Local rules v. USPSA

[Joe4d]

shot fired in unsafe direction isnt a DQ. 
That rule talks about accidental discharges and even specifically says the DQ doesnt apply if you are shooting at a target.
If a club wants to keep people from shooting the sidewalls, they need to make targets not visible  at an angle that would hit sidewall.

[IHAVEGAS]

18 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

If a club wants to keep people from shooting the sidewalls, they need to make targets not visible  at an angle that would hit sidewall.

 

If you're happy with basically 6 versions of El Presidente then that would work. 

[waktasz]

You can definitely do it. Our outdoor range has 3 bays with cement walls on the outside. It's a lot more effort and requires more props at a quick indoor match to set it up that way though

[perttime]

51 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

shot fired in unsafe direction isnt a DQ. 
...

Yes it is, unless it happened while shooting at a target.

The rule:

10.4 Match Disqualification – Accidental Discharge

A competitor who causes an accidental discharge must be stopped by a Range Officer as soon as possible. An accidental discharge is defined as follows:

10.4.1 A shot, which travels over a backstop, a berm or in any other direction, specified in the written stage briefing by the match organizers as being unsafe. Note that a competitor who legitimately fires a shot at a target, which then travels in an unsafe direction, will not be disqualified (the provisions of Section 2.3 may apply).

 

Obviously, stage designers and builders must do their jobs so that shots at targets will not hit unsafe areas. Then they can write in the WSB that any hits in (unsafe areas) are deemed as unsafe and will result in DQ. Nothing theoretical about that either. It can and should be done if you don't want hits on walls or other structures.

 

--------

Elsewhere, I had an argument about IPSC rules concerning a hit in the ceiling.

- My view: WSB didn't specifically list the ceiling as an unsafe area. The bullet didn't travel over a backstop or berm, because the ceiling stopped it: no DQ

- Majority view: The bullet would have traveled over a backstop or berm if the ceiling hadn't been there: DQ.

 

Edited July 28, 2019 by perttime

[Joe4d]

38 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

If you're happy with basically 6 versions of El Presidente then that would work. 

that or have a bit of imagination.
Used to set up a 5 stage IDPA match in an indoor bay,, Seemed to work out fine.
Far as the unsafe direction pretty much what I said.
You are quoting a subsection of AD rules and trying to apply a Non AD situation to it.
If I am shooting at a target, its NOT an AD,,, and your AD DQ doesnt apply.

Edited July 28, 2019 by Joe4d

[IHAVEGAS]

45 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

that or have a bit of imagination.
Used to set up a 5 stage IDPA match in an indoor bay,, Seemed to work out fine.
 

 

Local club does idpa in the walled pistol bays. 

You can have fun, particularly with a 9 target limitation, but it is not like having the freedom to do a 180 degree stage. 

[Joe4d]

True,, but I think folks are ok with that and kinda expect it from an indoor match.
While we didnt like people shooting walls. It rarely happened, I dont recall it ever being an issue during a match and wasnt even mentioned in the briefing.  Was all about using bullet traps and stage design...

[shred]

The 'No local rules' rule works both ways.  One BOC-owned club I know of wanted to impose a ton of stupid 'safety' rules on the USPSA club that wanted to shoot there.

 

After being told they couldn't do that per the USPSA rules, it turned out they wanted the USPSA match money just a bit more than they wanted their stupid rules, but it was a close call. 

 

If that goes away we'll need separate rulebooks per range...

 

 

[MikeBurgess]

Looking at IPSC stages I see most of them now contain a extra line in the WSB defining "Safe Angles"  I know its horrible to consider but I think something like this could help get us more ranges to host matches. One of our local clubs lost USPSA because of a no muzzle over the berm rule, I would be willing to add a line to the WSB defining "Safe Angles" in exchange for more places to shoot. 

 

 

[Sarge]

17 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

Looking at IPSC stages I see most of them now contain a extra line in the WSB defining "Safe Angles"  I know its horrible to consider but I think something like this could help get us more ranges to host matches. One of our local clubs lost USPSA because of a no muzzle over the berm rule, I would be willing to add a line to the WSB defining "Safe Angles" in exchange for more places to shoot. 

 

 

Unless the area is starved for uspsa matches there is no way I would shoot anywhere that did not allow muzzle over berm. It's just too ingrained of a technique to shut it off for one club.

 

Just remembered a thread from many years ago. Somewhere overseas held a major IPSC match and had flags up on the berm that were DQ limits. They were well forward of the 180 line. I think IPSC is just a little too quick to make these kinds of changes.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Sarge

[Whitefish]

10 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

One of our local clubs lost USPSA because of a no muzzle over the berm rule, I would be willing to add a line to the WSB defining "Safe Angles" in exchange for more places to shoot. 

And the club deserved to lose the USPSA sanction of the matches for this local rule. Note that this club has continued to run "practical" pistol matches using mostly USPSA rules and targets, save for the no muzzle over the berm, which has caused many shooters to not even bother going there anymore. It is very difficult to shoot and reload with that rule at the one club and then shoot without it at the other clubs. It all depends on the RO whether you get a warning or a DQ for the offense, so not consistent. Oh, and the no muzzle over the berm has been deemed to not apply to revolvers when reloading, so even that rule application is inconsistent. In my opinion, it is a slippery slope with local rules like no muzzle over the berm. I do not think it worth the trade-off to gain this club back, but then once burned, twice shy.

[broadside72]

We don't have an "over berm" rule where I shoot regularly but we prefer that you try to limit your muzzle if you can. Won't get called for it during the CoF but its good for the range if you try to minimize the exposure to NDs/rounds going over the berm into the neighboring properties. We would like the range to continue to operate.

 

Actual NDs or other unsafe shooting angles that result in ricochet going over will be addressed per the rules.

[IHAVEGAS]

4 hours ago, Sarge said:

Unless the area is starved for uspsa matches there is no way I would shoot anywhere that did not allow muzzle over berm. It's just too ingrained of a technique to shut it off for one club.

 

It would be interesting to see how opinions break down. Muzzle limits wouldn't bother me, particularly because there are other existing USPSA rules I just roll with because that is the way it is. 

[motosapiens]

7 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

It would be interesting to see how opinions break down. Muzzle limits wouldn't bother me, particularly because there are other existing USPSA rules I just roll with because that is the way it is. 

 

my issue with muzzle limits is it's going to be very very difficult to enforce equitably, and when an RO calls a DQ, there's not a whole lot you can do about it, similar to a 180 call, except worse. You just have to take his word for it. With a good RO, it's usually right, and it's usually obviously past the limit. With a bad or inexperienced RO.... maybe, maybe not.

 

I think my normal reload keeps the muzzle below the berm (and closer to the target, thus speeding up the whole process), but I have seen plenty of bays with short berms where we have to be careful with target placement to avoid pointing guns over the berm when actually shooting at targets. I would probably not shoot at a club with such a rule unless there was absolutely no other available option.

Edited July 30, 2019 by motosapiens

[IHAVEGAS]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

my issue with muzzle limits is it's going to be very very difficult to enforce equitably, and when an RO calls a DQ, there's not a whole lot you can do about it, similar to a 180 call, except worse.

 

Agreed. Gut feel is that it would be like a finger on the trigger call, most times you get by with it because it is hard to be 100% certain.

On 180's it seems like the longer you r.o. the more you learn to be very sure, in real time if nobody in the cheap seats ever tells you that you missed a call then you are probably not giving the shooter the full 180 that he owns. 

[Joe4d]

5 hours ago, broadside72 said:

We don't have an "over berm" rule where I shoot regularly but we prefer that you try to limit your muzzle if you can. Won't get called for it during the CoF but its good for the range if you try to minimize the exposure to NDs/rounds going over the berm into the neighboring properties. We would like the range to continue to operate.

 

Actual NDs or other unsafe shooting angles that result in ricochet going over will be addressed per the rules.

Maybe said ranges needs to take some of the money they are collecting in fees and use it to build higher berms, or overhead bullet traps.
Some ranges simply arnt suitable for anything but controlled aimed fire. Nothing wrong with that. MY private range is that way at the moment.
 But if they decide they want the income exposure and draw of action pistol matches. They need to accommodate the sport. NOT expect the sport to accommodate their range.

[broadside72]

Maybe said ranges needs to take some of the money they are collecting in fees and use it to build higher berms, or overhead bullet traps.
Some ranges simply arnt suitable for anything but controlled aimed fire. Nothing wrong with that. MY private range is that way at the moment.
 But if they decide they want the income exposure and draw of action pistol matches. They need to accommodate the sport. NOT expect the sport to accommodate their range.

Agreed. The range I was talking about has high berms but some people still get very exaggerated reloading. Mostly newer shooters though

[shred]

Plus "fishing" draws, which most of the 'Don't ever point the muzzle over the berm' crowd seems to do all the time.

 

 

 

[Kraj]

If you advertise your match as a uspsa match and you try to dq me for muzzle over the berm during a reload, I would like my money back. If you want to run a special match with your special rules let people know in advance so they don't bother to show up. 

[Zincwarrior]

edited: not helpful

Edited July 31, 2019 by Zincwarrior
not helpful

[perttime]

On 7/30/2019 at 6:07 PM, Sarge said:

....

Just remembered a thread from many years ago. Somewhere overseas held a major IPSC match and had flags up on the berm that were DQ limits. They were well forward of the 180 line. I think IPSC is just a little too quick to make these kinds of changes.

 

We do that all the time at Level 2 IPSC Matches. That allows us to put more stages into the available range facilities. People don't seem to have trouble with those stages.

I've also shot an IPSC stage where the marked "safe angles" allowed way more than 180. Worked just fine (except I forgot to engage 3 targets).

[IHAVEGAS]

5 hours ago, perttime said:

 

We do that all the time at Level 2 IPSC Matches. That allows us to put more stages into the available range facilities. People don't seem to have trouble with those stages.

I've also shot an IPSC stage where the marked "safe angles" allowed way more than 180. Worked just fine (except I forgot to engage 3 targets).

 

I've never seen the tightened safety zones cause IDPA shooters much heartburn. Never shot a match with a broadened 180. 

[RJH]

5 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

 Never shot a match with a broadened 180. 

 

I shot some 3 gun that the 180 was kinda, "don't shoot the RO"  haha

[mreed911]

15 hours ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

I've never seen the tightened safety zones cause IDPA shooters much heartburn. Never shot a match with a broadened 180. 

 

When someone is telling you where to engage targets in which order, it's harder to break the 180. 

[perttime]

1 hour ago, mreed911 said:

 

When someone is telling you where to engage targets in which order, it's harder to break the 180. 

 

Actually designing, building and troubleshooting your stages helps too.