DQ or no DQ? You make the call

[MarkCO]

This is one of those areas where I feel a stage DQ is a fair call. You may or may not agree with it, but if I were the RM, that's how I would have called it.

Epic fail. The job of the RM (and the ROs) is to enforce the rules of the match as WRITTEN, not what you feel or think. IF you don't agree with the rulebook, you have 2 choices...don't work the match or get the MD to change the rules before the match starts.

I was the RM at FNH last year, and Larry and Howard run a great match, without tomfoolery or favoritism. If I could have been there this year, I would have. Go look up the DQs from last year...Larry tripped as safely as one could, but he was still DQ'd. I was standing 20 feet away and my "duck" instinct never kicked in. There were 21 DQs last year and they were not due to stage design last year either.

When the match was over, I gave Larry my thoughts on a few areas and he made some changes. Larry and Howard reciprocated and gave my input on how I handled various items. That is exactly how it is supposed to work, people working together to make the matches fun and safe. When one person decides they are king, and know it all, they are destined to fail.

[Shooter115]

Funny. I knew what's Mark's opinion would be before my fingers ever touched the keyboard.

I'm just glad our countries justice system doesn't work in the same way he feels matches should be run.

I am curious though how one get's DQ'd for tripping? Unless they broke the 180 or dropped a gun, which would both without a doubt be a match DQ situation.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Shooter115

[MarkCO]

Larry's gun was on the ground.

Actually, our Justice system (in which I work professionally) is controlled by the rule of law, read the constitution! Of course if you are a liberal and get all emotional and believe it was not little Tommy's fault and set criminals free to prey on innocents again, then sure...

[Shooter115]

Larry's gun was on the ground.

Actually, our Justice system (in which I work professionally) is controlled by the rule of law, read the constitution! Of course if you are a liberal and get all emotional and believe it was not little Tommy's fault and set criminals free to prey on innocents again, then sure...

True, but we also have Judges to interpret the law and determine sentences. If the rule book is perfect already we might as well just get rid of them...... right?

If you're trying to imply I'm a liberal....now that's funny too. You're providing all sorts of humor for me today. Thanks

This thread is really starting to jump the shark here. If you wish to carry on this conversation I'd suggest you do it by PM.

[SonOfSpartans]

:ph34r:The rules set mandatory minimum sentences. (stage/match DQ) The Judges (RO, RM) have no leeway on the sentence (or should not) based on how the lawmakers (rule committee) wrote them. The citizens (shooters) can petition to have those minimums removed or altered.

And this is how we get multi page threads about a round jammed in a pistol.

[MAC702]

...I don't understand the notion of a time penalty for a safety violation...

Like shooting a hostage?

That is a make-believe safety violation, a no shoot it placed there to act as a possible trap for the shooter and it doesn't actually bleed when shot. A safety violation can result in real people bleeding all over the ground and a that is a completely different story then a cardboard hostage.

You completely ignored the rest of my post which also describes how the pistol in question CANNOT fire, and therefore is the same kind of make-believe safety violation, which is why we go to the imperfect rules that govern the sport instead of making judgment calls all day long.

[MAC702]

Let,s ask this question then. If this pistol is not "unsafe", would anyone be willing to stand in front of the muzzle while it is cleared? Is a pistol that is not " unsafe" deemed "safe", or are there varying degrees of "not unsafe"?

I don't think that argument works. I wouldn't want to stand in front of any gun being cleared.....

There's being "cleared" and then there's being "cleared." The typical one pulls a live round out of the chamber. This one would have dropped an unchambered, unshootable round out of the magazine well. I'd stand in front of it before standing on a sidewalk near busy traffic.

[Vlad]

You completely ignored the rest of my post which also describes how the pistol in question CANNOT fire, and therefore is the same kind of make-believe safety violation, which is why we go to the imperfect rules that govern the sport instead of making judgment calls all day long.

Sorry but your example is irrelevant. The rules spell out clearly that ammo in the gun without safety on is a DQ. You can argue that the rule is written wrong, you can talk to the MDs, you can choose not shoot the match. However it is not as if that rule wasn't clear, announced long in advanced and equally enforced.

I made this point already buy you must have missed it, I had to DQ someone at the same match for placing a 2011 type gun in the dump bucket as it came from the holster, empty chamber, safety off, mag inserted. I don't think that makes sense, and expressed that to the MD/RM at the end of the match.

However, it isn't my rule book, I play by it and enforce it equally. My opinion on the matter is irrelevant. How sure are you it can't fire? What if the bullet was stuck in a different position with part of slide locked against the primer? What if it was stuck on the ramp in a way that would chamber it when touched?

The only gun I KNOW can't fire is the one I've made sure is empty or which has is safety engaged, and even the second one is not 100%.

If you don't like that sort of rule, don't shoot the match. If you shoot the match then you commit yourself to shoot by the rules.

[MAC702]

You completely ignored the rest of my post which also describes how the pistol in question CANNOT fire, and therefore is the same kind of make-believe safety violation, which is why we go to the imperfect rules that govern the sport instead of making judgment calls all day long.

Sorry but your example is irrelevant. The rules spell out clearly that ammo in the gun without safety on is a DQ. You can argue that the rule is written wrong, you can talk to the MDs, you can choose not shoot the match. However it is not as if that rule wasn't clear, announced long in advanced and equally enforced.

I made this point already buy you must have missed it, I had to DQ someone at the same match for placing a 2011 type gun in the dump bucket as it came from the holster, empty chamber, safety off, mag inserted. I don't think that makes sense, and expressed that to the MD/RM at the end of the match.

However, it isn't my rule book, I play by it and enforce it equally. My opinion on the matter is irrelevant. How sure are you it can't fire? What if the bullet was stuck in a different position with part of slide locked against the primer? What if it was stuck on the ramp in a way that would chamber it when touched?

The only gun I KNOW can't fire is the one I've made sure is empty or which has is safety engaged, and even the second one is not 100%.

If you don't like that sort of rule, don't shoot the match. If you shoot the match then you commit yourself to shoot by the rules.

I have not once argued that this was not a rule violation. Please do not confuse my posts with the posts of others.

I've followed the OP in discussion of whether or not this was an unsafe pistol. I have also asked what criteria are or should be used in differentiating between different pistol types while making this determination for future rules changes or adoptions, as I believe was the intent of the OP.

Edited September 23, 2014 by MAC702

[Vlad]

I'm sorry, you seem angry, and I'm not sure why. I've read your earlier post, twice. You can not tell me for sure that pistol can not fire. For one, it is a staged pistol photo, not the original. Secondly, odd stuff happens all the time, what if the bullet was stuck 90 degrees from how it was with the primer jammed against a metal bit, just waiting for a small bump or jiggle to fire out of battery?

There are a number of cases like the one in the staged photo where the gun is probably safe and a number of case where a round gets stuck in gun without being safe. How would you like the rule book written? How many pictures and angles of random jams should the rule book cover? Should the RO/CRO/MD try to make calls on the range saying .. well this round is at 15 degrees and its fine, but this one is at 25 degrees and is not? Somehow that is more fair?

As I already said there is a problem with this type of rule, in that we consider a empty chamber, loaded mag, safety off, hammer down 1911 in the holster safer then a cocked an locked gun when holstered but we do it the opposite way when abandoned. Yes a glock in that photo would be considered safe while a 1911 is not and it doesn't really make a heck of a lot of sense, but unless you want a rule book that needs its own range cart and crew to wheel around to each stage when a call needs to be made, then you need to accept that there are simple lines drawn, know how they apply to your gun, and play.

People get too wrapped up in this kinda issue. If the shooter racked the slide twice and used 0.25 seconds (or possibly none at all depending on the stage) this would have not matter. If he flicked the safety instead of trying to unload it, it would have been fine.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Vlad

[SonOfSpartans]

If the rule book stated dump condition for pistols was empty....... this would still be a DQ, there would be no unequal treatment based on design and the rulebook would remain thin and clear. That was my response to this thread and question based on how it was asked. "If I could make the rules".......... Some have fixated on the current rules and rushed to defend them at all costs.

Segment the conversations instead of attacking the comments.

If someone showed up to shoot three gun with a revolver and no hammer block, what would the safe condition be? My suggested rule covers it.......

[Vlad]

So I've gone through the thread and I can't find the exact wording on how you would write this rule, maybe I'm missing it, but really who cares if someone is shooting a glock or a 1911 or a revolver? This rule exists for a number of safety reasons, it is put before the shooter in advance and the shooter made a choice to bring the weapon they brought.

I want a rule that says targets must be 20MOA and timeouts should be 1800 seconds, because I plant to shoot the match with a muzzleloader. My request is no more valid then asking to change the rules regarding grounding handguns because I chose to shoot a 1911 type gun. If I make a choice to bring a firearm that I have to work harder with to stay in the rule, that is on me the shooter, not on the RM to interpret the rules for my specific equipment set.

[kurtm]

And this is where I point out, just like I do in my classes, I've never seen a fast firearm abandonment win a match, but I sure have seen them loose one!

Once again I think folks weren't looking for a philosophical debate, they were looking for validation that the call was wrong, due to the gun being in a safe condition. My original post still stands, if you ask enough people and in enough ways you will get validation for almost anything.

Is that gun "safe", you bet....but I also feel that we should be able to go prone with a hot pistol.....but either way that isn't what the rules allow.

Edited September 23, 2014 by kurtm

[MarkCO]

....but I also feel that we should be able to go prone with a hot pistol....

I am doing that right now, on the couch in my office. or maybe I am supine...

[Jadeslade]

So who cleared it safely? And why was that safe? If ROs want to clear guns to speed things up, and want to stick their hands in a barrel, pull a gun out blindly and empty it - the RO is the unsafe element, not the gun. If you just look at it and leave it because the "safety's off", what is unsafe there? Somebody has to eventually pull the gun out and clear it. And it's almost always done safely, isn't it? It's like telling your three year old to not touch the fire grate screen because it's "hot" and he puts his hand on it and says "not hot". Credibility is an issue. It is an arbitrary decision, not made for safety reasons, that requires a safety to be on or a gun empty. It is "the match rules". That does not by itself increase or decrease safety. A hot range is not necessarily more unsafe than a cold range and vice versa. We follow match rules by convention. I am in favor of dedicated dump devices that hold guns securely and are adequate. Rubbermaid garbage cans are no longer deep enough and 50 gallon drums are not sturdy enough. Something made by MGM would be perfect. So, no DQ. Because it's arbitrary. Has nothing to do with safety.

[Vlad]

So who cleared it safely?

I can't talk about every case on every range at every match, but if I find a gun in a questionable state I wait for the shooter to clear it. If it is in a well defined "clear" state I don't have an issue with the RO clearing it. If the shooter is about to be DQ'ed resetting the stage quickly takes a back sit.

Personally, I think if you want a large match with long stages to keep moving, you have no choice but to clear and reset behind the shooter. For everyone's sanity and safety guns abandoned in a distinct set of states make that possible.

The other thing is, do you know this guy, who always does everything stupid and broken and backwards? The dude who thinks a 1lb trigger job on a glock is fine? The guy that thinks filing on his 1911 sear at the safe table is just fine? Well, he shoots 3 gun. and his gun may be pointing at my back in a bucket somewhere. If I was king of the world handguns would all be abandoned empty, its easy and quick vs say unloading a shotgun that goes in a barrel muzzle down.

But thats me.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Vlad

[Jadeslade]

So I've gone through the thread and I can't find the exact wording on how you would write this rule, maybe I'm missing it, but really who cares if someone is shooting a glock or a 1911 or a revolver? This rule exists for a number of safety reasons, it is put before the shooter in advance and the shooter made a choice to bring the weapon they brought.

I want a rule that says targets must be 20MOA and timeouts should be 1800 seconds, because I plant to shoot the match with a muzzleloader. My request is no more valid then asking to change the rules regarding grounding handguns because I chose to shoot a 1911 type gun. If I make a choice to bring a firearm that I have to work harder with to stay in the rule, that is on me the shooter, not on the RM to interpret the rules for my specific equipment set.

Because there is nothing safer about a Glock in the bucket compared to a functioning 1911 with grip safety and the manual safety off. A 1911 is safer with the manual safety on. It is simply convention that allows Glocks to be abandoned loaded.

[Vlad]

Because there is nothing safer about a Glock in the bucket compared to a functioning 1911 with grip safety and the manual safety off. A 1911 is safer with the manual safety on. It is simply convention that allows Glocks to be abandoned loaded.

So you are saying its ok if we start people in USPSA with unlocked 1911 because it has a grip safety? Can you tell how many people have disabled their grip safety?

[Jadeslade]

So who cleared it safely?

I can't talk about every case on every range at every match, but if I find a gun in a questionable state I wait for the shooter to clear it. If it is in a well defined "clear" state I don't have an issue with the RO clearing it. If the shooter is about to be DQ'ed resetting the stage quickly takes a back sit.

Personally, I think if you want a large match with long stages to keep moving, you have no choice but to clear and reset behind the shooter. For everyone's sanity and safety guns abandoned in a distinct set of states make that possible.

The other thing is, do you know this guy, who always does everything stupid and broken and backwards? The dude who thinks a 1lb trigger job on a glock is fine? The guy that thinks filing on his 1911 sear at the safe table is just fine? Well, he shoots 3 gun. and his gun may be pointing at my back in a bucket somewhere. If I was king of the world handguns would all be abandoned empty, its easy and quick vs say unloading a shotgun that goes in a barrel muzzle down.

But thats me.

This makes a lot of sense. But do you see the fallacy in "the gun in the dump bucket at my back"? By itself, no problem. Maybe 3 Gun matches need equipment checks and safety checks as an "added layer" of safety more than we need DQs. You are racing to get a lot of shooters through a match. Maybe not the best model.

[Jadeslade]

Because there is nothing safer about a Glock in the bucket compared to a functioning 1911 with grip safety and the manual safety off. A 1911 is safer with the manual safety on. It is simply convention that allows Glocks to be abandoned loaded.

So you are saying its ok if we start people in USPSA with unlocked 1911 because it has a grip safety? Can you tell how many people have disabled their grip safety?

Not saying that at all. We are talking about abandoned guns, not holstered guns. Or guns made ready and left in place. I specified functioning grip safety.

[Vlad]

This makes a lot of sense. But do you see the fallacy in "the gun in the dump bucket at my back"? By itself, no problem. Maybe 3 Gun matches need equipment checks and safety checks as an "added layer" of safety more than we need DQs. You are racing to get a lot of shooters through a match. Maybe not the best model.

Maybe. I don't think the rule if perfect, because the 1lb glock can still be behind my back and be "legal". The problem with equipment checks is 1 page rule books and the fear of large rule books. At the end of the day it is all a list of compromises and we all have a line in the sand that says "this far and no further" and that line may be in different places for different people.

We can't ignore that the sport has grown and change and that more people want to shoot bigger matches. We can have matches fill in 30min except for reserving spots for the top dogs because we want their names in the match, or we can accept larger matches and the compromises we need to make them work. The Olympics are not a swim meet, they take longer and they run differently. Thats the price of success, what you can do in the back yard with your friends doesn't work with 300 strangers of various skill levels.

[dcloudy777]

If there's a dump barrel situated where it would allow a gun to be pointed at my back, I'm leaving.

Guns are "safe" by virtue of two things: the direction in which they are pointed and the absence of things (like fingers) messing withy them. A gun sitting in a properly configured dump barrel/bucket is safe, irrespective of it's condition.

But that's just me.

[Vlad]

If there's a dump barrel situated where it would allow a gun to be pointed at my back, I'm leaving.

Well a bucket that fits a open gun lets a G19 point in all sorts of directions. If you want to move sideways and forward of it, it may point at your back.

[Moltke]

This thread is awesome

Letter of the law vs Spirit of the Law

What is the meaning of "safe"

Now dump buckets are too big

[Jadeslade]

This makes a lot of sense. But do you see the fallacy in "the gun in the dump bucket at my back"? By itself, no problem. Maybe 3 Gun matches need equipment checks and safety checks as an "added layer" of safety more than we need DQs. You are racing to get a lot of shooters through a match. Maybe not the best model.

We can't ignore that the sport has grown and change and that more people want to shoot bigger matches. We can have matches fill in 30min except for reserving spots for the top dogs because we want their names in the match, or we can accept larger matches and the compromises we need to make them work. The Olympics are not a swim meet, they take longer and they run differently. Thats the price of success, what you can do in the back yard with your friends doesn't work with 300 strangers of various skill levels.

Yeah, definitely. I think DQ really means " you're going too f**king fast" more than " you left the gun unsafe". Safety is paramount, but equating abandoned guns with ADs and breaking the 90 or 180 angle is probably not great, because of the above arguments.