Member Proposed Rule Changes is now open!

[Chuck D]

"If IDPA is training for an actual gunfight which is exactly what Joyce and the Tiger Teams want all to buy into...when was the last time you heard of or saw on the evening news a firearms owner who was engaged in a "dynamic critical incident" wearing their logo plastered fishing vest and sponsor logo laden billboard shooting jersey ?"

Asked Bill....but never answered so let me answer it for you. The sponsor plastered shirt offers NO competitive advantage other than offer free advertisement for companies that sell IDPA legal products and shower IDPA with money through match sponsorship i.e. S&W, Comp-Tac, Safariland, ect...

If a soft cell knee pad manufacturer sponsored the Nationals or a Regional Championship and provided funding to H.Q. you could bet your you know what soft cell knee pads would not only be legal but you'd find them on prize tables by the gross.

Vests DO offer a competitive advantage...Armadillo Custom Vests is a classic example of equipment that skirts the rules and almost NEVER is used by the average CCW but is welcomed with open arms by IDPA because they BOUGHT their way into the sport.

It all goes back to the hypocritical manner in which the way the rules are crafted and enforced and THAT'S what people have been carping about all along.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Chuck D

[BillR1]

Nope, I've never heard a newscast like that. Is that really what you were after??

I'm not sure of the point of that question...oh well.

[Chuck D]

Nope, I've never heard a newscast like that. Is that really what you were after??

I'm not sure of the point of that question...oh well.

You know EXACTLY what I'm talking about....

You constantly support IDPA's approach to rules creation and enforcement and you defend rules that simply can not be defended from a common sense perspective BUT when given DIRECT examples of bias, inconsistencies, and a complete lack of common sense i.e. the gamer attire vs. a simple soft cell knee pad worn with shorts you SUDDENLY aren't sure of the "point of my question."

What am I most likely to run into "on the street"....someone with a logo plastered jersey or someone wearing a soft knee pad for support ?

Lets take it one step further,,,,instead of reloading and moving BEHIND COVER" lets make people stand static while a potential threat is supposedly shooting back at us. Fact is....IDPA eliminated movement behind cover while reloading because "gamers" could do it and do it well ...just like those USPSA/IPSC guys do and we certainly didn't want that now did we...

No shooting sport rulebook is as convoluted as IDPA's because H.Q. is hell bent on pretending to be what it is not, could never be, and its principles run contrary to the needs of the organization especially membership retention.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Chuck D

[BillR1]

I DO, however, disagree with this statement of yours... "It's being DRIVEN out of a sport that you actually liked because a group of Marksman class shooters at the request of H.Q. crafted a rulebook that singled out those with a "competitive mindset" is what I and others have a problem with." NO one is "driven" out of a sport. You choose to leave or stay! No one forces me to start, continue, or stop a sport. Barring a physical ailment, I ALONE choose which sports I participate in and for how long. I have left sports/activities before, and for various reasons. The can be many reasons why an activity is no longer enjoyable or "worth the trouble" to participate in. Yep, sometimes rules change. It happens in many areas other than shooting sports. If they change to the point where you no longer enjoy the activity, then YOU make the decision to do something else. Again, these nothing wrong with that.

The huge variety of suggestions during the comment period indicates that different people have issues with many parts of the rule book. That happens...it's impossible to please everyone. Lines have to be drawn somewhere; nearly everyone agrees with that. The points of discussion are where those lines are drawn and who is drawing them. (and why) Those issues appear to be largely out of our control. That's actually OK with me. If the rules or situation get to the point where it's not fun anymore, I'll find other things to do also. Unlike many people here, I'm not there yet. It's still fun for me. But if/when I decide to leave and do other things, that will be MY choice and not because something or someone "drove me" to do it.

[BillR1]

Nope, I've never heard a newscast like that. Is that really what you were after??

I'm not sure of the point of that question...oh well.

You know EXACTLY what I'm talking about....

You constantly support IDPA's approach to rules creation and enforcement and you defend rules that simply can not be defended from a common sense perspective BUT when given DIRECT examples of bias, inconsistencies, and a complete lack of common sense i.e. the gamer attire vs. a simple soft cell knee pad worn with shorts you SUDDENLY aren't sure of the "point of my question."

What am I most likely to run into "on the street"....someone with a logo plastered jersey or someone wearing a soft knee pad for support ?

Lets take it one step further,,,,instead of reloading and moving BEHIND COVER" lets make people stand static while a potential threat is supposedly shooting back at us. Fact is....IDPA eliminated movement behind cover while reloading because "gamers" could do it and do it well ...just like those USPSA/IPSC guys do and we certainly didn't want that now did we...

No shooting sport rulebook is as convoluted as IDPA's because H.Q. is hell bent on pretending to be what it is not, could never be, and its principles run contrary to the needs of the organization especially membership retention.

Chuck...we get it! There are rules you don't agree with or see the logic in. I understand. There are rules that I ALSO don't agree with or see the point of. The difference is that FOR ME the rule issues are not (yet?) enough to get me to leave the sport. Maybe that will happen one day..I don't know. But right now I'm still enjoying it, so I'm staying around.

[Chuck D]

Bill obviously you don't remember the "feel free to leave" comments made by Joyce Wilson or most likely you CHOOSE not to remember.

If that doesn't indicate being "driven out of the sport" then I don't know what does...

By the way....who is "we?" You (to your credit) are one of a very few that back IDPA's play at every opportunity.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Chuck D

[BillR1]

Bill obviously you don't remember the "feel free to leave" comments made by Joyce Wilson or most likely you CHOOSE not to remember.

If that doesn't indicate being "driven out of the sport" then I don't know what does...

By the way....who is "we?" You (to your credit) are one of a very few that back IDPA's play at every opportunity.

Just...wow! I don't even know how to respond to this...

In what world does "feel FREE to leave" mean even remotely the same thing as "being FORCED out"? Those statements are completely different in any English class I've ever attended.

Speaking of choosing to ignore statements...I've said MANY times that there are rules and procedures in IDPA that I don't agree with, just like many others here. I'm not sure why you like to chastise me in particular simply because the rule changes don't bother me as much as they must affect you.

[Chuck D]

"If you don't like the way things are run here...get out" is the basic premise of her statement. Many people did just that which is living proof you should be careful what you wish for. The rule book is SO unpopular that along comes ANOTHER comment period that is designed to gauge the depth of the dissatisfaction. Obvious signs that something is "amiss" regardless of the fact that you refuse to at the very least recognize the obvious.

I won't bother getting into the "procedural penalty festival" most matches have become due to the "subjectivity" of a rulebook that encourages SO's to "apply" the rules as they see fit versus clear application of the written rule. This in and of itself is designed to "run off" the "gamer" who is the most likely candidate for receiving unearned procedural penalties for pushing stage creativity to it's limits.

I'm not "chastising" you...I'm calling you out on your never ending willingness to ignore the obvious and do so in a public forum where comments and dissention is to be expected. I am more than willing to stand by every single statement and prediction I've made about the arrogance and incompetency expressed by H.Q. If you want to defend their actions...you become subject to the criticisms that go along with supporting what is obviously wrong. Where on earth would someone running a successful business tell its customer base that if they disagree with the manner in which the product they PAY for and VOLUNTEER their time and labor to support is administered to feel free to take their time, effort, and money elsewhere ? Would YOU purchase products or services from that company after being told in so many words you're not welcomed there anymore ?

You're no victim. You chose to support their policies. I'm not asking you to quit. I'm asking you to take a good hard look at what's been done, run a "morality check" and then with all honesty say you can support IDPA's position.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Chuck D

[BillR1]

"If you don't like the way things are run here...get out" is the basic premise of her statement. Many people did just that which is living proof you should be careful what you wish for.

Where on earth would someone running a successful business tell its customer base that if they disagree with the manner in which the product they PAY for and VOLUNTEER their time and labor to support is administered to feel free to take their time, effort, and money elsewhere ? Would YOU purchase products or services from that company after being told in so many words you're not welcomed there anymore ?

.

Seriously? Where DOESN'T this happen?? Businesses FREQUENTLY set or even change rules about what is allowed. The customer is then FREE to either accept the new rules or take their business elsewhere. That's just simple capitalism. A good example is a business that decides to ban concealed firearms. As a customer, I can CHOOSE to either comply with their rules, or spend my money elsewhere. This situation is no different. IDPA is stating what the rules are. Those that CHOOSE not to comply are free to find a different game to play.

The statement I read from Joyce did not say "get out". It did encourage people that were unwilling to embrace the new rules to find a sport more to their liking. BIG difference!

[BillR1]

You're no victim. You chose to support their policies. I'm not asking you to quit. I'm asking you to take a good hard look at what's been done, run a "morality check" and then with all honesty say you can support IDPA's position.

You're correct here. I CHOOSE to support their policies. For me, the cost/benefit scale has not tipped yet to the negative. I'm still enjoying the sport. (much to your dismay for some reason...)

IF the rules get too unrealistic or cumbersome to where I'm no longer enjoying myself, then I'll have a CHOICE to make.

[Chuck D]

OK Bill....

I sure hope you are sufficiently compensated for your support .

By the way, the term "basic premise" was the terminology I used. There are expressed meanings and implied meanings. Joyce expressed herself in one fashion but those that saw through the smoke and mirror show KNOW what she implied and now her efforts and arrogance is coming home to roost as it should.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Chuck D

[BillR1]

By the way, the term "basic premise" was the terminology I used. There are expressed meanings and implied meanings. Joyce expressed herself in one fashion but those that saw through the smoke and mirror show KNOW what she implied and now her efforts and arrogance is coming home to roost as it should.

If you say so...

I didn't see anything other than exactly what she said, but I guess I wasn't LOOKING for any evil intent or hidden meanings...how did I possibly miss that?

[M1911]

It all goes back to the hypocritical manner in which the way the rules are crafted and enforced and THAT'S what people have been carping about all along.

Amen! Just like the way S&W 1911s with slide lightening cuts were approved just before a certain major match.

Bill obviously you don't remember the "feel free to leave" comments made by Joyce Wilson or most likely you CHOOSE not to remember.

I do remember that quite well. Joyce gave me the same line directly, in response to my opposition to the flat-footed reload rule. It is rather amusing some months later to see how the member proposed changes are dominated by hundreds of suggestions to drop flat-footed reloads. Nice going, Joyce. I guess you miscalculated. Now what are you gonna do?

It should be interesting to watch her rationalizations and double-speak if she is forced to backtrack on flat-footed reloads.

Edited October 15, 2014 by M1911

[M1911]

Double-tap

Edited October 15, 2014 by M1911

[mikeinctown]

I'm a noob both here and to the sport of shhoting in general. After doing some research into what clubs I have locally, the majority of them shoot IDPA and so these are the rules I have been looking at. So a few comments from a noob after reading some of the rules and comments regarding this thread.

1) A 3% response to an internet survey based on an email sent is rather good. There are many, amny people who don't even look at their emails or they just delete them. A vast majority of people don't care enough to get involved in advocating for anything and yet another group still might feel put off by past actions.

2) Based on the numbers floated here, if 30%+ of all comments were regarding one specific thing then you can bet your house that this is a BIG issue for your members. If 75+% of the comments dealt with 3 or 4 of the rules then you should look a whole lot closer as to why the comments are there and re-examine why the rule is there in the first place.

3) I still do not understand a justification for the footwork rule as people are describing it. According to the rulebook you have to be behind cover. As part of the goal and stated name of the organization is "defensive" I'd really like to know what makes moving your feet any less defensive if you remain behind cover? If I am fighting for my life I am certainly going to be moving in an attempt to either get away or gain position if I cannot get away. I sure am not going to stop and stand in one spot while I do something with my pistol.

4) I do not understand the dowel rod rule. If a holster and weapon is concealed then why does it matter if it sticks out 1/2" or 1"? Along those lines I still cannot figure out in their illustrations why a belt they show with a holster is claimed to be illegal.

5) The dust cover rule for ESP. I can shoot a factory SP-01 in SPP and the only reason it would be legal in ESP is because it is SPP legal. If I do one thing to the gun, no matter how minor that would make it illegal for SPP I am now illegal for ESP as well. (even though ESP is supposed to be allowed more modifications??)

6) I know this is a point of contention among many and I only bring this up because I am looking into buying a CZ to use down the road, but the whole notation about no modified pistols from factory custom shops allowed is crazy. (paraphrasing here) I'm not sure if people think the firearm business is somehow different than any other business out there, but if a manufacturer has a contract with a supplier or shop to assemble a certain product it does not change the result of the product put on market. The product is listed in the catalog, has a product stock number, is ordered through the MFG, and carries a manufacturer warranty then the product is from the manufacturer. Just because you have assembly done out of house does not mean you haven't made the product. (especially when documents from the ATF show that the shop doesn't actually manufacture any firearms)

I worked for MTD for a time and we made a certain product for 5 different companies to their specifications. They were sold under that company name, not ours, and those companies were the ones putting out the catalogues and carrying the warranty. They were considerd the manufacturer of the product. Another example could be an iPhone. It might be made in a factory in china owned by ShintoLTD company but we see it as being made by Apple because they designed the specifications, designed the packaging, claim ownership of the patents, and sell and warranty the final product. the fact they outsourced production or assembly means nothing.

7) Do CCW courses offered in states around the country require people to look in the mirror and hold their arms out to be sure they remain CCW? or is the standard just that the weapon remains concealed? Also, given that so many states have open carry laws, why the need for concealement anyway? It just seems to me that there is a lot of focus on something that really bears no relation on defense at all. (belts, holsters, length of outerwear, etc)

Some of these can be taken as questions that I just don't know the answer to, but some may be taken as a why does that rule even exist. As I said at the top, I'm still trying to get to know the rules and am a relative noob to the sport.

[Brooke]

"c ) Figure out how to have a rule book AND the web site in front of you. (Two web accessible devices at once?)"

Pretty interesting comment. First you suggest "older" people are stupid, then you make the quoted comment. Seems you have no idea how to get two screen views at the same time on a single device. Maybe stupid is on your side, not mine.

[logiztix]

"c ) Figure out how to have a rule book AND the web site in front of you. (Two web accessible devices at once?)"

Pretty interesting comment. First you suggest "older" people are stupid, then you make the quoted comment. Seems you have no idea how to get two screen views at the same time on a single device. Maybe stupid is on your side, not mine.

No, I suggested that certain age demographics are less likely to own the equipment to replicate the deck of the USS Enterprise in order to fill out an IDPA rule change request.

While 77% of 18-29 year olds in a specific income bracket have a smart phone, only 22% of those in the 'average age' of IDPA's own membership statistics have one.

http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/06/05/smartphone-ownership-2013/

It's a simple question of access to and interest in the type of technology that IDPA requires you to use to express an opinion on the rule book.

[elguapo]

I'm a noob both here and to the sport of shhoting in general. After doing some research into what clubs I have locally, the majority of them shoot IDPA and so these are the rules I have been looking at. So a few comments from a noob after reading some of the rules and comments regarding this thread.

1) A 3% response to an internet survey based on an email sent is rather good. There are many, amny people who don't even look at their emails or they just delete them. A vast majority of people don't care enough to get involved in advocating for anything and yet another group still might feel put off by past actions.

2) Based on the numbers floated here, if 30%+ of all comments were regarding one specific thing then you can bet your house that this is a BIG issue for your members. If 75+% of the comments dealt with 3 or 4 of the rules then you should look a whole lot closer as to why the comments are there and re-examine why the rule is there in the first place.

3) I still do not understand a justification for the footwork rule as people are describing it. According to the rulebook you have to be behind cover. As part of the goal and stated name of the organization is "defensive" I'd really like to know what makes moving your feet any less defensive if you remain behind cover? If I am fighting for my life I am certainly going to be moving in an attempt to either get away or gain position if I cannot get away. I sure am not going to stop and stand in one spot while I do something with my pistol.

4) I do not understand the dowel rod rule. If a holster and weapon is concealed then why does it matter if it sticks out 1/2" or 1"? Along those lines I still cannot figure out in their illustrations why a belt they show with a holster is claimed to be illegal.

5) The dust cover rule for ESP. I can shoot a factory SP-01 in SPP and the only reason it would be legal in ESP is because it is SPP legal. If I do one thing to the gun, no matter how minor that would make it illegal for SPP I am now illegal for ESP as well. (even though ESP is supposed to be allowed more modifications??)

6) I know this is a point of contention among many and I only bring this up because I am looking into buying a CZ to use down the road, but the whole notation about no modified pistols from factory custom shops allowed is crazy. (paraphrasing here) I'm not sure if people think the firearm business is somehow different than any other business out there, but if a manufacturer has a contract with a supplier or shop to assemble a certain product it does not change the result of the product put on market. The product is listed in the catalog, has a product stock number, is ordered through the MFG, and carries a manufacturer warranty then the product is from the manufacturer. Just because you have assembly done out of house does not mean you haven't made the product. (especially when documents from the ATF show that the shop doesn't actually manufacture any firearms)

I worked for MTD for a time and we made a certain product for 5 different companies to their specifications. They were sold under that company name, not ours, and those companies were the ones putting out the catalogues and carrying the warranty. They were considerd the manufacturer of the product. Another example could be an iPhone. It might be made in a factory in china owned by ShintoLTD company but we see it as being made by Apple because they designed the specifications, designed the packaging, claim ownership of the patents, and sell and warranty the final product. the fact they outsourced production or assembly means nothing.

7) Do CCW courses offered in states around the country require people to look in the mirror and hold their arms out to be sure they remain CCW? or is the standard just that the weapon remains concealed? Also, given that so many states have open carry laws, why the need for concealement anyway? It just seems to me that there is a lot of focus on something that really bears no relation on defense at all. (belts, holsters, length of outerwear, etc)

Some of these can be taken as questions that I just don't know the answer to, but some may be taken as a why does that rule even exist. As I said at the top, I'm still trying to get to know the rules and am a relative noob to the sport.

Or you can do what I did: find where to shoot USPSA and give them the money I would have otherwise given to IDPA. Your seven points become none!

Edited October 16, 2014 by elguapo

[v1911]

This is a bit off topic..

When reading the USPSA subforum, the negativity seems to be from their own active members. I can respect that.

When reading the IDPA subforum, much of the negativity comes from former IDPA members and USPSA members. I find this a bit odd.

Why is it that people admit to having left IDPA still feel the need to come back and vent about how much they disliked the sport? Maybe I overlooked all the posts from IDPA members on the USPSA subforum recruiting disgruntled members. But that seems to be the norm here on the IDPA subforum.

[Brooke]

"While 77% of 18-29 year olds in a specific income bracket have a smart phone, only 22% of those in the 'average age' of IDPA's own membership statistics have one."

This is really a stupid discussion with which I continue to take issue. You clearly have some "young" chip up your rear end. Think about it, most folks 50 and over actually are independent. About 30% of people in their 20's live with their 50's parents. It's true that I fall into a category with an engineering degree, a +$100,000 income, and have supported myself since age 16. I'm likely to have the stuff that you think I'm too stupid to operate, but everyone I know has and operates the same devices (and can actually have two internet sessions simultaneously). You need to quit thinking you are superior to an older person until you can prove it by surviving a lifetime on your own. With your attitude that's unlikely.

​If you don't like something (IDPA for example) then don't do it but don't bash the people who do not have a problem with it.

Just for closers, don't suggest that using a smart phone makes you smart. That's not what it means., Most high school dropouts and drug dealers (overlapping groups) use them just fine. I have owned every iPhone that Apple has released including a 6. I do most of computing and internet surfing on this retina MacBook Pro I'm typing on or my 27" iMac. I have 3 iPads used mostly for entertainment like watching UTube videos of idiots. The majority of my friends have similar device inventories.

Give it a rest until you have solved a few problems, shot at some people who actually shoot back (literally or figuratively), and actually achieve something worthwhile. Demeaning people older than yourself is easy until you prove you can actually function as well as they do.

​So say whatever you want. I'm not continuing to argue with you because most people have no interest in such a debate. Have a good life with your smart phone.

[elguapo]

This is a bit off topic..

When reading the USPSA subforum, the negativity seems to be from their own active members. I can respect that.

When reading the IDPA subforum, much of the negativity comes from former IDPA members and USPSA members. I find this a bit odd.

Why is it that people admit to having left IDPA still feel the need to come back and vent about how much they disliked the sport? Maybe I overlooked all the posts from IDPA members on the USPSA subforum recruiting disgruntled members. But that seems to be the norm here on the IDPA subforum.

You should worry less about the opinions of those who left the sport and worry more about the negative opinions of new guys looking at your sport.

Mikeinctown nails some very good points that the kool aid drinkers, apologists, and nuthuggers seem to easily gloss over.

[BillR1]

This is a bit off topic..

When reading the USPSA subforum, the negativity seems to be from their own active members. I can respect that.

When reading the IDPA subforum, much of the negativity comes from former IDPA members and USPSA members. I find this a bit odd.

Why is it that people admit to having left IDPA still feel the need to come back and vent about how much they disliked the sport? Maybe I overlooked all the posts from IDPA members on the USPSA subforum recruiting disgruntled members. But that seems to be the norm here on the IDPA subforum.

Well said!

The attitude of many here:

"I hate IDPA enough to quit the sport, but I'm going to keep coming on here and telling everyone that I hate it!" Priceless!

Edited October 16, 2014 by BillR1

[motosapiens]

This is a bit off topic..

When reading the USPSA subforum, the negativity seems to be from their own active members. I can respect that.

When reading the IDPA subforum, much of the negativity comes from former IDPA members and USPSA members. I find this a bit odd.

Why is it that people admit to having left IDPA still feel the need to come back and vent about how much they disliked the sport?

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me personally, I like the concept of IDPA (using genuinely carryable equipment), and I like the focus on accuracy (greater penalties for inaccurate shots). However, I think many of the other rules have been expressly designed to discourage skilled competitors and drive them away.

Despite that, I would still probably shoot a couple matches a year because the idpa clubs locally are good folks and I enjoy their stages and the cameraderie, (just like some of their guys shoot a couple uspsa matches each year as time allows). Unfortunately, IDPA's retarded business model doesn't allow people to shoot without being members, unlike many other popular shooting sports.

So the reason I 'come back' is not to vent about how much I dislike IDPA, but to agitate for a couple small changes that would allow me to start shooting IDPA again. Being able to shoot as a non-member (for an extra $5 or so) is one of the biggies. Stage design can make the flat-footed reload thingy pretty insignificant.

I know the folks at IDPA hq are motivated by money, so I think it's important to let them know that there is potential money being left on the table due to some of their policies.

[v1911]

5) The dust cover rule for ESP. I can shoot a factory SP-01 in SPP and the only reason it would be legal in ESP is because it is SPP legal. If I do one thing to the gun, no matter how minor that would make it illegal for SPP I am now illegal for ESP as well. (even though ESP is supposed to be allowed more modifications??)

Mike,

If the mods made are ESP legal, then you are OK to shoot in ESP. depending on the mods, you may still be able to shoot SSP if you're able to revent back to stock form.

Magwells, would be a prime example of this. While illegal in SSP, they are perfectly legal in ESP. If you removed the magwell, you would again be legal for both SSP and ESP.

[mikeinctown]

This is a bit off topic..

When reading the USPSA subforum, the negativity seems to be from their own active members. I can respect that.

When reading the IDPA subforum, much of the negativity comes from former IDPA members and USPSA members. I find this a bit odd.

Why is it that people admit to having left IDPA still feel the need to come back and vent about how much they disliked the sport? Maybe I overlooked all the posts from IDPA members on the USPSA subforum recruiting disgruntled members. But that seems to be the norm here on the IDPA subforum.

Former customers are the best way to gauge why your product needs improvement. Why does that customer not come to buy your product any more. What can be done to get hat customer back, if there is anything that can be done. Companies spend millions of dollars figuring out how to best retain and get back former customers.

I can guarantee the best way to gain customers and get back former ones is to NOT say "oh you don't shop here any more, we don't care what you think".