New Shooters makin mistakes

[Flyin40]

I wanted touch on the subject of new shooters makin mistakes. I was at a match today, the first one since 1999 when I first started, I think I shot 5 matches back then. I haven't shoot a pistol since until 2 weeks ago and and had some adjusting and remembering to do. I still consider myself a beginner. I made 2 mistakes as far as the rules go and safety issues. Both times I was informed of the mistake in a way that wouldn't turn a new shooter away. This was much appreciated. I think this is important at a Local club level to keep new shooters from being intimidated or feel they are being belittled.

Had a great time, glad to get back into it.

I'll be on your heels before you know it guys

Flyin40

[Jasonub]

thats the way to do it. if one is a newbie he/she should state it to the range officers and they will definitely be more than helpful to beginners. also beginners should shoot only on club level or level 1 competitions. RO's are more forgiving on level 1 and club matches. So far the only club level shoot that DQed a shooter was when the shooter was clearing his pistol, the round exploded when it hit the ejector. he was fine just a small finger cut.

[Sparky]

In 25 years in this sport I've DQed one shooter and been DQed once. I felt

worse having to DQ the shooter than I did when I was DQed.

As I've stated before we have to use common sense when applying the rules in

this sport. We also have to treat other shooters like we'd like to be treated.

[Ron Ankeny]

Our club has let half a dozen DQable offenses slide with new shooters in the last five years. In retrospect, not issuing the DQ was a huge mistake and a disservice to the shooter, the range, the club, and the sport. I know a lot of folks will disagree with such an inflexible approach, but it's my name on the range isurance policy and my name is also on the Limited Liability Corporation papers. I am also a CRO and I think USPSA has fairly high expectations of people who complete the training.

Anyhow, our club now has a reputation of letting stuff slide. From a liability point of view, we could have some issues if a shooter who should be DQ'd gets injured or hurts another person. I have come to realize that all safety violations that carry the disqualification penalty should be rigidly enforced no matter what the circumstances. A DQ can be issued professionally, with courtesy, and with understanding. Frankly, the two times I did not issue a DQ it was because I just lacked the balls.

[schoonie]

Ron,

You are absolutely correct, one screwup or mistake can erase or ruin a reputation based on years of good work.

RO's need to be firm to ensure everyone's safety and should be courteous to create a positive experience.

[JFlowers]

Ron,

I agree with you. In the end I think it's not the DQ, but how its done that will decide if the new shooter returns or no.

[davidwiz]

Having attended various matches (not IPSC or IDPA) run by the same organization where it is the policy of that organization not to DQ people because people are there to "have fun" (had loaded guns pointed at me and saw others had guns pointed at them), I don't think it is a good idea to "go easy" on someone regarding safety whom is just starting out because they might not "like it" and might not return. All it takes is for one person to get injured.

-David

[diehli]

I think we're conflating two ideas here: in order to not go easy on a person, the person must be DQ'ed. No DQ, we must be going easy on 'em.

I've seen several several-minute long discussions with a newbie that violates or comes close to violating the 180 (don't think I've seen an AD other than my own). Things are explained, as well as what the resultant action could be and definitely would be at a big(ger) match. Ultimately they're allowed to continue, but they're watched like a hawk. If it's just not something that someone can (will?) control, then they're told to go home.

Granted, it's not a fine line. Someone has to evaluate what's going on and make the call. Whatever call they make, if the reasoning is good enough, it should be respected.

[Jake Di Vita]

If what they do concerns the safety of themselves, me, or anyone at the match, there is no excuse for not DQing them.

Our sport is inherently dangerous and we can't allow unsafe actions no matter how new someone is.

[aXXman]

Maybe if an RO can see someone brand new getting close to doing something that would result in a justified DQ, they could stop them at that point and give them the talk without either stepping on the integrity of the safety of the sport or running off a new shooter.

You would have to be pretty fast though...

-Shawn

[John Dunn]

I'm a little less hard line than Ron, I think for newbie shooters at a club match a few instances don't warrant a DQ.

Say for instance a new shooter starts to gear up at the truck, doesn't point a gun at anyone, but does holster up. DQ by the rules, but I would show them the safety area and try to educate them.

On the other hand, a 180 violation, AD, unsafe gun handling, I think you don't have a choice there. It's a tough call to make. I was at a non-IPSC match where a guy torched round into the ground about 3 feet from his toe off the draw, no DQ was isssued. I'll admit to being a little nervous after that.

[Nik Habicht]

Locally, we try very hard to prevent the possibility of a newbie being DQ'd. We assign an expereinced shooter and certified RO to conduct their safety check and to explain the basic fundamentals of navigating the course of fire safely. We tell new shooters to walk and not run. We walk them through every stage, and help them develop a plan that avoids any potential pitfalls --- we point out targets where there could be a problem if a shooter went too far downrange before engaging the target. We make sure that one of our best R.O.s has the timer fior their run and we encourage coaching.

At a local Bianchi match, a shooter broke kydex while we were gearing up. I caught him with the Stop command before the muzzle stopped pointing at the ground. After I cleared the surrounding area, I had him show clear and reholster. We discussed the situation. No one had told him what the safety rules were, he was facing an area of the sideberm at a downrange angle with no people in front of him. He was a little shaken, concerned and contrite. We walked him through the safety rules and allowed him to shoot the match. He was perfectly safe from that point on --- and he understood why he got the loud "Stop" command when he did.

I think that range safety needs to be every shooters first priority --- and for me that involves talking to the people that you don't know. Got a new face showing up? Introduce yourself. Ask some questions about the person's shooting background. Offer to introduce them to the MD, to give them a safety check if needed, to mentor them through the first match or three.....

Who knows --- you might make a new friend in the process....

[Nik Habicht]

On the other hand, a 180 violation, AD, unsafe gun handling, I think you don't have a choice there. It's a tough call to make. I was at a non-IPSC match where a guy torched round into the ground about 3 feet from his toe off the draw, no DQ was isssued. I'll admit to being a little nervous after that.

John,

this is the only part of your post I disagree with: I think it's an easy call to make. We all know "unsafe gunhandling" when we see it --- and there's only one response.

[John Dunn]

Tough meaning no fun, not tough as in, "Oh geez, what do I do?"

[j1b]

Interesting post.

I believe any safety violation should lead to a DQ and to the point of several members of the forum, dq'd tastefully. Odds are the shooter knows they did wrong anyhow.

More importantly to me is making the new shooter aware of the traps before the stage/match. I'd acknowledge that some things need to be addressed before the match (running with trigger in finger guard, safe reloading, muzzle direction etc. etc.) but a rule like the 180 is touchy. We inherently build a lot of stages that "test" the limits of a shooters ability to manage the 180. I shot a match this weekend that did.

Advising a new shooter of where the traps lie on a stage is key - either by the RO, the shooter's squad (my preference) or a specified mentor.

My only DQ in a match was an AD. It was clear, it was blatant, and I had no issues about getting told I screwed up. I went back and filmed the prop I shot.

Most shooters are inherently good and will understand when something blatant has been done. It's those tricky ones like a 180 (especially after watching somebody smoke through a stage) that we in fact owe it to a new shooter to point out and say "Hey, be careful here"

Safety shouldn't be compromised - for the shooter, the RO, or the squad. Any safety violation should end a match. I just think we should teach to avoid those situations a little better.

JB

[richardschennberg]

DQ offense - you have to DQ the shooter. The MD or RM does have authority to overturn the DQ at a local match. Perhaps on every DQ the CRO should have the RM or MD present before making a final call so that there can be a consensus rather than an overturned call.

However, I would suggest that if you do reinstate a new shooter who may have committed a DQ offense, he should not shoot the match for score but as a coach-through with an experienced RO. If the original RO is comfortable running the shooter as a coach through, perhaps the most diplomatic solution would be to explain the DQ offense to the shooter and give him/her the option of shooting the match as a coach-through and not for score.

It's worth examining why this happened in the first place. Did the club do the new shooter checkout according to the checklist, or merely hand him score sheets? If so, or if the shooter was not quite up to par during the checkout, the first match should have been a coach-throught in the first place.

Richard

Schennberg.com

[MikeFoley]

It's worth examining why this happened in the first place. Did the club do the new shooter checkout according to the checklist, or merely hand him score sheets? If so, or if the shooter was not quite up to par during the checkout, the first match should have been a coach-throught in the first place.

Richard

Well put Richard, it is extremely important that we give new shooters what we call "new shooter check". I did new shooter check before the last match, and then squadded with all the new shooters, carefully explaining the stages and potential issues. It enhances their experience, and let's them know we are seriously proactive when it comes to safety. Encourage questions in this situation. They all had a blast.

[Jim Norman]

I would second Nik's earlier comments.

What we do even at our practice match is warn a shooter BEFORE the final moment when the DQ becomes inevitable. We can talk about the why and explain the reasons. If the shooter actually commits the infractin, then we have to issue the DQ. Its a tight line to walk, how close to the DQ do you le the new shooter get? Do you stop him before he actually crosses the line the give him a reshoot since technically it is RO interference if you stop him and the DQable offense was not committed. Or do you stop him and have a talk, explain why score the stage as it stanads and continue on with the match. I realize that this is a bit outside the rules, but consider that we do play a game with guns and the new shooter is an unknown entity that we have to learn before we are comfortable with his skills.

The second approach is what we generally will apply at our indoor practcie match. It gives us a training tool. Of course if the shooter does cross the line before we can stop him, we have no choice but to issue the DQ, which we try to do in the spirt of the gameand we explain why, then invite the shooter to stay and watch as well as to return the next time. Of course this shooter is watched even more closely for some time before we become comfortable.

Jim Norman

[Flyin40]

This topic is about informing new shooters about mistakes they are making in a way to make sure they will return not about whether or not you should DQ someone.

Flyin40

[CSEMARTIN]

I am always amazed at new shooters that come to our range and start to gear up without asking anyone what the 'rules' are. I always thought it was common sense, especially when I was a new shooter myself, to ask someone about the 'rules' of the club.

We have practice night every Wednesday night. Most of the time, when new shooters show up, they handle their guns outside of the safety area, load mags in the safe area, etc. We need to encourage new shooters, but they need to be watched very carefully.

[Nik Habicht]

Tough meaning no fun, not tough as in, "Oh geez, what do I do?"

Doh, I didn't think of that meaning. Time to run words through M-W from now on......

[Dead Buff]

I have had 1 DQ in my life (I still argue that it was wrongful, but I accepted it....) and it changed my view of the game completely. I think I have become a better shooter because of the DQ. It does "control" me in a way since I'm shitscared of being DQ'ed again. I am more safety conscious, more aware of what I do and of the environment. That DQ changed my shooting life and style - FOR THE GOOD.

Educate new guys before hand, warn them when they are close/were close to a violation, DQ when they cross the line and ensure that guys stays/comes back to the game....

[Skywalker]

I'd offer my 2c worth.

A newcomer/beginner is there (at a match) to learn, besides having fun.

What are we going to teach him if we let DQable offences slip by simply thinking we don't want to be hard on him? Are we really doing him a favour, or not?

Do they in junior school award all As because the pupils have to go on, and they do not want to have kids leaving school?

What's the RO task while officiating a newcomer? Assisting him, of course, teaching him, maybe, but closely monitoring safe competitor action, definitely.

So, if you let a DQable offence slip by, you're not doing your job as an RO, you're not going to teach anything useful to the beginner (he'll invariably think "...well it must not have been that bad, they let me go...", and will not train hard to avoid doing the same mistake again), and you're not assisting him.

All in all, I think the rulebook should not be waived when it comes to safety.

This will help the sport to grow safer, and the shooter to be more conscious about the safety of his actions and the safety of all bystanders.

Things will never deteriorate if the rules and their application are clear and consistent, they start running down the toilet when different calls are made on similar issues, because this confuses people, and leads them to believe everything can be subject to argumentation and personal opinions.

And, quite frankly, if a beginner is only going to remain in the sport because you didn't DQ him when it was due, but will leave immediately for something else on the first DQ, well, I'd rather let him go than keep him in the sport.

[Jasonub]

he can be dqed but he should be able to know why and also he can continue shooting the other stages. i think he wont commit the same mistake

[Dead Buff]

he can be dqed but he should be able to know why and also he can continue shooting the other stages. i think he wont commit the same mistake

How can you be DQ'ed and continue shooting - thats the same as letting it slip....