Ross Carter Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Since I have not had much success in getting an answer for the previous questions I asked, I'll try something new. Troy says there is no penalty for having an illegal holster, i.e. more than 2 inches, etc. The solution is to have the shooter adjust the illegal holster, What if the holster can not be adjusted. It is what it is. Now what? Troy says there is no move to Open period. That is because the same rule applies in Open also So do we just allow the shooter to finish the competition with an illegal holster?Since there is no penalty available, the only option would be to refuse to start the competitor on the remaining COFs until the equipment was within specifications. That pretty much rules out shooting for no score, since once you start the competitor, the run counts.The seemingly appropriate fix is to remove the 2" requirement in open.I still don't understand why 6.2.5.1 doesn't apply here.6.2.5.1 However, if a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements of a declared Division during a course of fire, the competitor will be placed in Open Division, if available, otherwise the competitor will shoot the match for no score. It should be no different than any other equipment requirement. If it gets noticed before you shoot, you can be asked to adjust it to comply, no harm no foul. If it gets noticed "during a course of fire", bump to open if available. Since the requirement we are talking about also applies to Open, Open is "not available" and you shoot for no score. I can't imagine that the drafters of the rulebook decided to make an equipment requirement that applies to all divisions that has absolutely no penalty other than adjusting if you get caught. only option is to shoot for no score... Maybe if we had a Pizza and Milkshake station next door to the safety area, a competitor in crisis could eat his way into compliance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 The seemingly appropriate fix is to remove the 2" requirement in open.And Limited and Limited 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxshooter Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Other than Production and Single Stack it should not be a rule. The only thing that needs to be said for Open , Limited, L-10 and Revolver is that the holster must safely retain the firearm. If they want to add what the height the grip of the gun must be in relationship to the top of the belt ok but that is enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Any chance someone with NROI will comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Any chance someone with NROI will comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I'm not sure what part you want NROI to comment on, but Troy gave his input about 60 posts ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I'm not sure what part you want NROI to comment on, but Troy gave his input about 60 posts ago.There has been a lot of discussion and thoughts since post 92. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I'm not sure what part you want NROI to comment on, but Troy gave his input about 60 posts ago. Well for one thing currently Troy is an AD right? AD's are not the body responsible for rules. So it would make sense to get DNROI interpretations on rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Well I don't think that is entirely correct Sarge. Troy is also an RMI and was deeply involved in the formulation of the new rulebook, as I understand it. I asked a question or two about the holster at the Bluegrass match a couple of years ago, but have not received any response as of yet. I also asked about what happens if an illegal holster cannot be adjusted, no response as of yet. I guess I could go directly to Troy, but I thought the entire viewing audience might benefit from the answer. I know most folks have lives other than the BE forum. However, if someone is going to enter into a thread about rules, with a semi-official statement, please don't make it a drive by post. Check back and see if it stimulated follow up questions. My 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Well I don't think that is entirely correct Sarge. Troy is also an RMI and was deeply involved in the formulation of the new rulebook, as I understand it. I agree. But my response to his post was essentially that he shared his "opinions" in the thread and he could not insure that every RM/MD in the organization shared the same exact opinions. Therefore the rule was bound to not be enforced uniformly across the board. I have the utmost respect for RMI's (even retired ones)but they can and do have differing views of some things in the sport. If I got called on a violation at a match and whipped out my email saying it is good to go which would carry more weight? The one from DNROI saying "this is legal" or the one from Troy or any other RMI saying, "well, I think this is legal in my opinion". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 You know that sounds very reasonable:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 ... I know most folks have lives other than the BE forum. However, if someone is going to enter into a thread about rules, with a semi-official statement, please don't make it a drive by post. Check back and see if it stimulated follow up questions. .... Yes! Thank you Gary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 At the risk of sounding cynical, can I say that every post here generates some sort of followup? This IS the Enos Rules forum, is it not? A poll of the NROI Instructors, including the DNROI, shows that it's always treated as an adjustment, not a move to Open, not a move to shooting for no score. What happens when someone can't get it within 2 inches? The answer is, they run with it like that, but it's extremely rare that the holster can't be adjusted to withing at least an overlay's width. Likewise, we all use an overlay as a rough gauge. Fellas, the rules allow the RM some leeway here, and I (and the rest of the NROI Instructor group) don't read the rules to say that it's a move to Open or anywhere else. That's about as plain as I can make it. I'm sure some of you disagree with that, and that's fine. Driving on now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Then DNROI needs to issue a ruling to make sure EVERY shooter gets the same treatment from every RM in the country. Pretty good info Troy. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadarTech Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Then DNROI needs to issue a ruling to make sure EVERY shooter gets the same treatment from every RM in the country. Pretty good info Troy. Thanks I'm not sure about anyone else... But my concern is not the RMI corps or even the RM's... But rather the CRO's or even RO's serving as RM's at local or state matches.... So that ruling is important as many of them may never see this thread.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 An RM is an RM is an RM. Whether an actual RM or an RM by position in any match. They all need to know how to handle this. My opinion is basically the same as yours RT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beltjones Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 There are plenty of holsters (production holsters, especially) that can't be adjusted on the range to comply with the 2" rule. Frankly, I'm ok with it if they just get to shoot. But what if someone has a race holster and says they can't possibly adjust it to within 2"? Are ROs/RMs to provide them with allen wrenches and insist? What if they refuse? I really don't think there is even a reason for this rule, but as long as it's on the books there has to be a reason for it and a method of enforcement. Otherwise it's like one of those antiquated laws like "No fishing from horseback" that people just laugh about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthyBlagga Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 ... What if they refuse? I really don't think there is even a reason for this rule, but as long as it's on the books there has to be a reason for it and a method of enforcement. Otherwise it's like one of those antiquated laws like "No fishing from horseback" that people just laugh about. If they refuse, I don't start them. They can refuse as long as they like, and as a consequence get a zero score for my stage. Pretty simple really. As for the origin of the rule, my assumption is that it hearkens back to the CCW origins of our sport - that a gun carried concealed for self defense needs to be tight to the body tor remain concealed. Whether you personally agree with this still being an aspect of our sport, and whether it makes sense for Open, is a different question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 It's my understanding that the distance rules, (from the belt, in relation to the belt), as well as the no-tie-down stuff, came about to prevent the "gunslinger" image. I don't know that for a fact, however. Again, the RM has discretion here, and as long as the competitor is attempting to comply and can get close, it's usually not a problem. It's not a big problem anyway. As for refusing, not starting them is one thing. Unsportsmanlike conduct is another. Not advocating for either one, just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Discretion. An interesting concept. I wonder where it starts and where it ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAFO Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 I had to add washers to my BladeTech Black Ice DOH to get within the 2" distance. It's easier to do on that model than the standard DOH since the support bracket extends lower, but it's not something I could have fixed at the range unless someone had a bunch of washers in their bag. From that perspective, I'd be grateful to be allowed to finish the match and be given the chance to fix it at home. What if a competitor consistently fails to fix it match after match (e.g., at a local match where the shooter is seen by the same group of ROs/RM month after month)? Refuse to let them compete under 10.6? Otherwise, it seems to be an unenforceable rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersonj55126 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) This was checked at 2014 Nationals. One guy in my squad had to adjust his setup. We were measured to thumb safety on limited/open. Luckily they did not measure to grip or everyone would have failed. Edited October 26, 2014 by andersonj55126 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Was this years Nationals run under the old rulebook? The 2014 rules now specifically say measure to the grip. From the 2014 rulebook: 5.2.5 Where a Division specifies a maximum distance that a competitor’s handgun and equipment may extend away from a competitor’s belt, the measurement shall be taken in the following manner: — Perpendicular to the belt at the point of attachment to the belt — from the inner most surface of the belt equipment (against the pants/body) to the closest point of the grip of the handgun and/or any reloading device. (bold emphasis mine). From the older rulebook: 5.2.5 Where a Division specifies a maximum distance that a competitor’s handgun and equipment may extend away from a competitor’s belt, the measurement shall be taken in the following manner: — perpendicular to the belt at the point of attachment to the belt — from the inner most surface of the belt equipment (against the pants/body) to the nearest body-side surface of the handgun and/or any reloading device. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Seems they need a definition of "point of attachment" as it could be construed to be the top of the belt, or the bottom of the belt. Then, if the bottom, you could measure to the magazine release (right handed shooter) which would make it closer than most other measurable parts. Mostly I'm not sure exactly where the point of attachment is ??? I'm pretty sure the magazine release would be considered a "reloading device". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now