Trapped the RO

[Nik Habicht]

The question came up, if I had swept the RO while he was downrange of me, should I be DQ'd?

this happened to me once as well. A younger faster shooter decided to blitz uprange to retrieve a mag for one more target. Totally unexpected and I was actually walking up to him to begin clearing him when he bolted. I was able to stay even with his muzzle and watched it. Later when I casually mentioned how big a .45 muzzle looks from the front they told me I should have DQ'd the shooter if I saw muzzle even though it was not pointed in my direction. I let him finish the stage and he said he knew where I was and that I did not interfere with him at all. We discussed it on here and there were arguments on all sides but I personally could not have DQ'd him with a clear conscience in that particular situation. It was a good lesson for me as I now stay well clear and back until body language tells me they are done

Seeing the muzzle at an angle and having the gun pointed at you are two different things. If you saw it at a safe angle, good call.

[ktm300]

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

What rule in 10.3 are you going to use?

[Poppa Bear]

Nik. I think he meant he kept the muzzle clear of the RO.

[Nik Habicht]

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

What rule in 10.3 are you going to use?

I won't use any portion of 10.3...... :D

We clearly -- and fortunately -- don't plan for this in our rules. I'd issue the DQ under 10.5

You point a gun at someone else, you go home. (notice that it's that specific for me -- it's not the simple "the RO was downrange of the shooter" ergo match DQ) It's that simple -- you may only have a split second to react but you'll need to react correctly.....

[Nik Habicht]

Nik. I think he meant he kept the muzzle clear of the RO.

I got that -- I'm not saying that Scott should have been DQ'd in his situation where he clearly did not sweep the RO. I was addressing his hypothetical question.....

[ktm300]

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

What rule in 10.3 are you going to use?

I won't use any portion of 10.3...... :D

We clearly -- and fortunately -- don't plan for this in our rules. I'd issue the DQ under 10.5

You point a gun at someone else, you go home. (notice that it's that specific for me -- it's not the simple "the RO was downrange of the shooter" ergo match DQ) It's that simple -- you may only have a split second to react but you'll need to react correctly.....

So you are making ready and the RO sticks his hand in front of your gun. DQ? You had that split second.

So give me the rule in 10.5 you are going to use.

[Nik Habicht]

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

What rule in 10.3 are you going to use?

I won't use any portion of 10.3...... :D

We clearly -- and fortunately -- don't plan for this in our rules. I'd issue the DQ under 10.5

You point a gun at someone else, you go home. (notice that it's that specific for me -- it's not the simple "the RO was downrange of the shooter" ergo match DQ) It's that simple -- you may only have a split second to react but you'll need to react correctly.....

So you are making ready and the RO sticks his hand in front of your gun. DQ? You had that split second.

So give me the rule in 10.5 you are going to use.

Let's have that situation occur for real at a match -- it's highly unlikely that it would ever occur. And I've already given you the rule -- read 10.5 again....

It's also pretty unlikely that an RO would ever have a gun pointed at them -- but it's far more likely that an RO could wind up downrange of a competitor. That last possibility won't always result in a DQ, but it could if a gun is actually pointed at the RO.....

Tell me something: Are you making the argument that it's safe to point a loaded gun at another human being?

[alma]

When ROing a stage which will require retreating I generally start close to the shooter but start backing up to give him plenty of room before he starts coming my way. In this scenario it's best to have the score keeper or another RO watching from another angle for gun handling issues as the primary RO might not have a good view from behind, especially when trying to clear out of the shooters path.

If it's a fast in and out I just hold my ground further back and wait for the shooter to emerge.

[alma]

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

What rule in 10.3 are you going to use?

I won't use any portion of 10.3...... :D

We clearly -- and fortunately -- don't plan for this in our rules. I'd issue the DQ under 10.5

You point a gun at someone else, you go home. (notice that it's that specific for me -- it's not the simple "the RO was downrange of the shooter" ergo match DQ) It's that simple -- you may only have a split second to react but you'll need to react correctly.....

So you are making ready and the RO sticks his hand in front of your gun. DQ? You had that split second.

So give me the rule in 10.5 you are going to use.

Let's have that situation occur for real at a match -- it's highly unlikely that it would ever occur. And I've already given you the rule -- read 10.5 again....

It's also pretty unlikely that an RO would ever have a gun pointed at them -- but it's far more likely that an RO could wind up downrange of a competitor. That last possibility won't always result in a DQ, but it could if a gun is actually pointed at the RO.....

Tell me something: Are you making the argument that it's safe to point a loaded gun at another human being?

Sorry but 10.5 doesn't apply to sweeping an RO. As long as the shooter didn't break the rules it's not his fault.

Not saying he shouldn't stop if he overtakes the RO but as far as I read the rules it isn't a DQ.

Per 7.1.1 the RO is responsible to monitor for safe competitor actions. If a safety issue were about to occur such as sweeping another person who was in the wrong place and inside the 90 degree line I believe it would be first and foremost up to the RO to call Stop. The only place in the rule book where remember a mention of the shooter stopping themselves was for losing eye or ear protection.

[ktm300]

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

What rule in 10.3 are you going to use?

I won't use any portion of 10.3...... :D

We clearly -- and fortunately -- don't plan for this in our rules. I'd issue the DQ under 10.5

You point a gun at someone else, you go home. (notice that it's that specific for me -- it's not the simple "the RO was downrange of the shooter" ergo match DQ) It's that simple -- you may only have a split second to react but you'll need to react correctly.....

So you are making ready and the RO sticks his hand in front of your gun. DQ? You had that split second.

So give me the rule in 10.5 you are going to use.

Let's have that situation occur for real at a match -- it's highly unlikely that it would ever occur. And I've already given you the rule -- read 10.5 again....

It's also pretty unlikely that an RO would ever have a gun pointed at them -- but it's far more likely that an RO could wind up downrange of a competitor. That last possibility won't always result in a DQ, but it could if a gun is actually pointed at the RO.....

Tell me something: Are you making the argument that it's safe to point a loaded gun at another human being?

No, lets not point guns at people at matches. Never a good idea.

10,5 is a big rule. The norm is to list the specific rule inside 10.5 that the shooter broke. And yes I know it says they are examples are not all inclusive.

Yes it is unlikely as most all RO's know not to get downrange, and most shooters are going to point their gun someplace else if they see the RO on the wrong side of them. I have not seen a gun pointed at someone at a match even if the RO got in a bad place. But to say the shooter is an automatic DQ when there is a specific example of a rule that covers sweeping is wrong. Every instance is unique and needs to be treated that way.

[Nik Habicht]

Every instance is unique and needs to be treated that way.

Correct. And the overriding purpose behind our belt and suspenders approach to safety is to disqualify a competitor at the first sign of a potentially unsafe act. Tell me something -- do you see a difference between sweeping an RO who was unfortunate enough to have been trapped downrange, and sweeping an RO at 181 degrees? I don't -- we didn't pick the 180 arbitrarily, we picked it to ensure that the other people in the bay would be very unlikely to be swept.....

And 10.5.5 only covers a competitor's own body as currently written, so it's clearly not all inclusive of sweeping, and isn't applicable to the situation at hand. (It's limited to the competitor's own body; he swept another person's body -- and we don't have a specific rule to deal with that, hence a 10.5 DQ.)

I hate ending someone's match early; I'd hate it more though if I didn't DQ the competitor and something happened a stage or two later.....

[alma]

Edited-looking again at 10.5 it does say that they are examples and unsafe gun handling isn't limited to them. I find that pretty strange as other areas in the rule book are more much more objective . I didn't even realize there was room for addition as the items under that category seem fairly comprehensive.

So it comes down to a subjective call on whether the it was the shooters fault or the ROs.

Edited March 10, 2014 by alma

[Nik Habicht]

All calls made are subjective -- based on our perception of what happened, our experience, and the underlying situation. We strive to be objective by making calls consistently, regardless of who the shooter might be....

[sperman]

This happened to me at last years NC match. I started running uprange when the RO thought I was done with the stage (not sure why, there were several targets left to engage.) He hit the deck when he saw me take off. As soon as I saw him on the ground I stopped, and had the gun clear before he could yell stop. There was no question on interference, and no way I could finish the stage.

The question came up, if I had swept the RO while he was downrange of me, should I be DQ'd?

Two thoughts -- as an RO or acting as an RM, I don't need you or even want you to clear the gun at that moment. Find a safe place, concentrate on pointing and keeping the muzzle there, and reengage the safety. Hold the gun still. Clearing requires muzzle movement -- while I have no doubt that you accomplished this safely, not every situation is the same. Clear the gun when you get RO direction from someone who can provide the appropriate safety direction, someone who can both see you, and whatever else is still going on on the stage....

Second thought -- if you muzzle anyone, for any reason, yep, that's a match DQ. You're responsible for the gun -- bottom line. Last sentence of 8.6.4 covers it:

However, in the event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

Two replies:

1) The RO was about 45 degrees to my right, and my muzzle was pointed about 45 degrees to the left, so there was at least 90 degrees between the direction of my muzzle, and the RO. However, I agree that it might not be the best course of action. To be honest, I didn't really think about what to do. I had the gun unloaded before my conscious mind took over.

2) If I had swept the RO, and been DQ'd, I would have paid the $100 and filled out an arb form.

In this case, I had turned to run up range and was dragging the gun behind me. I happened to turn towards the RO, and saw him in my peripheral vision, but if I had turned the other way, and he had done something really stupid, I could have easily swept him and not even known it had happened. Yes, I'm responsible for my muzzle, but the RO is responsible for keeping the course of fire safe, and that includes his own actions. I can assure you, if I ever do something that results in me being downrange of the shooter and having his muzzle pointed at me, I will not be issuing a DQ. I will probably hand the timer off as I go change my shorts and collect my wits, but I will not ruin a competitors match because of my own mistake.

[alma]

I agree

[alma]

also, in the event that the RO was in your way such that you had to change what you were doing to avoid sweeping him with the gun then I believe under 8.6.4 you should be offered a reshoot sense this would be external influence.

[ktm300]

also, in the event that the RO was in your way such that you had to change what you were doing to avoid sweeping him with the gun then I believe under 8.6.4 you should be offered a reshoot sense this would be external influence.

It would be a stop and re-shoot the second the RO is downrange of the shooter. That is one of the only reasons I would stop myself.

I also agree with sperman that if the RO caused me to sweep him and I got a DQ I would pay the $100 and arb that. I keep $100 in my shooting bag just so that won't happen.

[Gary Stevens]

This is a tricky subject and I suspect many will disagree with me. However, I see it that everything in front of the 180 line belongs to the shooter. If I as an RO manage to get within that 180 line and in front of the shooter, then shame on me. I can't imagine a situation where I would try to hold the shooter responsible for me smooching the pooch.

[ktm300]

This is a tricky subject and I suspect many will disagree with me. However, I see it that everything in front of the 180 line belongs to the shooter. If I as an RO manage to get within that 180 line and in front of the shooter, then shame on me. I can't imagine a situation where I would try to hold the shooter responsible for me smooching the pooch.

Well said.

[mildot1]

No way would I ever DQ a shooter that "I" allowed to get uprange of me! I WILL be screaming "STOP" and give a reshoot and a BIG apology for screwing up his run.

You don't have to be mounting the guy to maintain control, I can usually see more from 5' back than I can from 2'. In my mind the shooter gets full use of the course and I need to stay out of his way while I do my job.

Mildot

[Gary Stevens]

"Mounting the guy", I may use that some time.

The term, not the act

Edited March 11, 2014 by Gary Stevens

[kevin c]

Nik, I usually agree with your interpretation of the rules and their intent, but I'm seeing the RO sweeping issue more the way alma and sperman do this time around. For me it boils down to reasonable expectations of what each person on the stage can and ought to be able to do and control. I think that i can reasonably be held accountable for keeping my muzzle downrange, where I can reasonably expect there not to be warm bodies not desiring perforation. I do not think it reasonable for me to have to anticipate that a slow footed RO or poorly designed stage will require me to control my muzzle in a way that is not normally expected, which is to point it anywhere down range where there should not be anything except props and targets and where it is reasonable to expect that there will be no ROs.

I've described this before - I shot a stage where targets were at either end of a hallway with the entry to it in the middle. I told the CRO that I would be going to one end to engage everything, meaning that I would be shooting back across the entry. HE stuck to me like glue, but he didn't tell the ARO who sauntered through the door just as I swung back. I pulled off just in time. I definitely covered the ARO with my muzzle with my finger on the trigger. I was green then, and didn't do anything except finish the stage after the ARO got out of the way. Now, I think I would ask for a RS, and would be very unhappy if I got sent home for the RO's screwing up.