DQ or a WARNING

[kmanick]

I attended an all weekend "intro to USPSA" session a couple of weeks ago. The Ro's that ran it really tried to hammer home the "safety" piece of this sport

and IMO did an excellent job. (Hopkinton Heavy Hitters)

Day 2 we ran a 4 stage course. During the runs every time someone did something that would've DQ'd them we heard "STOP" the violation was explained

and if not too egregious they wee allowed to continue that stage , otherwise they were pulled aside and spoken to one on one and the violation was 

clearly explained to them.

Fast forward to this weekend. I attended my first "real" USPSA match, coincidentally at the same club.

This time the Ro's were right on top of everyone as they knew we had a lot of new "competitors" attending and 4 people DQ'd.

I took my time and went a bit slower than I normally would and told the Ro's that I was  focused on getting as many alphas as possible and not getting DQ'd.

My scores reflected it but I finished safely and the RO's that ran our squad remembered me from the class and actually thanked me after each of

my runs for taking my time and being safe.

I don't ever want to be "that guy" that is in the pictures earlier in this thread.

[Nalle2491]

Getting DQ is a great way to have to think about your mistakes and how to fix them. If you get a warning sometimes you can overlook the seriousness of your mistake.

[Boudreaux78]

I still don’t understand why it is so difficult to enforce the rules as written. I haven’t seen a rule in the book that allows for a warning when a safety violation occurs. Every action that you can be DQed for is a safety violation. If it’s a new shooter during a orientation course, warn away. If it’s a match, call it properly. Most clubs allow for a new shooter to be coached. Don’t allow the RO to be the coach, make it an experienced shooter who is good at instructing and preferably an RO as well. This way he can give the warnings and the RO can DQ it nessecary. 

 

If you like giving warnings, remain a spectator and leave ROing to someone who cares about everyone’s safety, shooter and spectators.   

 

JMHO

[blacklab]

I've been reading a few post's on Enos's form about DQ's and seems to be two different views about when a DQ should be enforced. Most people have a very black and white point of view. Some people say the book says if you (fill in offence) you broke the rule so DQ it is. Other people say (fill in offence) was a small mistake so let it slide. However in the real world things are not so black and white. There are different penalties for the same offences, for example lets speeding. If you are doing 60mph over the speed limit the penalty will be much worse then if you are doing 5mph over the speed limit even though the law that was broke was the same, you were speeding.  And if you get caught speeding a second time the penalty will be even worse.

    So lets go back to the OP. The book says if you sweep yourself it's unsafe and it's a DQ but this is the way I see it, yes she did sweep herself but the gun was unloaded and no harm could have been done. I think the RO should have stopped her conformed the gun was unloaded gave her a warning and put her on probation. If she did it again through out the match then she shows poor ethics and should begiven a DQ. If the RO found the gun to be loaded when she swept herself then that's a whole different set of circumstances and a few other rules that were broke so definitely a DQ. My point is its impossible for the people who wrote the rules to spell out everything for every possible situation. Somethings are obvious safety issues like breaking the 180 or dropping a loaded firearm but other things are not so obvious like sweeping yourself while un bagging an unloaded firearm. I'm for safety as much as the next person and I would never want to see anyone get hurt but sometimes I think people should apply common sense to the situation and ask themselves if it actually was an unsafe act. Just my 2 cents worth.

[perttime]

I'm of the school that tries to stick to the letter of the rules. If the Rules say it is a DQ, it is a DQ. My reasoning is that it pushes people to take the safety rules seriously.

 

In my corner of the world, I can mostly expect that competitors have read and understood the rules.

 

 

[IHAVEGAS]

4 hours ago, blacklab said:

sometimes I think people should apply common sense to the situation and ask themselves if it actually was an unsafe act.

 

1 hour ago, perttime said:

My reasoning is that it pushes people to take the safety rules seriously.

 

If the speed limit on a curve is 55 but you can likely do it at 70 before risk starts becoming high, then it is rational for an officer to say ok he was only doing 62 & that it is not a worry so I will use my common sense and allow him to continue, and it is rational for a different officer to say ok he was speeding on that curve and that is a worry so I will use my common sense and give him a ticket so he does not create an accident in the future.

 

Common sense is a matter of philosophy sometimes. 

 

 

[perttime]

Apples and oranges.

[blacklab]

7 hours ago, perttime said:

In my corner of the world, I can mostly expect that competitors have read and understood the rules.

In every set of rules no matter what they are for have gray areas. Not everything is black and white.

 

6 hours ago, IHAVEGAS said:

If the speed limit on a curve is 55 but you can likely do it at 70 before risk starts becoming high, then it is rational for an officer to say ok he was only doing 62 & that it is not a worry so I will use my common sense and allow him to continue, and it is rational for a different officer to say ok he was speeding on that curve and that is a worry so I will use my common sense and give him a ticket so he does not create an accident in the future.

 

This is a perfect example of a gray area. Which officer made the right call? Two different point of views and both are logical. Sweeping your hand with an unloaded gun while un bagging technically could do no harm. I'll bet next weeks pay everyone here does it at home once in awhile, but it is a bad practice and not something anyone should make a habit of. The rule book seems to take this situation to the extreme. It's not technically unsafe but its not good practice. A DQ seems a little harsh for the first offence. But I do see how it forces people to think before they act. I think this is one of those things people will never agree on.

[Sarge]

11 hours ago, blacklab said:

  So lets go back to the OP. The book says if you sweep yourself it's unsafe and it's a DQ    YOU COULD END THE WHOLE DISCUSSION RIGHT THERE

 

but this is the way I see it, MAKES NO DIFFERENCE HOW ANY OF US “SEE IT” AS LONG AS THERE IS A RULE SET.

 

 yes she did sweep herself but the gun was unloaded and no harm could have been done. HOW DO YOU KNOW THE GUN WAS UNLOADED? ALL GUNS SHOULD BE TREATED AS IF THEY ARE LOADED. I HAVE SEEN A SHOOTER UNBAG A GUN AT THE SAFE TABLE AND PULL THE TRIGGER AND FIRE A ROUND.

 

I think the RO should have stopped her conformed the gun was unloaded

WHY? YOU SAY IT WAS UNLOADED LIKE ITS A FACTUAL STATEMENT SO THERE IS NO NEED TO CHECK IT RIGHT?

 

gave her a warning and put her on probation.

PLEASE FIND THIS CLAUSE IN THE RULEBOOK.

I’m not being a smart ass but If you are still in doubt do this simple test. Go get one of your guns that you KNOW is unloaded, don’t check it but just pick it up and stick it in your mouth and pull the trigger. I’ll bet you can’t do it.

  Even if I pick up a gun and clear it a dozen times I still can’t imagine pointing it at myself on purpose. 

[3gunDQ]

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

I’m not being a smart ass

 

...rrrrrriiiiiiiggggghhhhhttttt

[blacklab]

5 hours ago, Sarge said:

 Even if I pick up a gun and clear it a dozen times I still can’t imagine pointing it at myself on purpose

So you never had your muzzle sweep any part of your body? Ever? Not when putting it in a safe or taking it out of a safe? Never when getting ready to clean it or putting it in your bag? Never during dryfire practice had a momentary laps and muzzeled a leg or hand? If that's the case we should all bow to your greatness. But I really doubt that you can honestly say you never muzzeled yourself in some way. I also don't think she did it on purpose.

 

5 hours ago, Sarge said:

PLEASE FIND THIS CLAUSE IN THE RULEBOOK.

Its not in the rule book, just saying a DQ seems a little harsh for that situation.

[teros135]

14 minutes ago, blacklab said:

So you never had your muzzle sweep any part of your body? Ever? Not when putting it in a safe or taking it out of a safe? Never when getting ready to clean it or putting it in your bag? Never during dryfire practice had a momentary laps and muzzeled a leg or hand? If that's the case we should all bow to your greatness. But I really doubt that you can honestly say you never muzzeled yourself in some way. I also don't think she did it on purpose.

 

Its not in the rule book, just saying a DQ seems a little harsh for that situation.

 

It's not whether someone has done it before (hopefully by pure mistake) but whether it's a rule, and a reasonable precaution.  I'm remembering Cooper's four rules.  (And if you're muzzling yourself and don't care, WHY?)

[blacklab]

1 minute ago, teros135 said:

and a reasonable precaution.

Still seems a little harsh for the situation. Some people would say it's unreasonable. Like breaking your childes arm for grabbing a peace of candy. You don't want him to have the candy because it not healthy but breaking his are to make a point is not a reasonable precaution.

 

2 minutes ago, teros135 said:

  (And if you're muzzling yourself and don't care, WHY?)

Who said she didn't care?

[teros135]

You're likening a DQ yo breaking a child's arm?  Seriously? 

[Sarge]

1 minute ago, teros135 said:

You're likening a DQ yo breaking a child's arm?  Seriously? 

 

1 hour ago, blacklab said:

So you never had your muzzle sweep any part of your body? Ever? Not when putting it in a safe or taking it out of a safe? Never when getting ready to clean it or putting it in your bag? Never during dryfire practice had a momentary laps and muzzeled a leg or hand? If that's the case we should all bow to your greatness. But I really doubt that you can honestly say you never muzzeled yourself in some way. I also don't think she did it on purpose.

 

Its not in the rule book, just saying a DQ seems a little harsh for that situation.

I don’t make a habit of pointing guns at my body so it’s quite possible you may have to bow to my greatness but I’m sure at some point it has probably happened so by all means please remain standing.

  But I have never done it in competition or even on a range practicing.

[blacklab]

1 minute ago, teros135 said:

You're likening a DQ yo breaking a child's arm?  Seriously? 

You get my point. Every 22 steel match I’ve ever been at  requires chamber flags for a bagged firearm. So if the slide is back and a  piece of plastic is in the chamber how would  accidentally sweeping your hand while un bagging pose a threat ?  It’s impossible to have an accidental or negligent discharge. Still seems harsh to me. But this is also a Ford/Chevy  argument, it can’t be won.

[blacklab]

7 minutes ago, Sarge said:

 

I don’t make a habit of pointing guns at my body so it’s quite possible you may have to bow to my greatness but I’m sure at some point it has probably happened so by all means please remain standing.

  But I have never done it in competition or even on a range practicing.

So you admit to being human and making mistakes?  Her mistake just happened to be where someone could see it.  There’s no difference then if you sweep your hand at home or at the range with an unloaded firearm with a chamber flag. 

[teros135]

6 minutes ago, blacklab said:

You get my point. Every 22 steel match I’ve ever been at  requires chamber flags for a bagged firearm. So if the slide is back and a  piece of plastic is in the chamber how would  accidentally sweeping your hand while un bagging pose a threat ?  It’s impossible to have an accidental or negligent discharge. Still seems harsh to me. But this is also a Ford/Chevy  argument, it can’t be won.

 

Not Ford/Chevy at all.  Sweep yourself, just sweep away.  You'll get DQd and then complain that it's "not fair" because nobody got hurt.  Enjoy your Blizzard.  

[blacklab]

1 hour ago, teros135 said:

 

Not Ford/Chevy at all.  Sweep yourself, just sweep away.  You'll get DQd and then complain that it's "not fair" because nobody got hurt.  Enjoy your Blizzard.  

Who said I’d complain? I play by the rules even if I don’t agree with them. I just think the punishment didn’t fit the crime in this particular case. I would suggest you never go to a trap or sporting clay event. Your head would explode when you see the way people carry their shotguns.

Edited August 30, 2018 by blacklab

[Sarge]

2 hours ago, blacklab said:

So you admit to being human and making mistakes?  Her mistake just happened to be where someone could see it.  There’s no difference then if you sweep your hand at home or at the range with an unloaded firearm with a chamber flag. 

Except it's a DQ offense at a match. At home it's just dumb and dangerous but no DQ.

 

1 hour ago, blacklab said:

Who said I’d complain? I play by the rules even if I don’t agree with them. I just think the punishment didn’t fit the crime in this particular case. I would suggest you never go to a trap or sporting clay event. Your head would explode when you see the way people carry their shotguns.

Been there, done that. Totally different mindset and ruleset. I remember moving though when even a broken open O/U was pointing at my legs. The few guys running autoloaders were generally pretty good at keeping muzzles out of peoples faces. But that was 20 years ago or so. Maybe it's different these days but a muzzle should never cover anything you don't want destroyed.

[Sarge]

I still contend it goes back to rules redundancy. If you don't point a gun at somebody it's impossible to shoot them if your finger finds it's way to the trigger of a gun that is not as unloaded as you thought and it goes bang. It would take three huge mistakes in that case to shoot yourself or somebody: Sweeping, finger on trigger, loaded gun. Take any one of those out of the equation and nobody gets hurt. 

  I'm wondering if you might think breaking the 180 isn't as serious if there are no people for miles in the direction the gun pointed. If everybody is on the left side of the bay and a gun breaks the 180 towards the empty side is that less serious than breaking it towards the shooters? One side gets a stern warning and "probation" and the other is a DQ? Of course not. 

Edited August 30, 2018 by Sarge

[blacklab]

42 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Totally different mindset and ruleset.

So an unloaded gun is safer at a trap meet then at a USPSA shoot or steel match because the rulebook says so? 

[Sarge]

11 minutes ago, blacklab said:

So an unloaded gun is safer at a trap meet then at a USPSA shoot or steel match because the rulebook says so? 

Your entire first post in this thread was about Steel challenge rules. You barely mentioned safety. Now it's all about what's safe and not as much about rules? When I'm at a USPSA match and somebody sweeps their hand I don't wonder what a skeet shooter would think before issuing a DQ.

[blacklab]

5 minutes ago, Sarge said:

You barely mentioned safety

Sorry dude, read the first post again. I did talk about safety and about rules. I think some rules are taken too far and should probably be changed. Is sweeping yourself with any firearm stupid? Yes it is. Dangerous? Maybe not. When a firearm is unloaded and with a chamber flag and you accidentally sweep your hand while un bagging it, I don't feel a DQ is appropriate. It's impossible for anyone to get hurt unless you drop the firearm on your fingers. However if the person continues to show poor handling then they need to go home and work on proper firearm handling and should get a DQ. But one small mistake that couldn't harm anyone shouldn't end someone's day. Like I said though its a Ford/Chevy argument. I'm not going to see your point of view and your not going to see mine.

[DKorn]

I hate to admit this, but I agree with Sarge. Just kidding, I’ve shot with him many times and he’s a very reasonable range official and great squadmate. 

 

As Range Officers, a large part of our job is to make calls per the rules. If the people who wrote wanted there to be exceptions, they would have written them into the rules. This is supported by the fact that these exceptions exist- for example, dropping a gun is a DQ, unless it’s outside of the course of fire.

 

If someone violates a rule and the penalty per the rulebook is a DQ, then there is no room for judgement or warnings. 

 

How would you feel if someone violates a rule, and you let them off with a warning, and then later that day they cause injury to themselves or someone else?

 

Warnings make sense when someone comes close to violating a rule, or when you think someone may have done something but aren’t sure enough to make a call (“It looked like your finger might’ve been in the trigger guard while you were moving but I’m not 100% sure. If your finger is in the trigger guard and the RO sees it you’ll get DQ’d. You might want to be more careful.”). When someone has actually violated a rule, the time for warnings has passed, and all you can/should do is apply the proper penalty per the rules.