POLL for Match Directors ONLY - Loaded/Off-Safe Abandonment

[StealthyBlagga]

This is a poll for MDs only. Please don't respond to the poll unless you are a Match Director of a 3-Gun/Multigun match (either a major or a club match).

 

Historically, abandoning a firearm in the stipulated location but loaded and off-safe has resulted in a match disqualification. However, in recent years some matches have been reducing the penalty for this infraction. JJ Johnson at RM3G was a prominent early proponent of this approach, and now both USPSA and UML stipulate a +30-second procedural penalty.

 

This thread is NOT intended to rehash the pros and cons of this change, so please don't derail the discussion.

 

In this thread, I want to hear from MATCH DIRECTORS on how they treat this infraction today. Those who changed their match rules to reduce the penalty from a match DQ to something less, have you noticed any change in frequency of this infraction? Please share your experiences.

 

Thanks in advance for your responses.

Edited September 2, 2018 by StealthyBlagga

[Benelli Chick]

Sorry! I must disagree with calling a gun pointed in a safe direction(at the ground which you would be willing to destroy), with finger off the trigger,  and no one touching it, unsafe...is NOT an unsafe gun. It is a gun with the safety not on.

It follows all the NRA rules for safe gun handling.

We can indeed argue Glocks versus 1911's etc, but as you are assuming a gun without the external safety applied is unsafe, I cannot answer the questions...as it is a safe gun...just did not follow all safety oriented procedures.

We DQ people for unsafe gun abandonment...gun pointed in an unsafe direction...not in the provided receptacle etc.

And NO, we have not seen a rise in guns left in barrels or buckets not on safe. It is very rare...I believe 3 penalties for a gun not on safe has been the most at our matches over the last 8 years or so. Some years, we have had one or none.

 

[RiggerJJ]

Richard,

Your terms are a bit skewed. Unsafe abandonment would mean that for some reason the gun is not safe in it's abandoned condition. For example, not placed in the proper receptical, or placed in some way that it's pointing toward someone or where they will be later in the stage.

 

The gun that is abandon properly but loaded and not on safe is not an unsafe abandonment, it's just what it is; a loaded gun abandon but not on safe. 

 

Said another way, not having the safety switch in the safe position is not an unsafe abandonment if the gun is otherwise properly abandoned

jj

 

Eta; a properly abandon gun with empty chamber empty mag inserted is also not an unsafe gun. It has no ammo...not a DQ or penalty.

Edited September 2, 2018 by RiggerJJ

[AFH]

At the matches I have run, the procedural penalty is 20 seconds, and I can't remember hearing about an occurrence in the last 3 or 4 years.  However. it could have happened and discussion of the incident didn't make it to me. 

[StealthyBlagga]

Denise/JJ: The phrase "unsafe abandonment" is used here simply as a concise way of describing the phenomenon. IMA-SMM3G rules call it "unsafe abandonment" (rule 2.4.3). UML rules call it "firearm not abandoned safely" (rule 9.2.8.). RM3G rules appear to call it "unsafe gun handling" (rules 1k and 2f) but, as you don't DQ folks for it, perhaps you now call it something else. I guess I could have called it "off-safe abandonment", but that is not accurate either because off-safe is OK if the gun is empty. If you have a different term of art you think would be more appropriate, let me know and I will happily change the thread/poll title.

 

In any case, I would rather this thread didn't devolve into a discussion about whether this infraction is worthy of a DQ - there have been many other threads here and elsewhere arguing this question over the years. Instead, I am simply trying to tap into the collective experience of MDs across the nation as to the impact of this changing paradigm 

Edited September 2, 2018 by StealthyBlagga

[RiggerJJ]

"loaded gun abandoned not on safe"

 

I guess you can refuse to discuss it, but with the poll written like it is, it cannot be answered properly because of reasons noted above.

[Benelli Chick]

So I answered your questions just not within the "survey" as using the term "unsafe" for a gun abandoned following all the NRA safety rules, just without it's external safety engaged is an inherently biased question. 

THAT is NOT unsafe gun handling...that term is used for, but not limited to cranking a round off when loading, unloading...not pointing down range, breaking the safety lines, abandoning a gun in an unsafe direction...

If you're calling a gun that's not "on safe" unsafe, then how do you fire the dang thing safely??

 

WE DQ people for unsafe gun handling. Abandoning a gun in a safe manner without the external safety engaged is not unsafe. IT is incorrect abandonment procedure.

 

And again, NO, we have NOT seen an increased incidence.

[StealthyBlagga]

7 minutes ago, RiggerJJ said:

"loaded gun abandoned not on safe"

 

I guess you can refuse to discuss it, but with the poll written like it is, it cannot be answered properly because of reasons noted above.

 

OK, that is fair. I have edited the thread title and poll question per your suggestion.

 

It is not a question of "refusing to discuss" - it's just that this question has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, and I am not optimistic that rehashing those same arguments is terribly productive. If MDs feel it would be helpful to expand on their experiences before vs. after making this rules change, then it would be great to hear their perspective. However, I really want to get quantitative data too, so please be sure to vote in the poll.

[StealthyBlagga]

7 minutes ago, Benelli Chick said:

So I answered your questions just not within the "survey" as using the term "unsafe" for a gun abandoned following all the NRA safety rules, just without it's external safety engaged is an inherently biased question. 

THAT is NOT unsafe gun handling...that term is used for, but not limited to cranking a round off when loading, unloading...not pointing down range, breaking the safety lines, abandoning a gun in an unsafe direction...

If you're calling a gun that's not "on safe" unsafe, then how do you fire the dang thing safely??

 

WE DQ people for unsafe gun handling. Abandoning a gun in a safe manner without the external safety engaged is not unsafe. IT is incorrect abandonment procedure.

 

And again, NO, we have NOT seen an increased incidence.

 

OK, thanks for clarifying RM3G rules, and for confirming no increase in incidence. Did you respond to the poll?

[Darqusoull13]

I like the discussion. Layered safety is the important concept in preventing accidents in my opinion. By requiring shooters abandon firearms with a safety engaged, we add another layer of safety and reduce the possibility of an issue.

 

The receptacle used to receive the abandoned firearm is extremely important. The MGM style gun drop box, a small bucket with a piece of plywood at a ~30 degree angle for pistol, or a trash can properly staked down all keep the muzzle pointed in a SAFE direction by limiting the orientation of the firearm. Keeping abandoned guns pointed into the ground and away from shooters ensures there is no one in front of the muzzle when guns are abandoned and the only place for a round to go is into the dirt. 

IF a shooter dumps a shotgun or rifle into the barrel and it stays in the barrel but is loaded OFF safe, that first layer of safety is no longer present. The firearm is still pointed in a safe direction and the shooter did not AD. However, I think the increased time penalty reminds the shooter of the importance of taking 1 additional second to ensure they are safe. At the same time, I want to be sure folks are having fun and come back to shoot. Shooters consciously thinking safety is a good thing in my opinion. At the same time, having your safety bonked off on a barrel is a pretty s#!tty way to leave a match.

[kurtm]

Might I ask J.J., and Denise, if the gun isn't "unsafe" why is the penalty at your matches "enhanced" to 30 seconds, Instead of just a regular procedural???? Is it to keep this "safe event" from happening, or is it really that much bigger of a "safety problem" that it must be punished more Sevierly???

Note: I didn't say whether I agreed or not, I just want to know the thinking that makes it a bigger penalty.

 

BTW Richard, I replied and I seem to be the only one doing what I do......go figure.

[Benelli Chick]

36 minutes ago, kurtm said:

Might I ask J.J., and Denise, if the gun isn't "unsafe" why is the penalty at your matches "enhanced" to 30 seconds, Instead of just a regular procedural???? Is it to keep this "safe event" from happening, or is it really that much bigger of a "safety problem" that it must be punished more Sevierly???

Note: I didn't say whether I agreed or not, I just want to know the thinking that makes it a bigger penalty.

 

BTW Richard, I replied and I seem to be the only one doing what I do......go figure.

Because it is tangentially safety...in other words, a procedure to abandon gun safely...we apply a higher procedural in order to keep that extra layer of safety there. People will continue to take the time to put the safety on if it's a 30 second procedural, while 5 seconds...you've shot the no-shoot (5 second penalty) and sometimes, by getting 2 targets at once, you may feel it's a win. A 30 second penalty is never a win!

LAYERS works...but a gun pointed at the ground, loaded, not on safe and not being touched isn't unsafe. But, it's against the rules and is penalized thusly! (Apparently, that's not how you spell thusly!)

 

The reason we want you to put the safety on...if you have an external safety...is that you are less likely to crank one off when getting it out of the bucket or barrel, or putting it in..etc...layers. However, if you do crank one off, you do get DQ'd for unsafe gun handling. So, putting on the safety can help the shooter out as well.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Benelli Chick

[louu]

You're probably not going to get many votes because the questions in the poll are rigged. There is no need for me to answer the second question because I have not done that and it won't let me only answer the first question. The answer to your first question is it is a match DQ. People often forget that these are real guns. I work way too hard putting on the match and I'm not going to let some reckless shooter ruin it for me, the club and the safe shooters by having an accident.

 

If a shooter has a problem with my rules they don't have to shoot the match. 

[StealthyBlagga]

6 hours ago, louu said:

You're probably not going to get many votes because the questions in the poll are rigged. There is no need for me to answer the second question because I have not done that and it won't let me only answer the first question. The answer to your first question is it is a match DQ. People often forget that these are real guns. I work way too hard putting on the match and I'm not going to let some reckless shooter ruin it for me, the club and the safe shooters by having an accident.

 

If a shooter has a problem with my rules they don't have to shoot the match. 

 

Sorry, I didn't realize that was a limitation. Not to worry, I will consider your written response a +1 for Match DQ. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

[LoganbillJ]

We run a 60 second penalty for a firearm abandoned off safe. Its a steep enough penalty to encourage people not to do it and at the same time won't send you home.

[Hi-Power Jack]

1 hour ago, LoganbillJ said:

We run a 60 second penalty for a firearm abandoned off safe. Its a steep enough penalty to encourage people not to do it and at the same time won't send you home.

 

[ziebart]

Safety is a belt and suspenders approach. If a gun on safe falls out of a bucket then there is LESS risk of ND. Note I say less because it is still mechanical and could fail. If we didn't require them to be on safe then the number of guns abandoned off safe would increase. The probability of falling out is still the same so the danger is increased.

 

I don't know if the numbers increased or not. Does USPSA have records of why someone was DQ'd at each match? Do they record these enhanced penalties? Does anyone in a database? I feel like they have increased, but I don't know if it has, and if so by how much. It would also be interesting to compare them across matches to see if equipment choice played a role. For example did the growth of 2011's in multigun change the numbers vs Glocks? 

Anecdotes: A person on our squad at USPSA MG nats this year got 2 safety penalties when using a borrowed 2011. The number of guns off safe would have been halved if they would have been DQ'd on the first one. Last year there at SMM3G was one person that felt their SG safety was bumped off after dumping it due to the cutouts in the dump bucket. Not sure what actually happened as I wasn't there, but this is to show that not all of them are from pistols, and could potentially be due to dump buckets. Nothing is perfect and people always seem to find out how it was their fault.

Dropping guns in buckets goes back a ways https://youtu.be/x5UX9SaB1nI?t=40 . I tried to find the video of when people just put the guns on the ground instead of in buckets, but couldn't find it.

 

[buzzworm]

30 seconds, and no increase in how often.