NROI Question Submission

[DougCarden]

You know, as a competitor for over 20 years, competing all over the US and abroad, and as a match director in multiple matches and disciplines, I have never had anyone hit me up about my mag capacity or how many I have loaded, anywhere at anytime. When I run matches, the last thing I have time for is to check a shooter's magazines, period. Trust me, if you have a limit on round in mags all the other competitors will keep the shooter honest, and help them out when they shoot 11 rounds after the first reload.... .

I was taught in my RO class that the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt, always. The OP seems to mention DQ an awful lot....Seems to me that we have a lot of other things to worry about other than catching someone possibly skirting the /laws. It all comes out in the wash.....always. A lot of shooters do things unintentionally wrong. When corrected they tow the line and don't make the same mistake.

DougC

[Cd662]

Hey Doug, I met you briefly at the IRC. I am interested in this issue as a USPSA shooter. I am not a NROI graduate and I was not present at the match it happened at. There's a place in New York I shoot at about two or three times a year and I'm a member on their forums. They brought it up for discussion, I was interested in what to do, and I posted it here. My verbiage was specific to reflect the concerns of the NROI graduates and USPSA members from that club. Personally, I wouldn't even want to get involved with that whole mess. I'm also a little confused, I am the original poster and did not use the acronym "DQ" at all in my post.

"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..."

I don't think this works here. The issue of "intent" has been brought up time and time again. One can never forecast someone's intent. One can never know if someone is doing something to overtly cheat or if it has been an oversight, short of the person advertising that they have been cheating.

The other thing is that people brought up the issue of law enforcement being able to use otherwise restricted items. I recall USPSA's statement that any such exceptions to a law cannot be used for a competitive advantage, that is to say, if everyone is restricted to Open 10 but a police officer or soldier is allowed to have a 20 round magazine, he can't load up and just say "Ha ha, sucks to be everyone else".

[Cd662]

Addendum: To the guy that says violating a law must result in disqualification due to bringing USPSA into disrepute, this would be impossible to enforce. What I think is a far more common occurrence is competitors traveling into another state with magazines they aren't supposed to have. I feel like this happens a lot with Production, for example. They put 11 in the first magazine and make ready with it. The magazine obviously either being loaded to over the legal capacity or is capable of carrying more rounds than is supposed to be legal. Do all of those guys get DQed? Is there going to be an elaborate gear legitimization process form? I'm sure that 99% of the time, this stuff is a non issue. Guys in Hawaii know they can't load up a big stick and shoot em up. People bringing the wrong mags into the wrong state will quietly be told about what was observed and to be careful. Shooters need to watch out for each other. The original post is the only situation I can think of where there is no tangible, USPSA specific, rules based solution.

[MarkCO]

Just a point of clarification...in the United States of America, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. Issuing a "DQ" for a perceived violation of a law for which one has not been convicted opens you up to personal liability and potentially bringing the sport into disrepute by your actions. If a person has broken a law, report them to law enforcement and then follow up appropriately.

As MDs/RMs, do we subject competitors to background checks, drug and alcohol screenings prior to the matches?

[DougCarden]

CD, I glazed over when I posted, and don't mean to paint you personally in the corner. My Bad. What is sad is the guys posting on the forum griping about how people shouldn't break the law were probably the same guys that maxed out credit cards to buy "replacement" magazine bodies before the magazine ban went into place,.....skirting the law.......If you are a rules person you need to be a rules person all the time, just not when it suits you. We have enough enemies against us...

DougC

[racerba]

Sorry we differ on opinions

Mildot

Shotguns with barrel less than 16" IS a class 3 item and can be legally owned along with full autos. They both can be used in a 3-gun match - so what's your point???

Why does the shooter have to prove to you that they own the standard capacity magazine legally? And if they don't, are you going to detain them and call LEO? Are you making a citizen arrest?

[Cd662]

It's OK Doug, PM me with some more insightful tips about how bullets work and we'll call it even

My suspicions were confirmed, no one has an answer. If John Amidon is still in charge until October, I guess he's the guy to ask. No further replies are necessary.

[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.

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

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...

You know, as a competitor for over 20 years, competing all over the US and abroad, and as a match director in multiple matches and disciplines, I have never had anyone hit me up about my mag capacity or how many I have loaded, anywhere at anytime. When I run matches, the last thing I have time for is to check a shooter's magazines, period. Trust me, if you have a limit on round in mags all the other competitors will keep the shooter honest, and help them out when they shoot 11 rounds after the first reload.... .

I was taught in my RO class that the shooter gets the benefit of the doubt, always. The OP seems to mention DQ an awful lot....Seems to me that we have a lot of other things to worry about other than catching someone possibly skirting the /laws. It all comes out in the wash.....always. A lot of shooters do things unintentionally wrong. When corrected they tow the line and don't make the same mistake.

DougC

Addendum: To the guy that says violating a law must result in disqualification due to bringing USPSA into disrepute, this would be impossible to enforce. What I think is a far more common occurrence is competitors traveling into another state with magazines they aren't supposed to have. I feel like this happens a lot with Production, for example. They put 11 in the first magazine and make ready with it. The magazine obviously either being loaded to over the legal capacity or is capable of carrying more rounds than is supposed to be legal. Do all of those guys get DQed? Is there going to be an elaborate gear legitimization process form? I'm sure that 99% of the time, this stuff is a non issue. Guys in Hawaii know they can't load up a big stick and shoot em up. People bringing the wrong mags into the wrong state will quietly be told about what was observed and to be careful. Shooters need to watch out for each other. The original post is the only situation I can think of where there is no tangible, USPSA specific, rules based solution.

CD, I glazed over when I posted, and don't mean to paint you personally in the corner. My Bad. What is sad is the guys posting on the forum griping about how people shouldn't break the law were probably the same guys that maxed out credit cards to buy "replacement" magazine bodies before the magazine ban went into place,.....skirting the law.......If you are a rules person you need to be a rules person all the time, just not when it suits you. We have enough enemies against us...

DougC

Sorry we differ on opinions

Mildot

Shotguns with barrel less than 16" IS a class 3 item and can be legally owned along with full autos. They both can be used in a 3-gun match - so what's your point???

Why does the shooter have to prove to you that they own the standard capacity magazine legally? And if they don't, are you going to detain them and call LEO? Are you making a citizen arrest?

Wow, you guys can't even read what I posted--I have said repeatedly this isn't about "enforcing the law." You have all stipulated that you're not going to pull credentials to determine who's legal to possess a full-capacity magazine and who is not. That's fine. That means you're proceeding under one of two assumptions--either EVERYONE is an LEO/permit holder (MA) and legal to possess or NO ONE is an LEO/permit holder and legal to possess.

In order to safeguard yourselves, you'd have to assume there are NO LEOs at the match. Proceeding from that assumption, you'd have to enforce the 10-round limit on everyone. Why? Because the moment you let one guy slide, then you have to let the next one and the next one. Pretty soon, you're going to have someone who shouldn't have the magazine breaking the law at your match. Do you really want that possibility?

NONE of you have addressed the point I'm trying to make, and let me spell it out, since it seems to be making several high-speed passes over your TACANs:

If you have a law that forces your club to put magazine capacity limits on your competitors, regardless of division, then you should tell all of your competitors NOT to load full-capacity magazines beyond that limit (regardless of their legal status), just to make sure you're playing from a level field and to keep everyone honest. I would personally tell the folks attending the match that they'll get a 10.6.2 DQ/ejection from the range for disregarding/disobeying the reasonable directions of a match official for doing so.

Is that clear enough for everyone? Does anyone here still think I'm trying to be a wannabe cop? Does anyone here think I'm trying to enforce the law? I'm simply trying to make sure everyone is treated THE SAME--that's what rules are for.

[Cd662]

There are always possibilities for someone to break the law at a USPSA match. A USPSA member could be a felon, or be subject to a restraining order, or maybe the Open gat they just bought was the result of a straw purchase. Who knows. I already stated this multiple times but I'll bold it for you, to keep things simple. USPSA already addressed the issue of how some people might have general legal exemptions. Those legal exemptions may not be used for competitive advantage in a match. My question was regarding the appropriate punishment for the situation, as per USPSA rules.

I don't understand why people get so butthurt over everything on this forum. It's like you can't ask anything legitimate without a nit picking contest or a bunch of irrelevant comments being spewed around.

[frag316]

Maybe it's because I'm retired military, but I'm a firm believer that a strong and swift punishment is good for expanding a behavior. Therefore, I strongly advocate administering a DQ under 10.6.2 for failing to follow the reasonable direction of a match official.

DQ a couple of guys and no one will do it.

[Vlad]

As others have mentioned you DO NOT want to be in the law enforcement business as a MD. There are legal implications, because if you decide to go down that path and you don't enforce it equally it gets funny. This is as per lawyers clubs in my vicinity have consulted.

Before you decide to get into the business of teachable moments and law enforcement you should think long and hard why you want to be an MD and consult a lawyer.

[frag316]

Jesus Christ.

How many times do I have to say this?

I'M NOT TRYING TO ENFORCE THE LAW. There's a rule in place for a reason. I'm enforcing the rule, and a DQ is a valid way to enforce that rule.

Can you people not frickin' read?

And I don't recall having said I was or wanted to be an MD. You should get RO'd by PVH and get +2'd for general principles.

[MarkCO]

Can you people not frickin' read?

It is the understanding of the common usage of the English language that gets many...it's tricky these days.

I think you have stated your position clearly, many times, so don't sweat the small stuff and get your blood pressure too high.

[racerba]

Jesus Christ.

How many times do I have to say this?

I'M NOT TRYING TO ENFORCE THE LAW. There's a rule in place for a reason. I'm enforcing the rule, and a DQ is a valid way to enforce that rule.

Can you people not frickin' read?

Yes, we can read, can you??? If you want to issue a DQ because you assumed that the competitor is breaking the law, then you are wanting to enforce the law. Apparently you are the only one advocating this DQ for this purpose. If you don't want to enforce the law, then follow the rule book...it's that simple. The rules does not allow you to DQ a competitor because you assumed the competitor is breaking the law!!!!! 10.6.2 does not say that. You are taking 10.6.2 to a stretch. The rule states that a competitor will be moved to open if he breaks the division requirements...if open division is not available or he violates open division requirements, he will then shoot for no score...period. There is nothing in the rule book that allows you to DQ a competitor because you assumed he is breaking the law. People in production division and limited-10 division break the 10 round limits on a regular basis...and I know that they do it by mistake 99% of the time. You are advocating that they all be DQed because you assumed that all of them are cheating...same principle...

[Nik Habicht]

I'M NOT TRYING TO ENFORCE THE LAW. There's a rule in place for a reason. I'm enforcing the rule, and a DQ is a valid way to enforce that rule.

No, it's not. One of the first principles of officiating that is taught is that we do not go to a general rule, when a more specific rule exists. (6.2.5.1 in this case......)

You don't get to make an announcement that you'll ignore the specific rule, and DQ under 10.6.1 because you got the MD to request that competitors not load more than 10 rounds......

.....well, at least you don't get to continue to call it a USPSA match.....

If you're not convinced, reach out to the RMI who taught your RO class. Arbitrations at Level 1 matches are cheap -- and I'd overturn this every day because you guys cited the wrong rule to deal with the infraction.....

[aztecdriver]

Jesus Christ.

How many times do I have to say this?

I'M NOT TRYING TO ENFORCE THE LAW. There's a rule in place for a reason. I'm enforcing the rule, and a DQ is a valid way to enforce that rule.

Can you people not frickin' read?

And I don't recall having said I was or wanted to be an MD. You should get RO'd by PVH and get +2'd for general principles.

Let me expand upon the process IN the rules that Nik talked about.

What happens when a state or locality that has an affect on magazine capacity legally allowed to be used at a match? Let's say that you are not allowed to have a magazine LOADED with more than 10 rounds? For the match, you change the divisional requirements, to some thing like production, for Open. Lim-10 exists, so there's no reason to do limited whatsoever. Open now becomes Open -10.

Now - if someone loads 11, in either production, limited or open, they are now all shooting for no score, under 6.2.5.1 because there is NO division that exists for them to compete in.

Now - every match, every stage, the read-in states - Rules are per the USPSA Handgun Rulebook. So therefore, by your logic, someone violating 11 rounds in Production Nationals should also be DQ'd for violating the rules. No. Just because you stand in front of a shooters meeting and state "By State Law, if you load 11 rounds in your mag, by accident or on purpose, you are DQ'd" I'd call BS. The rules permit you to limit the division capacity to 10 - and act accordingly to the rest of the rules - they do not permit you to change that rule in the shooters briefing to a DQ and then call it failing to follow a match officials instruction. Re-read 10.6.1 - it says "... failing to comply with the REASONABLE instructions of a match official..." Changing the penalty for violating division requirements to a match DQ is not reasonable - it's not permitted.

The only possible move I see that is valid is for you to try and DQ for bringing the sport into disrepute for violating the law - but then again - you unless you want to parse whether shooters have violated the law or not, by loading an 11th round at the match by mistake - you can't possibly DQ for that.

You can get indignant all you want about people disagreeing with you - you havn't provided the logic that gets you to the DQ legitimately.

[Cd662]

This is getting comical, can someone please lock this? I'm just going to E-Mail my question to Amidon and see if he answers.

[cas]

Just a point of clarification...in the United States of America, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty.

Considered innocent, but treated guilty.

I mean, they don't arrest you and lock you up for being innocent.

[kneelingatlas]

Am I missing something here? I'm under the impression loading 11 in the first mag at load and make ready is legal in Production and L10 so long as there are only ten rounds in the mag at the start signal?

[Sarge]

Am I missing something here? I'm under the impression loading 11 in the first mag at load and make ready is legal in Production and L10 so long as there are only ten rounds in the mag at the start signal?

unless you are shooting in a state that makes it a crime to have more than ten in a mag. That seems to be the gist of this thread

[kneelingatlas]

OK, so if it's in accordance with the rules, the other shooters in the squad might suggest he use a barney mag to not advertise his lawlessness, but I don't see that and official action must be taken.

[frag316]

I've actually explained it multiple times--it's the reasonable direction of a match official.

I'm done with this discussion.

[sfchorn]

3.3.1 In states where competitors are restricted by law to maximum magazine capacity, that maximum capacity will be the maximum allowed for all competitors in the contest. Any such limitations must be made known to all competitors by the Match Director/Range Master before the start of the match.

While 3.3.1 sets a magazine capacity limit, it gives no penalty for breaking the rule. The rule cites maximum magazine capacity, and it is the only place in the rulebook that does. Division requirements citing ammunition capacity are just that: they limit the amount of ammunition you can put in the magazine, not the maximum capacity of the magazine.

If a competitor uses a 15 round magazine in a state limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds, it is a violation of rule 3.3.1. But there is no penalty, as long as the competitor doesn't load more than 10 rounds in the magazine.

If he/she does, then 6.2.5.1 comes into play:

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.

And please, no DQ per 10.6.ifeellikeit. If you can't find a specific rule, just don't do it.

[kneelingatlas]

^^+1^^

3.3.1 is meant to eliminate an unfair advantage, loading 11 rather than using a barney mag does not constitute a competitive advantage, so it is not a match issue.

[teros135]

As others have noted, this thread seems to have diverged into several different trains of thought. I'd like to add my thoughts to the one about what to do about state law and mag capacity.

If it's a violation of a particular state's law to possess a mag with more than x (10, 7, whatever) capacity, then we shouldn't have them with us. A person could make a mistake and bring hicaps to an out of state match, but we're not supposed to be cops. However, them having one could get them arrested, or someone with a badge could notice, or whatever, which could get publicity and feed the "antis"...and thus bring disrepute to the sport.

So yes, we're not cops (except those who actually are), but why not have a quiet discussion with the competitor and give them a heads-up about the law. If they're LE and have a legal right to the hicap, they'll probably say so. If they're a straightforward USPSA'er, they'll probably put them away and find or borrow a legal substitute. But if they say "screw the law, I'm using what I brought", they're also saying "screw USPSA", and that's a problem. That last response may be few and far between, but I'd personally be uncomfortable with someone around with the illegal mags, and it could end up with uncomfortable legal problems for the club and the match. That last person should probably go home that day and think about it some more.

Would that solve the problem?

The rest of it (starting with 11 in a 10-max division, etc.) is dealt with in the rules, as noted by many folks above. It's the rule, and we don't have to try and figure out intent. You made a mistake, will learn from it, and can have fun learning from your new friends in Open, at least for the day.