9.1.6 - Shooting through walls/rehoots

[mreed911]

The newest USPSA email had a link to a discussion about walls from NROI.  One thing caught my eye: If a shot goes through a wall and knocks down steel, that's an REF by rule and a required reshoot, including "mesh" walls since they're hardcover by rule.

 

Does that mean a shooter that advances through a stage and decides they've made a mistake can intentionally take a shot on steel through a mesh wall, knock it down, and get an automatic reshoot without penalty?  If you could determine that the shooter did this intentionally, is there another rule that strictly applies to that intentional conduct? 

 

Note: Getting past the "I had a brain fart and was focused on the target, not the wall!" is, for all intents and purposes, outside the scope of this question/discussion.  I'm specifically asking about stopping, taking a two footed position and firing through a mesh wall at steel, or some other clearly intentional variation on that theme.

[barry]

Saw it done on 2 consecutive stages a few years ago at area 8  in va. By someone who is now a well regarded GM. 

[ChuckS]

20 minutes ago, mreed911 said:

--- snip ---  If you could determine that the shooter did this intentionally, is there another rule that strictly applies to that intentional conduct? 

 

Note: Getting past the "I had a brain fart and was focused on the target, not the wall!" is, for all intents and purposes, outside the scope of this question/discussion.  I'm specifically asking about stopping, taking a two footed position and firing through a mesh wall at steel, or some other clearly intentional variation on that theme.

10.6

[nasty618]

10.6.1 Competitors will be disqualified from a match for conduct which a Range Officer deems to be unsportsmanlike

[mreed911]

5 minutes ago, ChuckS said:

10.6

 

2 minutes ago, nasty618 said:

10.6.1 Competitors will be disqualified from a match for conduct which a Range Officer deems to be unsportsmanlike

 

Define "unsportsmanlike."  What the competitor did is within the bounds of the rules as they exist.  And define it in a way that holds up past arbitration.

[nasty618]

Quote

 

Examples of unsportsmanlike conduct include, but are not limited to, cheating, dishonesty, failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official, or any behavior likely to bring the sport into disrepute

 

 

If after watching a competitor shoot steel through a wall you, as the RO/CRO on the stage feel it was intentional, with the sole purpose of getting a reshoot and you further feel it's warranted to apply 10.6.1 ...  you must have observed something that fits somewhere in there.  And if you didnt see any of that - then you give him a reshoot.  

[driver8M3]

32 minutes ago, barry said:

Saw it done on 2 consecutive stages a few years ago at area 8  in va. By someone who is now a well regarded GM. 

Purposefully?

[motosapiens]

I saw what appeared to me to be an intentional through-the-wall shot last weekend. GM, had made several mistakes earlier in the stage, as soon as he holstered his gun he was saying 'i think that's a mandatory reshoot'.  HLe ended up winning the match. 

 

While I would love to see some unsportsmanlike DQ's for this, it can be made less of an issue by using actual steel hardcover, so that the marginal cases can be ruled out. It would be easy to dq someone for shooting through the middle of a wall at a piece of steel, but less easy when their shoot-through is only a couple inches into the hardcover.

[motosapiens]

37 minutes ago, barry said:

Saw it done on 2 consecutive stages a few years ago at area 8  in va. By someone who is now a well regarded GM. 

if it's who I'm thinking of, he's regarded as a bit of a cheater by many folks.

[Joe4d]

Id ask him if he meant to shoot through the wall and hit the steel.
If he/she says yes, Id DQ for 10.6.1
If he  says no, I'd DQ for 10.6.1 for lying.
If he was moving along wall, and he denies shooting at it , could DQ for AD as a shot occurring during movement while not engaging a target.
Dont care if it is slightly within letter of rule, still dishonorable. 
DQ take a hike bud. Arb if you like, by then, shooter may be mind screwed enough to screw up a future stage or two...

Edited August 1, 2019 by Joe4d

[NickBlasta]

It's a judgement call by the RO. If it appears to happen as they are normally engaging steel, it's REF. If they appear to do it intentionally, it could be cheating, which is 10.6.

 

I ran about 10 shooters at Area 1 who hit a popper thru a wall. It was because the wall was partially obscuring the popper to create a lean. They didn't lean far enough. Gave them all reshoots, it was accidental.

 

However, if someone appeared to tank a stage and then sought out a piece of steel they could hit thru a prop, I would seriously consider going with 10.6.

[MikeBurgess]

This is why I do my best to not use walls as down range barriers for targets, if the last edge stopping someone from shooting a target is more than a couple feet (like way less than 8 feet) from the shooting location that wall will get shot/shot through. its bad for both scoring and prop life.  Its pretty easy to tell if someone shoots through a wall 12 inches from their muzzle but 10 yards down range is march harder to see.

Edited August 1, 2019 by MikeBurgess

[DKorn]

If someone does it intentionally for the purposes of getting a reshoot, it’s a DQ for unsportsmanlike conduct under 10.6. It’s the same as intentionally running into an RO in order to get a reshoot for interference. The hard part would be proving it. But that’s the RM’s problem, not mine - if I think someone is trying to cheat to get reshoots, I’m going to call the RM over and let them discuss it with the shooter and make the decision. 

[Gary Stevens]

2 hours ago, DKorn said:

If someone does it intentionally for the purposes of getting a reshoot, it’s a DQ for unsportsmanlike conduct under 10.6. It’s the same as intentionally running into an RO in order to get a reshoot for interference. The hard part would be proving it. But that’s the RM’s problem, not mine - if I think someone is trying to cheat to get reshoots, I’m going to call the RM over and let them discuss it with the shooter and make the decision. 

 

If you make the call it will be n you to justify your call in any arbitration. 

[StealthyBlagga]

The application of 10.6.1 is an RO judgement call based on the totality of the circumstances. The RO needs to be able to articulate to the RM why he made the call. It helps if two or more ROs concur. If it goes to arbitration, it is for the arbitration committee to weigh the ROs observations against the shooters counter-assertions.

Edited August 2, 2019 by StealthyBlagga

[Joe4d]

15 hours ago, NickBlasta said:

It's a judgement call by the RO. If it appears to happen as they are normally engaging steel, it's REF. If they appear to do it intentionally, it could be cheating, which is 10.6.

 

I ran about 10 shooters at Area 1 who hit a popper thru a wall. It was because the wall was partially obscuring the popper to create a lean. They didn't lean far enough. Gave them all reshoots, it was accidental.

 

However, if someone appeared to tank a stage and then sought out a piece of steel they could hit thru a prop, I would seriously consider going with 10.6.

Sounds like a not so good stage design that coulda been fixed with a no shoot. BUT having built and proofed stages, its almost impossible to think of everything. One of those things you just learn from for next time.
But yes. 10.6 would be an RO judgement call, you'd have to take in the entire situation. Need an RO who gathers his thoughts, quotes the rule then sticks to it and not discuss it with the shooter other than informing them they are DQ'd. 
I suspect the type of shooter that would cheat in said manner would also be they type to try to get in your face , have a tantrum, boast about who they are and how long blah blah blah, and try to bully you into changing call or confusing you into saying something they can use in arbitration. Just have to be prepared for it.
 

[RJH]

If you think that a shooter shot through the wall on purpose cuz he had bombed the stage, just say you didn't see him shoot through the wall and score as shot. That's how you fix a cheater

[barry]

23 hours ago, driver8M3 said:

Purposefully?

 

23 hours ago, motosapiens said:

if it's who I'm thinking of, he's regarded as a bit of a cheater by many folks.

 First stage was poorly designed and ro pointed out it had happened already. Shooter tryed to burn it down and had several make up shots then shot last popper thru wall. On reshoot shot more in control .next stage hit a noshoot and later carefully shot popper thru wall. Told ro at end of stage i think i hit popper thru wall. Checked wall,sure enough hit on wall. Reshoot. As a master class shooter myself only thing that would come out of it would be grief if i pushed it. I have no respect for this shooter to this day. I think he won the match or top 3.

 

Do initials  W.D.  fit?

[Joe4d]

6 hours ago, RJH said:

If you think that a shooter shot through the wall on purpose cuz he had bombed the stage, just say you didn't see him shoot through the wall and score as shot. That's how you fix a cheater

Well,  wouldnt work with steel, as its a Range equipment falure if steel falls.

49 minutes ago, barry said:

 

 First stage was poorly designed and ro pointed out it had happened already. Shooter tryed to burn it down and had several make up shots then shot last popper thru wall. On reshoot shot more in control .next stage hit a noshoot and later carefully shot popper thru wall. Told ro at end of stage i think i hit popper thru wall. Checked wall,sure enough hit on wall. Reshoot. As a master class shooter myself only thing that would come out of it would be grief if i pushed it. I have no respect for this shooter to this day. I think he won the match or top 3.

 

Do initials  W.D.  fit?

Weak RO's 

[RJH]

4 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

Well,  wouldnt work with steel, as its a Range equipment falure if steel falls.

Weak RO's 

If it was a mesh wall, I may not have seen it go through the wall, so if I didn't see it it didn't happen. So score it as shot. I would only do that if I actually thought someone was trying to cheat. They actually shot through the wall and hit a popper the way it generally happens would order a reshoot. But we were kind of talking nefarious circumstances. So instead of fighting with the DQ, is an RO I I might just say I think you shot around the wall and score it

[barry]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

If it was a mesh wall, I may not have seen it go through the wall, so if I didn't see it it didn't happen. So score it as shot. I would only do that if I actually thought someone was trying to cheat. They actually shot through the wall and hit a popper the way it generally happens would order a reshoot. But we were kind of talking nefarious circumstances. So instead of fighting with the DQ, is an RO I I might just say I think you shot around the wall and score it

 

Non mesh wall clearly bullet went thru wall. Rule says reshoot. Sadly cheaters will cheat. Gotta get that brand ambassador Jersey somehow.

[Joe4d]

Id say DQ for AD if they shot through a wall

[Sarge]

1 minute ago, Joe4d said:

Id say DQ for AD if they shot through a wall

Funny, I thought I was the only one thinking about that. Remember we have argued the point many times that if you are looking through a mesh wall with your finger on the trigger you are NOT engaging a target because in theory you can't see the target because walls are actually impossible to see through. Of course the shooter would have to be moving to call an AD, or meet any of the other criteria for an AD.

[barry]

Shooter in question engaged target while standing still but from my vantage point leaned just enough to shoot aprox 2 inches into wall. Was clearly intentional.  I dont fault ro for not catching it as on a feild course he has alot to watch. I think rule should that it is scored a miss.

[driver8M3]

4 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Remember we have argued the point many times that if you are looking through a mesh wall with your finger on the trigger you are NOT engaging a target because in theory you can't see the target because walls are actually impossible to see through. 

I never bought into this argument, and a recent NROI post clarified it. You CAN look through mesh.