Loaded/unloaded Gun On Table Starts

[SteveZ]

This is actually two questions

Q1) At a recent match, a stage's start description was "loaded gun on table....hands relaxed at sides" with the shooter standing behind the table. One of the more creative shooters decided to try and prop his gun up using a spare magazine (which he didn't use for the COF). While something didn't seem "right" about doing so, we couldn't find anything in the rule book that prohibits a shooter from using it. We bucked the question up to the MD who ruled that the gun must be laying flat (and then changed the written stage description....but who knows if anyone else previously tried this trick). So what rule (if any) prevents a shooter from using a spare magazine (or a roll of tape, brick, rock, block of wood, etc) from proping a gun up on the start signal?

Q2) Unloaded gun starts. We've had a few stages in the NWS that describe "unloaded gun on table" starts. We've also had a few "seasoned" shooters around here strongly claim that "unloaded gun" ALWAYS means slide forward, hammer down gun laying flat on table because "thats the way we've always done it". Again, I can't find anything in the rule book that implies that "unloaded" gun would mean that the slide is forward and the hammer is down or the gun is flat on the table. I've also seen many shooters attempt to position their "unloaded" gun on the table using the magwell and the guide rod as contact points when the COF doesn't specify laying flat on table.

[TDean]

...good questons.

[bgary]

If the course designer wants specific conditions, they should write those into the course description.

If the things aren't written in the course description, then (IMHO) the course designer's "intent" is not binding on the shooter.

One of the basic tenets of our game is "freestyle" - i.e., you figure out how to solve the problem. We aren't supposed to have to guess at what the course designer's idea of "the problem" was, we're supposed to be governed by the boundaries set forth - in writing - in the rulebook and course description.

The rules *do* say that the written stage briefing has to be posted, has to contain certain info (including the handgun ready condition and the start position), and takes precedence over "any course of fire information published or otherwise communicated to competitors in advance of the match." So... if somebody told somebody that the gun has to be a certain way, but it doesn't say that in the written stage briefing.... the written stage briefing takes precedence.

If the designer really wants autos to start "slide forward, hammer down on an empty chamber, gun laying flat on the table, unsupported by magazines, props or other artificial means".... how difficult would it be to add those words to the description of the start position?

Bruce

[TDean]

I was hoping there was a rule (I can't find it) that would prohibit a shooter from using a roll of tape or used target to support his gun at the start.

If the course description say nothing about the gun being "unsupported" then where do we draw the line on what support devices are allowed?

I was thinking that if a shooter introduces a supporting device (prop) into a COF (other than gun and allied equipment) they've changed the COF.

[folsoml]

I couldn't find anything in the rule book either, except that the ready condition is what we are all used to: Loaded, safety applied, holstered, etc. Rule 8.1.3 covers anything they want to do other than that. It reads:

"8.1.3 Courses of fire may require ready conditions which are different

to those stated above. In such cases, the required ready condition

must be clearly stated in the written stage briefing."

So basically, propping can be allowed or disallowed if it says so in the briefing. The same with the condition of a gun that will be unloaded at the start signal.

[Jim Norman]

In answer (maybe) to your questions:

Q1, IF the gun is to lie flat, then it must be so stated in the Written Stage Brief (WSB). If you don't write it down it doesn't happen.

Q2, An unloaded gun, if no other information is given is simply that, a gun with no ammunition in it. In fact, if this were not a USPSA match, but rather "Real Life" You could argue that a 1911 in Condition three, that is loaded mag inserted, hammer down on an EMPTY chamber. However, I digress. Generally again, unless otherwise stated in the WSB, an Empty Gun is simply an EMPTY GUN. You can start, slide back, slide forward, hammer back or hammer down, you choice, there is no "We always do it this way" rule.

That having been said, at a local match there are two ways to play the game. As intended by the designer and according to "local Custom" or "By the book" The first while technically not correct, will probably win you more friends. Just remember which rules are being bent slightly and which aren't, otherwise you may find yourself at a disadvantage at a larger match.

Jim Norman

[bgary]

4.5 "feels" like it covers it, but it is not specific enough to apply, IMO.

I generally feel that it is incumbent on the course designer to be specific.

I do feel, however, that if someone starts bringing out stuff to prop their gun on (i.e., leaning their gun on a roll of tape or whatever), it would be valid to argue that the gun is no longer "laying on the table" - it is laying on a roll of tape.

All of that gets into gray areas. I've seen the IPSC (international) guys try to write a rule that said (for example) that three points of the gun, including at least one point on the *side* of the slide, has to be touching the table to qualify as a valid start position, yada, yada, yada. All of those approaches have problems. What if my Aimpoint knob sticks out far enough that the three points of contact are the bottom of the mag, the left-side of my ambi-safety, and the knob. Is my gun now "not laying on the table?" Do I have to take gear off my gun to make it comply (don't laugh, that has been suggested).

Bottom line for me is, make the course description specific. If you don't want people using "stuff" to prop up their guns, then say so.

Bruce

[Nik Habicht]

I was hoping there was a rule (I can't find it) that would prohibit a shooter from using a roll of tape or used target to support his gun at the start.

If the course description say nothing about the gun being "unsupported" then where do we draw the line on what support devices are allowed?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There is a rule: It (properly, in my opinion) puts the burden on the stage designer to be specific, if he wants to force everyone to do something. IMHO, the flexibility that is often offered by USPSA stage is a cool thing ----- if you want to throw a mag to work an activator pad, knock yourself out, as long as the stage description allows it. Want to waste a mag to prop your gun on? Cool with me. Want to start hammer cocked, and slide locked back on an unloaded gun start --- also cool. Want to start the same way when the course description reads: Unloaded, slide forward, hammer down, trigger guard over X on table --- not cool.....

[TDean]

I love the freestyle aspect of our sport. But again where do we draw the line on what device we can use for support?

A mag is part of our equipment and the rules say if you're going to use it to shoot with, it needs to start on your belt.

What about a rock on the ground? Is that part of our equipment?

If a shooter uses a rock does that mean he must carry that rock around with him/herself for the duration of the match?

[Flexmoney]

Q1) The shooter can't change the course of fire. No moving around or adding bricks, rocks, or other such things.

Q2a) "That's the way we have always done it"...nope, no dice. Write it into the stage description, or expect the shooters to come up with a different way.

Q2b) If the stage description doesn't specific "flat", there is no problem with the method you decribed.

[SteveZ]

What about a rock on the ground?  Is that part of our equipment?

If a shooter uses a rock does that mean he must carry that rock around with him/herself for the duration of the match?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On a similar but different note....at Area 1 during the "hot potato" stage, one of the more creative shooters went out and bought a certain article of womens undergarmet to "carry" the potato during the COF....but didn't use it for the rest of the match. Is that legal? (i.e. was it legal to use it in the first place. If so, should they be required to wear it for the rest of the match?)

[XRe]

Complying with the written course description is the shooter's problem. Failure to do so results in procedural penalties, etc.

Writing a clear, complete, concise course description is the course designers problem. Failure to do so results in shooters solving the problem presented by the course in way unintended by the course designer (aka, rampant gaming). This is not a failure on the part of the shooter, and is generally not unethical or unsportsmanlike. Those who claim it is tend to be too lazy to write good course descriptions or are ignorant of the concept of "freestyle" - or are mad they didn't think of it first. Some course designers take it personally when someone circumvents their "will", too....

1.1.5.1 allows the local course designer to not be fully "freestyle" - but such course descriptions should still be clearly written.

That said - at local matches, I'll sometimes follow the obvious intent of the course designer, simply to make life easy.

[SteveZ]

Q1)  The shooter can't change the course of fire.  No moving around or adding bricks, rocks, or other such things. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think 4.5.1 (or 4.5.2) really addresses that...it discussed "interfering" (which I would interpret that as altering existing stage equipment/props etc). I don't see that addressing "adding" things to a COF.

[bgary]

Is that legal? (i.e. was it legal to use it in the first place. If so, should they be required to wear it for the rest of the match?)

I've been involved in writing, reviewing and modifying the rules for several years, and I'm not sure I could meaningfully codify (without unintended consequences) the difference between what he did, and the people who chose to wear their jackets on that stage (partially unzipped), and stuffed the "potato" down the front of their jacket. Should they have been forced to wear their jacket for the rest of the match? What if they had been wearing a shirt with a big pocket - should they have to wear *that* shirt for the rest of the match?

The bottom line is, the shooter complied with the course description and "carried" the "hot potato". The course description did not say he had to keep it in his hand, it did not preclude stuffing it into an article of clothing. I say... hats off to him for the way he "solved the problem" - I know *I* wouldn't have done it that way. ;-)

Bruce

[SteveZ]

I say... hats off to him for the way he "solved the problem" - I know *I* wouldn't have done it that way.  ;-)

Bruce

..... I'm just happy I WASN'T there to see it! EEEEEW!

[TDean]

If I'm allowed to use a spare magazine to prop my gun at the start because the stage description doesn't say I can't, then can I, during my walkthrough, position more spare magazines around the COF at the sweet spots where I need to stop?

I see these as the same. Introducing non-shooting-related props into a COF and altering the stage design.

[EricW]

What about a rock on the ground?  Is that part of our equipment?

If a shooter uses a rock does that mean he must carry that rock around with him/herself for the duration of the match?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On a similar but different note....at Area 1 during the "hot potato" stage, one of the more creative shooters went out and bought a certain article of womens undergarmet to "carry" the potato during the COF....but didn't use it for the rest of the match. Is that legal? (i.e. was it legal to use it in the first place. If so, should they be required to wear it for the rest of the match?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dear Mr. Gary,

I would like to propose an amendment to the Rulebook:

5.3 Appropriate Dress

...

5.3.2 Competitors who choose to wear a brassiere externally during a COF shall be required to wear said brassiere for the entirety of the match, at the closing cerimonies, and at the bar afterwards. Exterior wearing of said female undergarment shall automatically constitute consent to waive all rights with regards to photo and video publication. This provision shall also include the wearing of any other female undergarments externally to the competitor's clothing, including, but not limited to: panties, thongs, garters, corsets, and fishnet stockings.

[lynn jones]

remember, the potato goes in the front.

[folsoml]

What about a rock on the ground?  Is that part of our equipment?

If a shooter uses a rock does that mean he must carry that rock around with him/herself for the duration of the match?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On a similar but different note....at Area 1 during the "hot potato" stage, one of the more creative shooters went out and bought a certain article of womens undergarmet to "carry" the potato during the COF....but didn't use it for the rest of the match. Is that legal? (i.e. was it legal to use it in the first place. If so, should they be required to wear it for the rest of the match?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dear Mr. Gary,

I would like to propose an amendment to the Rulebook:

5.3 Appropriate Dress

...

5.3.2 Competitors who choose to wear a brassiere externally during a COF shall be required to wear said brassiere for the entirety of the match, at the closing cerimonies, and at the bar afterwards. Exterior wearing of said female undergarment shall automatically constitute consent to waive all rights with regards to photo and video publication. This provision shall also include the wearing of any other female undergarments externally to the competitor's clothing, including, but not limited to: panties, thongs, garters, corsets, and fishnet stockings.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

All in favor say "aye"

[mike4045]

We try to add specifics in the write up for the stages. Unoaded means just that. If we intend to be unloaded we will add slide forward anad hammer down, mags on belt. Gets rid of a lot of isssues. We run into this at our club matches. For this reason I am puttinga slide racker on my open gun. So I will have a prop.

Interesting idea on the bra thing. Should of had him wear it the entire match.

[bgary]

Dear Mr. Gary,

I would like to propose an amendment to the Rulebook:

5.3 Appropriate Dress

I'm fine with having the MD be the arbiter of what is (or is not) appropriate.

Now, you'll have to excuse me while I go try claw out of my brain the mental images of some of those shooters in thongs and thigh-highs.

B

[n2ipsc]

Dear Mr. Gary,

I would like to propose an amendment to the Rulebook:

5.3 Appropriate Dress

I'm fine with having the MD be the arbiter of what is (or is not) appropriate.

Now, you'll have to excuse me while I go try claw out of my brain the mental images of some of those shooters in thongs and thigh-highs.

B

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ummmm - Area Directors shall shoot the match wearing...?

[bgary]

Ummmm - Area Directors shall shoot the match wearing...?

Careful, sport. I *can* write rules about what an RM has to wear. Troy has already set precedent with the use of a kilt at Nationals

[Jim Norman]

I am so happy that I shoot USPSA matches rather than IPSC.

We have declared in this thread that the Course of Fire is "FREESTYLE" and that this term applies equally to the interpretation of the start condition. There are those that would remove the freedom to game the start from our sport. I personally like seeing people overgame and screw them selves up. Adds to the fun of a match.

On a lighter note, there are precious few people in this spot that I would appreciate seeing in a thong, bra or thigh highs. In fact, the meer though of certain people so attired could cause me to shudder so much as to Zero a stage.

Jim (Tastefully attired in shorts and "t-shirt") Norman

[chuckw]

I am so happy that I shoot USPSA matches rather than IPSC.

I'm pretty sure IPSC is happy about that too!

At the IPSC forum, some one suggested the briefing could say "the start position will be demonstrated by the range officer". Hard to argue with that one.