Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Pistol Caliber Carbine. (PCC)


DocMedic

Recommended Posts

In USPSA Pistol there aren't any guns "pointing at people". ...

NOT TRUE - I have my feet swept by other people's holstered pistols all the time at USPSA handgun matches. It is just that we (rightly) regard a holstered pistol to be inert and inherently safe. I trust Troy to establish gun handling protocols that will render PCCs equally safe when off the line.

That would mean putting the rifle in a case or holster. Equally as safe as a holster is a holster

Agreed!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A bag will be the holster for the rifle. I don't see the big deal!!! It will be the same caliber round that is already being fired in the match. Think of it as a longer pistol. Drawing one of these fancy pants competition pistols with a 1-2 pound trigger from a holster is inherently more dangerous. I vote the board make all pistols with Six pound triggers so it will be safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bag will be the holster for the rifle. I don't see the big deal!!! It will be the same caliber round that is already being fired in the match. Think of it as a longer pistol. Drawing one of these fancy pants competition pistols with a 1-2 pound trigger from a holster is inherently more dangerous. I vote the board make all pistols with Six pound triggers so it will be safer.

Ok. Do it. I'll shoot a six pound trigger if you do tough guy.

And if you read the entire thread you will see that we are in agreement. If the bag is used like a holster, that would mitigate all of the primary concerns I have voiced.

Edited by Ultimo-Hombre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In USPSA Pistol there aren't any guns "pointing at people". ...

NOT TRUE - I have my feet swept by other people's holstered pistols all the time at USPSA handgun matches. It is just that we (rightly) regard a holstered pistol to be inert and inherently safe. I trust Troy to establish gun handling protocols that will render PCCs equally safe when off the line.

That would mean putting the rifle in a case or holster. Equally as safe as a holster is a holster

or Chamber flag?

Is this going to be a standardized piece of equipment?

Yes, it should be. Bagging long-ish guns at the line is a hassle and takes a lot of time.

3 Gun has standardized on chamber flags to show safe for all long guns. Even then you should still be carrying "muzzle up" or "muzzle down" when going to or coming from the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bag will be the holster for the rifle. I don't see the big deal!!! It will be the same caliber round that is already being fired in the match. Think of it as a longer pistol. Drawing one of these fancy pants competition pistols with a 1-2 pound trigger from a holster is inherently more dangerous. I vote the board make all pistols with six pound triggers...

Insulting the existing shooters isn't going to endear you to them or make any points in your quest to be a part of their game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And a bag is a lot harder to drag around in your back pocket than a chamber flag. Remember that on most stages you don't stop at the same place that you start the stage so either you need a bag caddie or have to scramble during UASC every time. Chamber flags are a sufficient way to safely move long guns back and forth from the line while demonstrating that they are safe. Bagging will slow things down for sure and presents more opportunities for fumbling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Are you guys tired of rehashing the same arguments every page of this thread without even having any factual rules to base your points on? I vote we lock the thread till the provisional rules appear, then we unlock it and you guys can tear the rules apart all you want. Then at least it will be worth arguing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or keep the thread open and use it express peoples views on the issues or rules ideas so it is seen. I would rather have a discussion that could lead to better rule set then just have it dumped on us. Mike has indicated that they will be using forums such as this one to collect info and ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Are you guys tired of rehashing the same arguments every page of this thread without even having any factual rules to base your points on? I vote we lock the thread till the provisional rules appear, then we unlock it and you guys can tear the rules apart all you want. Then at least it will be worth arguing.

Hopefully somebody who will have a say in the future of this will read the thread. That way they can have all the ideas laid out and pick some and claim they came up with them.:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Are you guys tired of rehashing the same arguments every page of this thread without even having any factual rules to base your points on? I vote we lock the thread till the provisional rules appear, then we unlock it and you guys can tear the rules apart all you want. Then at least it will be worth arguing.

Hopefully somebody who will have a say in the future of this will read the thread. That way they can have all the ideas laid out and pick some and claim they came up with them.:)

Dude,

You said it all right there.

my section coordinator knows my opinion. I trust him.

Ive learned who the fan boys are and who are the men willing to debate.

Adios.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other sports have managed to come up with reasonable rules for safe hand gun and long gun handling and for efficiently running stages. I'll give DNROI/USPSA the benefit of the doubt and assume we can do the same. If testing and experience show that something needs to be tweaked, I'll bet we have the good sense to make the change. Much like has been done over the years.

Debate is not the same as expecting others to refute a series of hypothetical situations based on assumptions of rules and behaviors.

Those who refuse to play this game are not necessarily fanboys. Those who choose to play are not necessarily men.

I'll be more interested in further discussion when there is something from DNROI to discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other sports have managed to come up with reasonable rules for safe hand gun and long gun handling and for efficiently running stages. I'll give DNROI/USPSA the benefit of the doubt and assume we can do the same. If testing and experience show that something needs to be tweaked, I'll bet we have the good sense to make the change. Much like has been done over the years.

Debate is not the same as expecting others to refute a series of hypothetical situations based on assumptions of rules and behaviors.

Those who refuse to play this game are not necessarily fanboys. Those who choose to play are not necessarily men.

I'll be more interested in further discussion when there is something from DNROI to discuss.

.... Edited by Ultimo-Hombre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the beginning there were Handgun matches, then separate matches were added for Rifle, Shotgun, and Multi-Gun.

If PCC is a popular concept as many have indicated then it should be possible to create a separate PCC match using the EXISTING rifle rules. In the UK they created a new discipline called mini-rifle (based on Ruger 1022's after the handgun ban).

What I do not understand is why there is a need to insert a rifle into what has been (for decades) a stand-alone handgun match. This is a complete change of direction for Practical Shooting sports, this is not like adding a new handgun division, its adding a completely different firearm to a handgun match and then trying to alter rules and start positions to accommodate it. We ALREADY have a rule-set for rifle, there is nothing to stop a MD from arranging a match for PCC under those rules. In fact I think Mark already has one.

USPSA is trying to put a square peg into a round hole. Reading through these posts are some questions about how it would work and how a solution could be reached, but I can't see WHY it's being added to what has always been a handgun match.

I could see a case being made to run a PCC match AFTER a HANDGUN match has concluded using the same stage layout (with changes in course description to cater for a gun that has its own unique safety requirements), but I can't see why they both have to be shot at the same time. Running the same stages in a separate match could increase revenue for our clubs without impacting the people who just want to compete in a handgun match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advantages to running a PCC match AFTER a HANDGUN match instead of concurrently:

  • Competitors would be able to shoot the entire match with their handgun and then again using the PCC.
  • PCC Competitors would be able to re-arrange the stage between matches to accommodate the needs of the longer gun.
  • PCC Competitors would be able to write different WSB's if they wished, again to accommodate the rifle.
  • There would be no need to insert special rules into the Handgun rule book for rifles.
  • The existing Rifle rules could be used with only a new appendix required for this division.
  • Clubs could get additional revenue as they would essentially have two matches one after the other with probably a lot of cross-over shooters.
  • More activity fees for USPSA.
  • No impact to the existing handgun matches.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WADR Paul, CO, SS, Lim10, Production were all seen in the same manner. PCCs don't "need" any changes from the pistol format of stages and rules. For the most part they are used in the same manner and circumstances as a pistol...where a rifle is not practical. The PCC is, in some sense just another step beyond CO or Open for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark, I think they are completely different; Our handgun divisions are all variations on a common theme, the handgun. PCC is a rifle. You say its the same, I say they're different. The President has already intimated that the rule book needs to change to accommodate it, if it were the same then no changes would be needed.

Can you tell me why this new division needs to be included into an existing handgun match ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You forgot a few:

- Match directors could stay at the range longer so PCC competitors could shoot some or all the stages.

- PCC Competitors could be responsible for match tear down well after handgun competitors leave.

Getting two matches from one match set up isn't the worst idea - once critical mass is achieved. But it would probably be a good way to dampen vs. grow interest in a provisional division.

[humor]

Maybe the CO competitors should shoot afterwards as well, because it's a provisional division. And Revolver, they are kind of slow. And Open, those folks are kind of noisy.

[/humor]

I'd love to have a face to face conversation with you.

Feel free to explain to me why I would find your arguments more compelling in person.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you tell me why this new division needs to be included into an existing handgun match ?

To capture a potential opportunity, to be brave enough to experiment and hopefully bring renewed interest and growth into USPSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...