NROI Question Submission

[Cd662]

The USPSA NROI page still lists John Amidon's E-Mail as the place to send rules clarifications questions. Who handles that these days?

For conversation's sake, my question:

USPSA ruled that local legal considerations in the context of magazine capacity and legal firearms take precedence over their division. Someone in a state that does not allow any "high capacity" magazines can't show up to a match, disregard the law, and shoot them anyway for a big advantage. It also stated that those who have exemptions to the law (eg, law enforcement) cannot use that to their advantage. Functionally, this is only really an issue right now with Open. There's a Limited 10 division but there's no Open 10. Production and Single Stack still are OK, now that New Yorkers can use 10 round magazines.

What is appropriate action to take if someone is shooting Open and they use a magazine loaded to 11 or more rounds in a state where it is not legal to do so? This could tangibly be an out of state competitor that does not know the rules, or someone who overloaded a magazine either intentionally or via oversight. Traditionally, someone loading past the magazine capacity of any given division would be bumped to Open, but Open competitors can't be bumped to a division they're already participating in.

[mildot1]

I'll probably get slapped but here is my take.

I would issue a DQ for unsportsmanlike behavior, my reasoning is as follows.

Your post says "states allowing 10 round magazines" it does not say states that only allow you to load ten, therefore simply possessing the high capacity mag is illegal. If you can possess a high cap and are limited to ten rounds loaded, loading eleven is still against the law.

While I don't agree with such laws,but it is what it is and I cannot see USPSA condoning illegal equipment or actions at a USPSA event.

FWIW

Mildot

[Vlad]

Possession of the magazine may not be illegal. There are always exceptions for law enforcement.

Answer is the shooter in question is now shooting for no score. He can keep shooting or he can go home, but his scores are null and void, this firearm doesn't fit our game rules. Kinda like if you discovered some one was shooting a .380 in production.

[frag316]

Possession of the magazine may not be illegal. There are always exceptions for law enforcement.

Answer is the shooter in question is now shooting for no score. He can keep shooting or he can go home, but his scores are null and void, this firearm doesn't fit our game rules. Kinda like if you discovered some one was shooting a .380 in production.

Are you going to ask for LE creds at the beginning of every match? Are you going to highlight who the LEOs are with some sort of distinguishing marking, so you know whether they're "allowed" to have the mags or not and the ROs don't have to try to keep track? Brief everyone before hand that if you want to load 11, use a barney mag or you'll be asked to go home. In those environments, I can't imagine wanting to deal with the idea of someone showing up with a full-capacity magazine and having the state come down on the whole organization.

And even if there are LEOs who are legal to possess the magazines, I'm not going to let them do something a non-LEO competitor isn't able to do. The sport is supposed to treat people as equitably as possible.

[Vlad]

Nope, I don't ask for credentials, I'm not the law enforcement buisness. They don't play by different rules, they play by the same game rules. I really don't care how many rounds their mags can hold as long as they only load the USPSA requrired number. I have no idea where you got that notion from, my point was not that they get to play USPSA with different rules, but to counterpoint mildot's post that stated hicap posession would be illegal, and my point was that it isn't always true.

So, yeah, my point was that I'm not going to DQ anyone for being a round over the limit, they just shoot for no score.

[cnote]

Load over prescribed limit , move to open

If shooting open & load over prescribed limit, then shoot for no score, kinda like if you declare minor and chrono under 125

I believe Hawaii has been dealing with this for quite some time, and it's unlikely a out of state competitor just happens to show up with his open/ limited rig!!!!!

[frag316]

Ehh, sorry, I'm not going to let them shoot when they're blatantly violating the law by loading that 11th round. I don't care if they're a LEO or not. If you're not going to ask for creds, then you have to proceed from the assumption every competitor is not a LEO (even if they prove otherwise) and treat them all the same. I'd administer a DQ under 10.6.1 (behavior which may bring the sport into disrepute--allowing non-LEOs [because we're treating everyone as a non-LEO] to commit illegal acts would be behavior that could bring the sport into disrepute, regardless of the fact there's no competitive advantage [i.e., cheating does not really apply here]).

Letting someone slide on loading an extra round into a magazine which they may or may not be legal to possess is a bad idea , because you've stated you're not in the business of verifying whether the competitor is legal to possess the item.

And you're still letting them play, which is another bad idea , because--even tho they're shooting for no score--you're letting someone commit a potentially illegal act in your match and in your club.

There's also an argument for expelling the competitor from the range under 10.6.2, because asking competitors not to load more than 10 rounds into a magazine PERIOD is a "reasonable direction of a Match Official," and violating that subjects the competitor to DQ and expulsion from the match.

And the OP already said their Open guns can't go above 10 rounds either, so a bump to Open is a complete non-starter.

[racerba]

We are not in the business of law-enforcement. Our rules are not laws. Our rules allow only 10 rounds to be loaded (per local laws), someone violate those rules, then we deal with it according to our rules. Our rules states that:

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, other- wise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

In this instance, there are no other available division, so they shoot for no score. We do not know the circumstances of how they own or able to load more than 10 rounds in their mag. It could be legal, we don't know and we are not in the business to find out. We are concern about fairness in the sport, not legality of the person owning the magazine. That's a slippery slope you don't want to walk into. If you want to do that, then you must ask everybody for their credentials to make sure they are not a felon, or if they do not have a restraining orders against them, or etc....

[Sarge]

Ask john amidon. He is still DNROI until October if I recall.

[MarkCO]

Colorado has some funky magazine laws, I emailed Amidon and he answered consistent with my reading the next day. Give it a try and if you don't get a reply in a few days, ask your Area Director for help.

[frag316]

We are not in the business of law-enforcement. Our rules are not laws. Our rules allow only 10 rounds to be loaded (per local laws), someone violate those rules, then we deal with it according to our rules. Our rules states that:

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, other- wise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

In this instance, there are no other available division, so they shoot for no score. We do not know the circumstances of how they own or able to load more than 10 rounds in their mag. It could be legal, we don't know and we are not in the business to find out. We are concern about fairness in the sport, not legality of the person owning the magazine. That's a slippery slope you don't want to walk into. If you want to do that, then you must ask everybody for their credentials to make sure they are not a felon, or if they do not have a restraining orders against them, or etc....

(Emphasis mine)

Sorry, I'm going to throw a flag on this one, because you've stated that the reason for the 10-round rule is because of the local laws (see the bolded section in my quote of your post above). SO, if someone violates the rule, they're simultaneously violating the law. You have to agree with this, because to do otherwise would be illogical. If someone violates the law in the course of violating the rules, then they get a DQ under 10.6.1 and/or 10.6.2. Period. Boom--using USPSA rules to enforce a USPSA rule. There is no way to argue that you can allow them to continue to shoot, because you're right--we're not going to check creds or do backgrounds on every competitor. Therefore the ONLY safe default is to treat everyone as a non-LEO and assume the magazine is not legal for them to own and they're breaking the law when they use it in an illegal fashion. Period.

[titandriver]

Citizen's arrest!!!!

[racerba]

We are not in the business of law-enforcement. Our rules are not laws. Our rules allow only 10 rounds to be loaded (per local laws), someone violate those rules, then we deal with it according to our rules. Our rules states that:

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, other- wise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

In this instance, there are no other available division, so they shoot for no score. We do not know the circumstances of how they own or able to load more than 10 rounds in their mag. It could be legal, we don't know and we are not in the business to find out. We are concern about fairness in the sport, not legality of the person owning the magazine. That's a slippery slope you don't want to walk into. If you want to do that, then you must ask everybody for their credentials to make sure they are not a felon, or if they do not have a restraining orders against them, or etc....

(Emphasis mine)

Sorry, I'm going to throw a flag on this one, because you've stated that the reason for the 10-round rule is because of the local laws (see the bolded section in my quote of your post above). SO, if someone violates the rule, they're simultaneously violating the law. You have to agree with this, because to do otherwise would be illogical. If someone violates the law in the course of violating the rules, then they get a DQ under 10.6.1 and/or 10.6.2. Period. Boom--using USPSA rules to enforce a USPSA rule. There is no way to argue that you can allow them to continue to shoot, because you're right--we're not going to check creds or do backgrounds on every competitor. Therefore the ONLY safe default is to treat everyone as a non-LEO and assume the magazine is not legal for them to own and they're breaking the law when they use it in an illegal fashion. Period.

(Emphasis mine)

The reason for the rule is because of the local law - I'll agree. However, the rule is based on the lowest denominator of the law. Just because the competitor broke our rules does not mean they broke the law. The law dictates our rules, our rules do not determine if the competitor broke the law.

[frag316]

The rule is only in effect for those places where it is illegal for a non-LEO to possess the magazine--are you willing to stipulate that? (NOTE--You kind of have to, because it's true.)

If that is the case, then there is no logic to allowing the competitor to continue to shoot for no score. No one is going to check creds to determine if the competitor is legal to possess the magazine (therefore, all competitors are considered to be non-LEOs), so all competitors are assumed to not be legal to possess the magazine. Therefore, any action where a competitor introduces a magazine that is illegal is not just breaking a rule (loading more than division capacity), their under-the-law illegal action could bring discredit upon the sport. 10.6.1 applies.

Additionally, if that is the case and the MD briefs all competitors to not load more than 10 rounds into ANY magazine, 10.6.2 applies (failed to follow the reasonable direction of a match official).

Your argument defaults to 6.2.5.1, which is the earliest rule, but that rule is really for areas where possession of a full-capacity magazine is legal AND the competitor violates the division rules (e.g., Limited shooter uses a magazine longer than 140mm or a Production shooter pulls a magazine from the belt with 11 rounds in it after the start signal). Either 10.6.1 or 10.6.2 override 6.2.5.1, in my not-so-humble.

Do what you want--if I were to ever RO a match in an area where full-capacity mags are illegal for private citizens (God forbid), and someone used one, I'd give them a DQ under 10.6.1 and make the MD override the decision.

[racerba]

so all competitors are assumed to not be legal to possess the magazine.

Not true. Those who are legally allowed to own the mags are allowed to use said mags. LEOs are allowed to use these mags to play the game. The RULE is they cannot load more than 10 rounds. If they do, for whatever reason other than intentionally cheating, they are allowed to keep shooting for no score. For cheating, then they get DQ'ed. These are the RULES we are enforcing in our game, we are not enforcing the LAW of the land.

[MarkCO]

Do what you want--if I were to ever RO a match in an area where full-capacity mags are illegal for private citizens (God forbid), and someone used one, I'd give them a DQ under 10.6.1 and make the MD override the decision.

The MD has no authority to over-ride a DQ under ANY rules scenario in USPSA.

[frag316]

Again, the discussion has revolved around the point that no one is checking creds. And I've not said that they're not allowed to use them. What I'm saying is that they're highlighting themselves as using mags we are assuming they're not allowed to possess (because we're not checking creds and not providing the ROs with a method of knowing who's legal and who's not), and that violates 10.6.1.

Barring that, 10.6.2 doesn't specify that the competitor has to be cheating--"reasonable directions of a Match Official" is the standard. The MD giving the brief at the shooters' meeting saying "doncha go loadin' no more than 10 rounds in any magazine" is a reasonable direction. Violating that is covered by 10.6.2. Period.

10.6.2 also covers "behavior likely to bring the sport into disrepute," so ignore the cheating part of 10.6.1 and use 10.6.2 instead.

You keep harping on enforcing the law. I'm not Judge Dredd here. I'm saying that a competitor who we don't know is legal to have those mags and highlights to us that he's using them in a match could bring the sport into disrepute in those jurisdictions because word could get out that the "go-fast shooters at that match on the fifth Saturday last month used illegal magazines" and bring the sport into disrepute in said jurisdictions. If clubs were willing to DQ a couple of folks who violate the rule--using 10.6.2--then the problem would correct itself.

Now, explain to me how that's "enforcing the law of the land." I'll wait.

[frag316]

Do what you want--if I were to ever RO a match in an area where full-capacity mags are illegal for private citizens (God forbid), and someone used one, I'd give them a DQ under 10.6.1 and make the MD override the decision.

The MD has no authority to over-ride a DQ under ANY rules scenario in USPSA.

OK, the RM, then--whomever, if there is anyone. Or I'll make them convene an arbitration panel.

Edited August 1, 2014 by frag316

[mildot1]

We are not in the business of law-enforcement. Our rules are not laws. Our rules allow only 10 rounds to be loaded (per local laws), someone violate those rules, then we deal with it according to our rules. Our rules states that:

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, other- wise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

In this instance, there are no other available division, so they shoot for no score. We do not know the circumstances of how they own or able to load more than 10 rounds in their mag. It could be legal, we don't know and we are not in the business to find out. We are concern about fairness in the sport, not legality of the person owning the magazine. That's a slippery slope you don't want to walk into. If you want to do that, then you must ask everybody for their credentials to make sure they are not a felon, or if they do not have a restraining orders against them, or etc....

So by that standard we would also ignore a competitor using a shotgun with a 14" barrel in a USPSA multi gun match? How about someone that brought a full auto M4 that did not have the proper permit to possess it? Would you allow a person that you know to be prohibited from possessing a firearm to compete? You are correct that we are not in the business of law enforcement, however that does not mean that we can knowingly allow illegal activities to happen at a USPSA match. I believe we are in the business to "find out" in order to make the correct call. IE: a LE officer who can legally possess and mistakenly loads an extra round. Shoot for no score. Average Joe who cannot legally possess said mag, Match DQ.

Mildot

[Sarge]

Do what you want--if I were to ever RO a match in an area where full-capacity mags are illegal for private citizens (God forbid), and someone used one, I'd give them a DQ under 10.6.1 and make the MD override the decision.

The MD has no authority to over-ride a DQ under ANY rules scenario in USPSA.

In a local match isn't the MD the RM?

[racerba]

You keep harping on enforcing the law. I'm not Judge Dredd here. I'm saying that a competitor who we don't know is legal to have those mags and highlights to us that he's using them in a match could bring the sport into disrepute in those jurisdictions because word could get out that the "go-fast shooters at that match on the fifth Saturday last month used illegal magazines" and bring the sport into disrepute in said jurisdictions. If clubs were willing to DQ a couple of folks who violate the rule--using 10.6.2--then the problem would correct itself.

Now, explain to me how that's "enforcing the law of the land." I'll wait.

If the competitor loads 11 rounds in the mag by mistake, a DQ is harsh. If they are doing it to cheat, then a DQ is warranted. If they are doing it to cheat, then your argument that they are bringing the sport in disrepute is justified and I will agree that a DQ is warranted. You are enforcing the law of the land when you assumed that everybody is not allowed to own such a magazine. So if the competitor comes to the line with a 17 round magazine loaded with 10 rounds, you will DQ them because you are assuming that they are not allowed to own that magazine? What I am saying is that you cannot apply the law of the land to DQ people where our rules does not allow it. 10.6.1 and/or 10.6.2 deals with competitors who knowingly tries to cheat against our rules. Yes, the MD's required to load no more than 10 rounds is a reasonable request. The competitor did not disobey on purpose if they mistakenly miscounted or whatever. If they did load 11 on purpose, then by all means, DQ...

[racerba]

We are not in the business of law-enforcement. Our rules are not laws. Our rules allow only 10 rounds to be loaded (per local laws), someone violate those rules, then we deal with it according to our rules. Our rules states that:

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, other- wise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

In this instance, there are no other available division, so they shoot for no score. We do not know the circumstances of how they own or able to load more than 10 rounds in their mag. It could be legal, we don't know and we are not in the business to find out. We are concern about fairness in the sport, not legality of the person owning the magazine. That's a slippery slope you don't want to walk into. If you want to do that, then you must ask everybody for their credentials to make sure they are not a felon, or if they do not have a restraining orders against them, or etc....

So by that standard we would also ignore a competitor using a shotgun with a 14" barrel in a USPSA multi gun match? How about someone that brought a full auto M4 that did not have the proper permit to possess it? Would you allow a person that you know to be prohibited from possessing a firearm to compete? You are correct that we are not in the business of law enforcement, however that does not mean that we can knowingly allow illegal activities to happen at a USPSA match. I believe we are in the business to "find out" in order to make the correct call. IE: a LE officer who can legally possess and mistakenly loads an extra round. Shoot for no score. Average Joe who cannot legally possess said mag, Match DQ.

Mildot

NO - if you KNOW that the person is involved in illegal activity, then no - you cannot let them proceed. What I said was since you don't know if they are allowed or not, you cannot assume that everybody is not allowed to own the large capacity magazines.

BTW - I think short barrel shotguns are allowed as are short barrel rifles. There are no barrel length minimum. Full autos are also allowed, you just have to switch it to single shot.

[mildot1]

We are not in the business of law-enforcement. Our rules are not laws. Our rules allow only 10 rounds to be loaded (per local laws), someone violate those rules, then we deal with it according to our rules. Our rules states that:

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, other- wise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

In this instance, there are no other available division, so they shoot for no score. We do not know the circumstances of how they own or able to load more than 10 rounds in their mag. It could be legal, we don't know and we are not in the business to find out. We are concern about fairness in the sport, not legality of the person owning the magazine. That's a slippery slope you don't want to walk into. If you want to do that, then you must ask everybody for their credentials to make sure they are not a felon, or if they do not have a restraining orders against them, or etc....

So by that standard we would also ignore a competitor using a shotgun with a 14" barrel in a USPSA multi gun match? How about someone that brought a full auto M4 that did not have the proper permit to possess it? Would you allow a person that you know to be prohibited from possessing a firearm to compete? You are correct that we are not in the business of law enforcement, however that does not mean that we can knowingly allow illegal activities to happen at a USPSA match. I believe we are in the business to "find out" in order to make the correct call. IE: a LE officer who can legally possess and mistakenly loads an extra round. Shoot for no score. Average Joe who cannot legally possess said mag, Match DQ.

Mildot

NO - if you KNOW that the person is involved in illegal activity, then no - you cannot let them proceed. What I said was since you don't know if they are allowed or not, you cannot assume that everybody is not allowed to own the large capacity magazines.

BTW - I think short barrel shotguns are allowed as are short barrel rifles. There are no barrel length minimum. Full autos are also allowed, you just have to switch it to single shot.

I think you will find that the ATF tends to frown on shotguns with barrels less than 16" and I believe that ownership of full autos are restricted and require a class 3 license but thats not the point I am trying to make. If I know that hi cap mags are illegal in the state that the match is being held in then the shooter is going to have to prove to me that he has the exemption, if I ask and he whips out his credentials then sorry but you are shooting for no score. If he can't then it is a match DQ because I cannot knowingly allow him to continue in violation of the law.

Sorry we differ on opinions

Mildot

[Nik Habicht]

The rule is only in effect for those places where it is illegal for a non-LEO to possess the magazine--are you willing to stipulate that? (NOTE--You kind of have to, because it's true.)

If that is the case, then there is no logic to allowing the competitor to continue to shoot for no score. No one is going to check creds to determine if the competitor is legal to possess the magazine (therefore, all competitors are considered to be non-LEOs), so all competitors are assumed to not be legal to possess the magazine. Therefore, any action where a competitor introduces a magazine that is illegal is not just breaking a rule (loading more than division capacity), their under-the-law illegal action could bring discredit upon the sport. 10.6.1 applies.

Additionally, if that is the case and the MD briefs all competitors to not load more than 10 rounds into ANY magazine, 10.6.2 applies (failed to follow the reasonable direction of a match official).

Your argument defaults to 6.2.5.1, which is the earliest rule, but that rule is really for areas where possession of a full-capacity magazine is legal AND the competitor violates the division rules (e.g., Limited shooter uses a magazine longer than 140mm or a Production shooter pulls a magazine from the belt with 11 rounds in it after the start signal). Either 10.6.1 or 10.6.2 override 6.2.5.1, in my not-so-humble.

Do what you want--if I were to ever RO a match in an area where full-capacity mags are illegal for private citizens (God forbid), and someone used one, I'd give them a DQ under 10.6.1 and make the MD override the decision.

If you cite 10.6.2 to DQ a competitor, well, that's a problem, as 10.6.2 refers to expelling non-competitors from the range -- so you really haven't done anything.....

And it would be the RM who would overturn a match DQ, not the MD......

Law Enforcement is a pretty slippery slope -- if you start down that road willingly, I don't know if you're going to be assuming any additional responsibilities or liabilities. May want to think about that....

[aztecdriver]

Again, the discussion has revolved around the point that no one is checking creds. And I've not said that they're not allowed to use them. What I'm saying is that they're highlighting themselves as using mags we are assuming they're not allowed to possess (because we're not checking creds and not providing the ROs with a method of knowing who's legal and who's not), and that violates 10.6.1.

Barring that, 10.6.2 doesn't specify that the competitor has to be cheating--"reasonable directions of a Match Official" is the standard. The MD giving the brief at the shooters' meeting saying "doncha go loadin' no more than 10 rounds in any magazine" is a reasonable direction. Violating that is covered by 10.6.2. Period.

10.6.2 also covers "behavior likely to bring the sport into disrepute," so ignore the cheating part of 10.6.1 and use 10.6.2 instead.

You keep harping on enforcing the law. I'm not Judge Dredd here. I'm saying that a competitor who we don't know is legal to have those mags and highlights to us that he's using them in a match could bring the sport into disrepute in those jurisdictions because word could get out that the "go-fast shooters at that match on the fifth Saturday last month used illegal magazines" and bring the sport into disrepute in said jurisdictions. If clubs were willing to DQ a couple of folks who violate the rule--using 10.6.2--then the problem would correct itself.

Now, explain to me how that's "enforcing the law of the land." I'll wait.

Let me ask one question here, are you going to detain the person and call up LEO, swear out a statement for the report and show up in court to testify that the competitor broke the law?

I didn't think so. DQ is not the way to go, because if you are not going to all of the above, you have no business trying to push a 10.6