while doing any of these tasks, thats very easy to call as you can tell what happened. We had one at a match here called that was called while the shooter was running and moving from an RO who was not on the timer and not in a position to see that that caused a good bit of controversy If i don't see it hanging out the other side or one isn't set off I don't call it.

Agree with you that any DQ should never be called if it can not be positively identified. I would like to say though, the point of calling the finger DQ is to PREVENT "setting one off" in the first place.

[Chuck Anderson]

Ya im not a fan of it easier as its VERY hard to tell 100 percent especially when the guy is moving reloading etc and if your not 100 percent sure, no DQ. If he sets one off while doing any of these tasks, thats very easy to call as you can tell what happened. We had one at a match here called that was called while the shooter was running and moving from an RO who was not on the timer and not in a position to see that that caused a good bit of controversy If i don't see it hanging out the other side or one isn't set off I don't call it.

Agree with you that any DQ should never be called if it can not be positively identified. I would like to say though, the point of calling the finger DQ is to PREVENT "setting one off" in the first place.

Exactly. The safety rules have multiple layers. Just like the four cardinal rules of firearms safety. They are there to prevent an unsafe condition, not just to DQ someone after they already hurt themselves or someone else. If you break one, but only one, yes you're going home but everyone should be safe. Start breaking two or three and bad things happen fast. It's important as an RO to enforce all the rules, not just the easy ones.

Yes it's hard to spot. But after the first stage if you think it's happening but didn't quite get a good look, talk to the shooter and have the RO on the clipboard stand in a bit better location to see. Both of you working as a team should be able to spot it. After I DQ'd the last guy I felt kind of bad (always do). One of the guys that was shooting with him came up to me and thanked me. Apparently he's the MD for a local multigun match and had been warning him for a while that his gun handling was going to get him in trouble at a USPSA match where they actually enforce the rules.

[Carmoney]

I will let other people argue the fine points of the rules, but the other problem is that you have a Nazi RO on your hands. If your club hosts any bigger matches, make sure you put him on stats or Mr. Fix-It or somewhere else where he does not have direct interaction with the competitors.

[StealthyBlagga]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

If I were that shooter, I would have arbitrated the call by claiming I was not in the process of "loading, reloading, or unloading" the gun, but only Making Ready. Indeed, as it was an unloaded start, he could not possibly have been loading the gun. There is nothing in the rules prohibiting the finger from entering the trigger guard during the Make Ready sequence (otherwise we would be DQing folks left and right for dry firing while taking a sight picture - a ubiquitous practice at USPSA matches). If I was on the arbitration committee, I would overturn the DQ on this basis.

Edited November 27, 2013 by StealthyBlagga

[Nik Habicht]

I will let other people argue the fine points of the rules, but the other problem is that you have a Nazi RO on your hands. If your club hosts any bigger matches, make sure you put him on stats or Mr. Fix-It or somewhere else where he does not have direct interaction with the competitors.

If I were running a match, either as MD or RM, I'd want any RO or CRO to make the same call. Might I overturn that call as RM? I might -- it would depend on the situation. But I'd want the stage staff to err on the side of caution and stop the shooter. We can talk about it at that point, and decide how to proceed.....

[Nik Habicht]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

If I were that shooter, I would have arbitrated the call by claiming I was not in the process of "loading, reloading, or unloading" the gun, but only Making Ready. Indeed, as it was an unloaded start, he could not possibly have been loading the gun. There is nothing in the rules prohibiting the finger from entering the trigger guard during the Make Ready sequence (otherwise we would be DQing folks left and right for dry firing while taking a sight picture - a ubiquitous practice at USPSA matches). If I was on the arbitration committee, I would overturn the DQ on this basis.

From reading Bill's initial post, I got the impression this happened on the clock, after the timer went off......

...not at Make Ready.....

[Sarge]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

If I were that shooter, I would have arbitrated the call by claiming I was not in the process of "loading, reloading, or unloading" the gun, but only Making Ready. Indeed, as it was an unloaded start, he could not possibly have been loading the gun. There is nothing in the rules prohibiting the finger from entering the trigger guard during the Make Ready sequence (otherwise we would be DQing folks left and right for dry firing while taking a sight picture - a ubiquitous practice at USPSA matches). If I was on the arbitration committee, I would overturn the DQ on this basis.

From reading Bill's initial post, I got the impression this happened on the clock, after the timer went off......

...not at Make Ready.....

That is correct. He was on the clock not making ready.

[StealthyBlagga]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

If I were that shooter, I would have arbitrated the call by claiming I was not in the process of "loading, reloading, or unloading" the gun, but only Making Ready. Indeed, as it was an unloaded start, he could not possibly have been loading the gun. There is nothing in the rules prohibiting the finger from entering the trigger guard during the Make Ready sequence (otherwise we would be DQing folks left and right for dry firing while taking a sight picture - a ubiquitous practice at USPSA matches). If I was on the arbitration committee, I would overturn the DQ on this basis.

From reading Bill's initial post, I got the impression this happened on the clock, after the timer went off......

...not at Make Ready.....

That is correct. He was on the clock not making ready.

Ahh, I missed that. My mistake. Still a harsh call.

Edited November 28, 2013 by StealthyBlagga

[OUshooter]

Harsh but correct. If you want to play the "common sense" game, then you shouldn't agree with most of the "safety" rules.

Example: The shooter is 20yrds down range and is engaging the last array of targets. One of which is close to the 180° and the shooter over runs a tick and goes 185°. even if a ND had occurred the bullet would have struck the backstop and endangered no one. It's still a DQ.

Our rules are based on common sense not ruled by them. Right or wrong that's the way it is.

[aztecdriver]

A couple of points - for clarification.

1. I witnessed the call. I was a spectator at the time. I was also asked about the rule at the time, and referenced the book... I could not see how it was not a DQ, despite the inability for the gun to actually fire.

2. It was not at the initial make ready, it was after the first shooting position when the shooter was returning to the table to reload. The shooter was not shooting moonclips, but speedloaders, which requires a little more control of the gun. The pinky was hooked around from the offhand as the gun was being cradled in the offhand to affect the reload. It was that way through out the process as far as I could tell.

3. The shooter stopped cold as soon as "stop" was called - frozen in the position - it wasn't in doubt that the finger was where he said it was, everyone saw it, including me from 20 feet behind and to the right.

4. I played the game about how 10.5.9 refers to "THE finger" within the text... until I read 8.4.1 -

8.4.1 When loading, reloading or unloading during a course of fire, the competitor’s fingers must be visibly outside the trigger guard and the handgun must be pointed safely down range or in another safe direction authorized by a Range Officer (see Section 10.5)

Let me play a little "what if" here - just to keep the discussion moving. THIS time, the gun was gripped in a way that it could not fire. What happens the next time that during the rush the competitor misplaced his pinky in front of the trigger? Cylinder closed and BANG. Ok, it's a DA revolver so most likely not - but do we want to be slicing this apple? If there is no way the gun could go off, we leave it go, but if the pinky is in front of the trigger, it's a DQ?

I'm with the "Just Damn", I hated that it happened. What else can you do?

[IHAVEGAS]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

It has been pointed out to me that if you can't handle the way things are done then you need to look for another game.

I've DQ'd folks in that other sport for safety violations & seen righteous DQ's in USPSA, so it ain't that I'm anti DQ, but the 'Dq'd because of rule 359 subparagraph D section xii, based on the subcommittees hypothetical scenario that such and such could eventually lead to so and so' just doesn't work for me personally.

What does work, and may or may not be a thing for the wheel gunner, is just to low key things. Contribute to the sport with set up & pasting and etc, have fun at low cost and easy drive local matches, but don't let yourself get too much invested to where the things you don't like can ruin your fun.

[sperman]

I have no problem with the way 10.5.9 is written. I don't care what kind of gun you are shooting, if you can't keep your finger out of the trigger guard during a reload, you are being unsafe.

[aztecdriver]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

It has been pointed out to me that if you can't handle the way things are done then you need to look for another game.

I've DQ'd folks in that other sport for safety violations & seen righteous DQ's in USPSA, so it ain't that I'm anti DQ, but the 'Dq'd because of rule 359 subparagraph D section xii, based on the subcommittees hypothetical scenario that such and such could eventually lead to so and so' just doesn't work for me personally.

What does work, and may or may not be a thing for the wheel gunner, is just to low key things. Contribute to the sport with set up & pasting and etc, have fun at low cost and easy drive local matches, but don't let yourself get too much invested to where the things you don't like can ruin your fun.

I'm going to challenge both you and stealthy to respond to my "what if" question above. While, looking at the rules, you can sit there and be critical of someone issuing a DQ for following the letter of the rule - but I think there is real practical sense, after thinking about this for a while, to adhering to the letter of the law here. Permitting a shooter to put their fingers in the trigger guard, in a specific way, for a specific piece of equipment, doing a specific process, can be a recipe for disaster.

Muscle memory combined with improper technique can cause them not to do it right - ONE TIME- and it results in a more dangerous situation than need be.

I understand that in this ONE particular observation, that he was DQ'd for something that couldn't have possibly resulted in the gun firing - but the technique COULD lead to something much more dangerous, and the reason for the DQ and the rules being as they are - are sound. My challenge to you is to argue against this premise, instead of calling the RO a nazi and the DQ being a lawyer trick instead of a chapter and verse issue. Sperman's point is valid.

Edited December 5, 2013 by aztecdriver

[IHAVEGAS]

OK, now I'll be a bit less tactful. Rule 10.5.9 is inartfully written, as are many of our rules, so some common sense is required of the RO. In this case, the RO enforced the rule blindly and without that critical common sense component.

It has been pointed out to me that if you can't handle the way things are done then you need to look for another game.

I've DQ'd folks in that other sport for safety violations & seen righteous DQ's in USPSA, so it ain't that I'm anti DQ, but the 'Dq'd because of rule 359 subparagraph D section xii, based on the subcommittees hypothetical scenario that such and such could eventually lead to so and so' just doesn't work for me personally.

What does work, and may or may not be a thing for the wheel gunner, is just to low key things. Contribute to the sport with set up & pasting and etc, have fun at low cost and easy drive local matches, but don't let yourself get too much invested to where the things you don't like can ruin your fun.

I'm going to challenge both you and stealthy to respond to my "what if" question above.

"What if" quickly gets you to the conclusion that accidents could always happen while participating in many different sports and recreational activities. We are not going to abandon all things like shooting sports and mountain bike riding and high school football, for example, so the questions get more complicated and rules are designed to allow high reward activities while restraining risk to whatever is deemed an acceptable level.

It is likely to be expected that there will not be a one size fits all philosophy for risk/reward regulations, so it is probably natural that some folks will like the way things are done and others will be better off looking elsewhere or just not getting deeply invested.