Gary Stevens Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 ...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. Rule 10.4.3.1 provides an exception for the situation described. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 Gary replied to the above in another thread. I thought it was important enough to deserve it's own topic...so I split it out for us. Here is(are) the rule(s): 10.4.3 A shot which occurs while preparing to or while actually loading, reloading or unloading a handgun. This includes any shot fired during the procedures outlined in Rule 8.3.7. 10.4.3.1 Exception – a detonation, which occurs while unloading a handgun, is not considered a shot or discharge subject to a match disqualification, however, Rule 5.1.6 may apply. 5.1.6 Handguns must be serviceable and safe. Range Officers may demand examination of a competitor’s handgun or related equipment, at any time, to check they are functioning safely. If any such item is declared unserviceable or unsafe by a Range Officer, it must be withdrawn from the match until the item is repaired to the satisfaction of the Range Master. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 Am I right in thinking that the above is a different way of handling things than what we had with the red book (14th eddition)? Also, the red book gave a different definition of "detonation" than what is implied by 10.4.3.1 in the green book. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeFoley Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 I agree, after seeing this many times last year, that it deserves its own thread. It was treated differently at different matches. You can't help but feel sorry for the guy it happens to. The most common circumstance was round hitting the ejector on 1911/2011 guns that are mechanically safe otherwise. This is a huge fear of mine in multigun, where guys are speed unloading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 fomeister, Maybe we are the only ones wondering about this one? lol Looks like an "ejector fire" was a DQ under teh red book? But, isn't now (under the green book)? Then there is the detail of (in the green book) the definition of a detonation. I always found that term to be odd in the red book. They did go into detail to define the word, however. Now, it appear that the green book defines "detonation" differently? (within 10.4.3.1) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 I'm supprised it has taken this long for this to come up. It was one of the very first things I noticed in the "Green" book. I still have yet to se this happen, but I have gone from being a person who didn't believe it happened, to one who doesn't try to catch people's rounds when they unload and show clear. If I am going to make Master I need all of my fingers in good working order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowsure Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 I have seen it happen!!!! and I saw the blood too!!! I DQ'd a fellow for this and "Fomeister" it was on a "speed unload". Unfortunate and scary! Looking back I'm glad that the new rule is out and a RO can have the gun checked and the person can continue. BUT if it was ME bleeding...a DQ might not be harsh enough. This is a gray area that a discharge is not a discharge??? But dim's da rules. <Edit: speed reload to speed unload.> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 discharge?? detonation?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcoliver Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Just last week I experienced ejector fire while in a the middle of a COF. I was DQ'ed which turned out to be an incorrect call according to the new IPSC rules. But for USPSA, does it have the same glossary page like the one in IPSC where shot and detonation is defined? This one seemed to cause some confusion due to the nature of the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowsure Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Flex, My hang up with this rule is: If I "discharge" a round @ LAMR. I get a DQ and "most" of the time no one gets hurt. But if I "detonate" @ unload and show clear and the brass shrapnel puts holes in my face and the RO's face who was sticking his/her face up to the gun to see a clear chamber its "OK", inspect the gun and apply bandages and continue.?!?! I personally think that this new "detonate" rule is bad. If something goes bang when its not supposed to it should be a DQ. Safety First. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveZ Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 I personally think that this new "detonate" rule is bad. If something goes bang when its not supposed to it should be a DQ. Safety First. I'm pretty sure the new rule was put in place to serve two situations. One as we know is when a round is detonated by the primer hitting the ejector. The other, as unlikely as it seems is when the round is ejected and hits a rock on the ground and goes off. Under your definition of "goes bang", these rock incidents would be DQ's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowsure Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Ok. 10.4.3.2 Exception – to a exception - a detonation, which occurs while unloading a handgun, near ROCKS is not considered a shot or discharge subject to a match disqualification, however, Rule 5.1.6 may apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Well, before we get to far into the should or shouldn't... I wanted to make sure that we all are on the same page with the change for the red book. My take is that, an "ejector fire" was a DQ under the red book. Under the green book, it is not a DQ...but, the RO may stop you to ensure you have a safe gun. And, the definition of "detonation" has changed (somewhat). I guess that about covers it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowsure Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 My take is that, an "ejector fire" was a DQ under the red book. Under the green book, it is not a DQ...but, the RO may stop you to ensure you have a safe gun. And, the definition of "detonation" has changed (somewhat). Yes, this is how I see it. The stopping part my be a Multigun application mostly. Most detonations, I assume, would be at UASC. I just cant see why a "ejectorFire" "Detonation" "AD" what every you want to call it, would not be a DQ for safety reasons. If someone gets hurt shouldent there be a rule to STOP this from happening? If the "its a mechanical failure not a human failure" argument is applied here then I think the DQ should still apply!!! If a top notch shooter gets DQ'd at tne Notionals for detonation with the title on the line, there will be more than one smart gunsmith to "fix" this problem once and forever. Because every shooter will want his/her gun "fixed" so the detonation issue wont happen to them. Maybe I'm over reacting for a extreamly small percentage of actuall events but it has happened to me and have given it some thought. Maybe too much My .02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 I just cant see why a "ejectorFire" "Detonation" "AD" what every you want to call it, would not be a DQ for safety reasons. If someone gets hurt shouldent there be a rule to STOP this from happening? This topic was beat up on earlier, and there was an excellent explanation of how "ejector fire" happens. Without trying to be argumentative, how would adding a rule against ejector fire stop it from happening? I think most gunsmiths set their guns up to guard against the possibility, but what the competitor does with his gun/ammo combination is unpredictable, at best. As an RO, I don't stick my face anywhere near the gun while it's being cleared. There is potential for injury there, but IMO as long as the competitor is compliant with all the safety rules, a detonation is just one of those unfortunate things. Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeFoley Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Mactigers closing words in that last post made me think of something: How is ejector fire any different from dropping a round from your gun, your hands, or your pocket and it detonating on the ground? Maybe someone already addressed it, but I have heard of rounds being dropped and detonating, and it happened to me once in my inlaws driveway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Troy is right...we have covered some of this before. (hey Flex$...do a search. ) In the second post of this thread (Range Commands, and what they mean) Vince introduces this rule to us...and, a definition of detonation that appear to be included in the IPSC rule book's glossary, but not the USPSA's glossary? and, from our new Glossary: Detonation - Ignition of the primer of a round, other than by action of a firing pin, where the bullet does not pass through the barrel (e.g. when a slide is being manually retracted, when a round is dropped). ---------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry White Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 This happened at the 3 gun nats last year. Shooter was clearing a 40 open gun on the clock and had a ejector fire. Luckly he had a few cuts and some brass in a finger that was removed by first aid. Pistol suffered damage to ejector and extractor. RO called DQ for AD and was talked out of it by other ROs. I think that was what caused a lot of the pissin contest with the MD about allowing the replacement pistol and a lot of the heartburn over the speed unloading( that already existed but the incident reinforced it, and it is a dangerous practice). I,m glad the new rule book addresses the diffrence, but after that match I think there are a lot of match officers who don't really care what the rule book says.-----Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now