10.5.11 - Loaded, or Not?

[Glen]

Two of us were practicing last night when the following

occured:

A competitor comes to the line and the RO says LAMR.

The competitor draws his gun, inserts a magazine and

then, without racking the slide or manually cocking the

gun, he reholsters.

Is there a call to be made?

The gun was a Para P-14 so the thumb safety cannot be

applied unless the hammer is cocked. If it was a double

action or a selective action, would the call be different?

Glen

[Vince Pinto]

Hi Glen,

If you're asking whether a DQ call should be made, the answer is Yes, because I believe the P14 would be covered by Rule 10.5.11.1 below:

10.5.11 Holstering a loaded handgun, in any of the following conditions:

........ 10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with the safety not applied.

........ 10.5.11.2 A double action or selective action pistol with the hammer cocked and the safety not applied.

........ 10.5.11.3 A revolver with the hammer cocked.

However if the gun was a SA/DA type, then Rule 10.5.11.2 would apply, so there would not be a DQ if the hammer was not cocked. Also note that "loaded" is defined in Rule 10.5.13.

Hope this helps.

[Glen]

Vince, thank you for the very fast reply.

That's how I read those rules too. I does seem odd

that the single actions are treated differently than

the other autoloaders when they are in the same

state - mag in, nothing in the barrel, hammer down,

and no hope of actually firing. The difference is the

phrase "hammer cocked" is not in 10.5.11.1

Is there a way to align the rules for the two groups of

autoloaders? Could a competitor get DQed undeservedly

(and then reinstated) or get a free pass because a RO

didn't properly recognize what he was shooting?

Glen

[Vince Pinto]

I does seem odd that the single actions are treated differently than the other autoloaders when they are in the same state - mag in, nothing in the barrel, hammer down, and no hope of actually firing.  The difference is the phrase "hammer cocked" is not in 10.5.11.1

A valid point. Let me see if my colleagues on the Rules Committee will agree to the following modification:

10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with the hammer cocked and the safety not applied.

[Jim Norman]

Also, in light of the new rules that do not allow me as RO to warn the shooter that he is not in the proper start conditon.

Also, what would the call be if we had a start: Gun in holster with magazine inserted, but no round in chamber, hammer down on an empty chamber? Would we just send all the SA shooters home?

Jim Norman

[Nik Habicht]

Also, what would the call be if we had a start: Gun in holster with magazine inserted, but no round in chamber, hammer down on an empty chamber? Would we just send all the SA shooters home?

Jim Norman

No. The smart RM (or MD) would have to modify the start position of the stage description. I for one am not about to have a start position that would result in DQing a significant chunk of my customers.

[Vince Pinto]

Also, what would the call be if we had a start: Gun in holster with magazine inserted, but no round in chamber, hammer down on an empty chamber? Would we just send all the SA shooters home?

Under current rules, yes, but why would you knowingly and intentionally require a gun ready position that would create such a situation? And did you not see or read my post directly above yours, where I proposed the following corrective change?:

10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with the hammer cocked and the safety not applied.

Glen identified the anomaly, I immediately acknowledged it, and I've proposed a corrective solution. Is there anything else I need to be doing, apart from possibly falling on my sword?

[Dead Buff]

We, uhm, how shall I say, uhm, ja, uhm....always ignored this rule on the SA's during start WHEN THE HAMMER WAS DOWN ON AN EMPTY CHAMBER with no thumb safety applied. The fools own prob to not know the condition for his gun during start. The rule is however strictly applied during the CoF.

Vince, your proposal sounds perfect.

[Jim Norman]

Nik,

I agree, that as the rules currently are written, we cannot use this start.

Vince,

Your proposed change is good, but take care in altering the rule. A SA gun with a round in the chamber and the Hammer Down would be made legal under your new wording! This is an unsafe condition.

DB,

You can't just ignore a rule, just because the rule doesn't make sense!

Jim Norman

[Neil Beverley]

Also, what would the call be if we had a start: Gun in holster with magazine inserted, but no round in chamber, hammer down on an empty chamber? Would we just send all the SA shooters home?

Under current rules, yes, but why would you knowingly and intentionally require a gun ready position that would create such a situation? And did you not see or read my post directly above yours, where I proposed the following corrective change?:

10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with the hammer cocked and the safety not applied.

Glen identified the anomaly, I immediately acknowledged it, and I've proposed a corrective solution. Is there anything else I need to be doing apart from possibly falling on my sword?

Vince

Of course I would support a correction. I think it could be adopted as an interpretation as well.

The alternative approach could be to add an exception in the case of being asked to do otherwise in the WSB?

[Vince Pinto]

Vince, Your proposed change is good, but take care in altering the rule. A SA gun with a round in the chamber and the Hammer Down would be made legal under your new wording! This is an unsafe condition.

I'm not sure I agree that it's unsafe. Consider a competitor in Production Division using a CZ75 (without a decocker), who must lower his hammer manually, in which case his hammer is down on a loaded chamber.

I don't know enough about "1911 genre" pistols but, if we're going to declare that they're unsafe in that condition, then we'll effectively be banning CZ75 and similar pistols from Production Division, and that's something we definitely don't want to do.

Comments, anyone?

[Dead Buff]

You can't just ignore a rule, just because the rule doesn't make sense!

Jim Norman

Too true, but it is an "obvious" oversight and I don't think that it was meant as a DQ rule for "Mag in, empty chamber, holster" starts...still no excuse though...

To have a round in chamber, hammer down on a SA is possible but highly improbable - do we need a rule to cover this? Like Neil suggested, maybe just a exemption for starts to the current rule and, to my untrained eyes, all bases appear to be covered...

[Jim Norman]

In a SA pistol, the hammer is generally resting on the firing pin when the hammer is down. An impat o the hammer spur could cause the round to fire.

As you state regarding 1911, I am not familiar enough with DA to make the same statement. I will however take some time in the next few days to check the various guns I own to see what happens when they are decocked.

Jim

[Skywalker]

Glen,

kudos to you for bringing to attention a possible anomaly in the rulebook for a specific starting condition.

Vince,

I'd rather propose the following:

10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with a live round in chamber and the safety not applied.

This because a SA gun without a round in the chamber is inherently safe, regardless of the hammer position, while the same gun with a round in chamber and the hammer down is inherently safe only if the gun has a firing pin safety (which we can't tell by only looking at the gun).

Does this help?

[Neil Beverley]

Vince,

I'd rather propose the following:

10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with a live round in chamber and the safety not applied.

This because a SA gun without a round in the chamber is inherently safe, regardless of the hammer position, while the same gun with a round in chamber and the hammer down is inherently safe only if the gun has a firing pin safety (which we can't tell by only looking at the gun).

Does this help?

Luca

I don't think it works without excluding hammer down on a loaded chamber which is a start condition I have used albeit it became less popular compared to hammer down on an empty chamber. In 1911 genre guns it would have been referred to as Condition 2. From my ancient memory I recall that the safety catch could not be applied in such a case. This is why I favoured my alternative wording and it follows the concept of the recent interpretation relating to 10.5.3.2 whereby you get an exemption to the rule if you are complying with the instructions of the WSB.

[Skywalker]

Neil,

I know condition 2 for the 1911, and I have consciously refrained from taking it into consideration because I've been told ad nauseam that there is no such thing as condition1, 2, 3 in IPSC.

Having said this, I have also to say that I have never encountered a "condition 2" start in IPSC matches since I started attending them (back in 1997).

Moreover, we're talking about intrinsic safety of a gun (upon holstering/reholstering). I (and others) have pointed out that a SA gun without a firing pin safety is not intrinsically safe, due to the possibility that a blow on the hammer (or a fall from the holster) might result in an AD, and this is exactly what led me to propose a change to the rule that "de facto" excluded "condition 2" holstering.

[Vince Pinto]

In a SA pistol, the hammer is generally resting on the firing pin when the hammer is down. An impat o the hammer spur could cause the round to fire.

In that case, I think Luca's suggestion is the correct way forward:

10.5.11.1 A single action self-loading pistol with a live round in the chamber and the safety not applied.

Can anybody see a problem with the above proposal? However, in order to avoid the possibility that a WSB might require a "Condition 2" start, we should probably dot the i's and cross the t's with:

New 8.2.6 A course of fire must never require a competitor to prepare a single action self-loading pistol with a round in the chamber and the safety not applied.

Can anybody see a problem with the second proposal?

[Glen]

Ignore this one, too.

Glen

[blackdragon]

Vince I like 8.2.5 Pretty straight forward.

Ivan

[Jim Norman]

Vince,

Your propsed new wording for the rule regarding a SA pistol looks fine. I will think on it, but at first look, I can find no holes.

Interesting comment regarding the CZ and maybe other DA guns. I will check my Sig, others can comment on other guns. WHat is the situatio with the hammer down in a DA? Is the firing pin blocked? Is there a transfer bar? If I hit the back of the hammer on a DA that his either decocked or has had the hammer lowered will that impact transfer to the firing pin and posiblly onto the primer?

I would see no reason to start a COF with a 1911 with the hammer down on a chambered round. You have to cock the gun to fire. An empty chamber yes, you rack to load witch also cocks the gun at the same time. Not really different from saying with an empy gun, no magazine inserted (holstered or on a table) On start signal, engage all targets.... The shooter is loading on the clock.

The Cowboys in the old west knew to load five and carry the hammer down on an empty cylinder in their SAA Colts and others.

Just what is the situation in a DA?

Jim Norman

[billwright]

Hi Guys,

Just to go back to Jim Normans post on 8/12/05.

Is there a new rule that won't allow the RO to tell a shooter he is in the wrong position to start, I was unaware of this rule and thought that the RO had to ensure that the shooter WAS in the correct position,

Could someone clarify this for me.

Bill

[Jim Norman]

Ok,

I just did a little checking. The Sig has a couple of additional safety features. When the gun is decocked, the hammer is blocked from going forward and hitting the firing pin. There is a lockng device in the mechanism so that the hammer is only free to travel if the trigger is fully retracted.

So, hammer down in this particular DA presents no problem. The SA 1911, unless it is a Series 80 type with the firing pin block in place has no such additional safety feature.

I cannot speak for other DA, DAO or DA/SA pistols. But, I think that some type of new wording along the lines of what Vince has proposed is a good idea. We can start a COF with the hammer down on an empty chamber, but with a Magazine Inserted and the gun holstered only once this change is made. Currently I think we can only do this with a table or drawer type of start since we cannot, by the rulebook, holster a "Loaded" SA without applying the safety and you can't apply the safety on a 1911 with the hammer down.

I do think we want to continue to forbid a hammer down start with a loaded chamber in all SA type of guns.

Jim

[mcoliver]

Heya unca Vince. If the original scenarion is a DQ, then I think I've been in more than a few sanctioned matches that required this type of start and in violation of the rules.

Normally, a match geared towards the local law enforcements have empty starts and some of those empty starts are holstered 1911 guns with the mag inserted.

I feel the need to tell somebody in PPSA about this thread...

[Vince Pinto]

Normally, a match geared towards the local law enforcements have empty starts and some of those empty starts are holstered 1911 guns with the mag inserted. I feel the need to tell somebody in PPSA about this thread...

Yes, I've been to quite a few PPSA matches myself, where the Gun Ready Condition is described as "Condition 2" ((hammer down, chamber loaded, magazine inserted) but they actually mean "Condition 3" (hammer down, chamber empty, magazine inserted).

In fact, I conducted a "Train The Trainers" seminar at the PPSA offices earlier this year, which was attended by all senior PPSA NROI personnel, and I once again emphasised the importance of clearly specifying the Gun Ready Condition (e.g. chamber empty, magazine inserted) instead of using one of Cooper's "conditions", which not only confuses many people, they only apply to "1911 genre" guns.

Of course old habits die hard, so I know the dreaded "conditions" are still used in some parts of the country, but there's definitely been progress!!

[Vince Pinto]

Is there a new rule that won't allow the RO to tell a shooter he is in the wrong position to start, I was unaware of this rule and thought that the RO had to ensure that the shooter WAS in the correct position, Could someone clarify this for me.

Bill, let's keep this thread on track. See this other marathon thread about Start Positions.