ND During Unload & Show Clear Command - DQ?

[Sarge]

Joe your point is not made any stronger by you continually calling it an ND and not an AD as defined in the rule book. I realize you don’t agree with the rules but they are pretty good in the AD department

[motosapiens]

On 10/18/2019 at 10:25 AM, Sarge said:

And that train of thought is what causes some confusion. In most other circumstances you can fire a shot completely by accident and it’s not a DQ. The shot has to break one of the cardinal AD rules to be called. 

 

those cardinal rules are pretty easy to find in the case of a genuine AD tho (as opposed to an 'early shot').  It's fun to argue about on the internet, but all the ones I've seen were pretty easy to call.  You can really only fire a shot completely by accident and not be dq'd if you are not loading, unloading, reloading or moving, *and* the shot is in a safe direction (inside the berm, further than 10' away, etc...). Pretty much all times that fit those criteria are when we are actually aiming at targets and shooting them. It is very easy to tell when someone intends to pause the ULSC process and resume shooting vs when they cook one off accidentally during the ULSC process.

[Joe4d]

really depends,,, why all that range lawyer nonsense should go.. 
Another example,, Me personally.. I hit a target DEAD center mass, perfect shot, was a ND , I knew it, SO ( IDPA) knew it.  He even commented,, that one surprised you... 
Yeh I understand hard to make a rule on intent.. Why 10.5 shoulda been left alone.  BOOM,, get a jump and an "oh crap" expression.. I dont think to many shooters are that good an actor to play it off.
I call them ND's cause thats what they are. Negligent. and AD would be do to a sear breaking on a 1911, or a broken extractor round slipping and ejector setting it off on reload. Basically no specific at fault action of the shooter.
Sorry I just think that section is wrong, and calling it "just an accident" is making an excuse for negligence.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Joe4d

[motosapiens]

Just now, Joe4d said:

really depends,,, why all that range lawyer nonsense should go.. 
Another example,, Me personally.. I hit a target DEAD center mass, perfect shot, was a ND , I knew it, SO ( IDPA) knew it.  He even commented,, that one surprised you... 
Yeh I understand hard to make a rule on intent.. Why 10.5 shoulda been left alone.  BOOM,, get a jump and an "oh crap" expression.. I dont think to many shooters are that good an actor to play it off.

 

If you think such shots should be a dq from a shooting sport, then you and I will have to disagree. We have light triggers, and we are in a hurry. Sometimes a shot breaks a bit before I expect it to. Not a big deal, whether it hits the target or whether it is so early that it is between 2 targets. 

 

Your experience begs the question tho, if you have the sights lined up on a target dead center mass, why haven't you already pulled the trigger and moved on?

[Joe4d]

cause shot broke as I cleared leather,, sights wernt on target, just had a good index.. Lucky  ND basically.
I mean If I ever RO again Id follow rules, and I know current interpretations.  Doesnt mean I have to agree with them.
As mentioned before, if shooting a round when you didnt mean too isnt unsafe, I have no idea what is. Seems to be the most unsafe thing you could possibly do.
Oh and as this is text, trying to just talk and not sound belligerent,  doesnt always work, just discussing.

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Joe4d

[motosapiens]

30 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

As mentioned before, if shooting a round when you didnt mean too isnt unsafe, I have no idea what is. Seems to be the most unsafe thing you could possibly do.
 

 

if the gun is pointed in a known safe direction, where it would also be safe if you missed the target due to poor marksmanship, then shooting a round before you mean to is not unsafe at all. that's why we have berms instead of target-sized bullet-traps in an open field.

 

I'm not aware of a single injury from an unintended shot that didn't qualify as a DQ. To me, that means the rules are working.

[Joe4d]

we had an earlier discussion about the 180,,  lack of dead people doesnt meant breaking 180 is safe.
Your getting into the 3 rule thing,,,  muzzle trigger chamber,,, do 2 things bad unsafe the 3rd will save you... 
I dunno ,,, I just think a "BANG" when you didnt want it is a bad thing.

[Sarge]

2 hours ago, Joe4d said:

and AD would be do to a sear breaking on a 1911, or a broken extractor round slipping and ejector setting it off on reload.

If sear breaks and gun goes off it’s still an AD(DQ) if other criteria is met.

Ejector hitting round on reload is covered in the rules. That’s a detonation and not a DQ.

[motosapiens]

13 hours ago, Joe4d said:

we had an earlier discussion about the 180,,  lack of dead people doesnt meant breaking 180 is safe.
Your getting into the 3 rule thing,,,  muzzle trigger chamber,,, do 2 things bad unsafe the 3rd will save you... 
I dunno ,,, I just think a "BANG" when you didnt want it is a bad thing.

 

You are supporting my point. The lack of dead people from 180's suggests that the current 180 rules are sufficient.

 

It may be a bad thing to have a bang when you don't want to,  OTOH, firearms instructors also teach a 'surprise break' for accuracy/group shooting. If your gun is pointed in a provably safe direction, I'm not sure being slightly surprised when it goes off is a crisis.

 

I also *really* don't want to have RO's having to make judgement calls regarding whether you intended to shoot right at that moment or not. I think everyone knows there would be certain people just itching to inflict their own personal views on the rest of us, and issuing DQ's because "you clearly didn't mean to shoot right then, even tho you hit the target center-mass".

[HCH]

The few times I have seen this, it was very apparent that the shooter WAS reloading and lit one off. As in, moving between shooting areas and the gun is sideways and BANG as the next mag was seated. Or trying to drop a mag and BANG. Or clearing a jam and BANG over the berm. 

 

It’s usually pretty easy to know if the shot was legitimate or not. And if the round goes off “during loading, reloading, or unloading” is probably not going to be legitimate. 

 

One thing i can think of that I have witnessed, and was a legal AD (or ND, or whatever we’re calling it), was a wide transition between two targets that were straight down range. Shooter engages left target, starts to transition, BANG into the berm straight down range, and goes to right target. 

[SeattleDude]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:07 AM, motosapiens said:

 

wut? so if I see a target i forgot, and shoot at just as the RO is starting to say 'if....' , I should be dq'd?

 

umm, no.

 

In reality, this is not a difficult rule to enforce. In my experience it is pretty easy to tell when someone has an AD while unloading vs decides to continue shooting. The rules as they are work just fine.

 

Exactly. You still have time to shoot when "If Finished..." command is given.

 

I remembered a situation from recent match where I had to make up target after RO quickly started "If Finished Unload..." Command. You can hear it in the video LOL LOL

 

 

[JeremiahD]

There's a reason the range command is "IF Finished, ULSC..." and not "You ARE finished, ULSC..."  

 

 

 

[broadside72]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:07 AM, motosapiens said:

 

wut? so if I see a target i forgot, and shoot at just as the RO is starting to say 'if....' , I should be dq'd?

 

umm, no.

 

In reality, this is not a difficult rule to enforce. In my experience it is pretty easy to tell when someone has an AD while unloading vs decides to continue shooting. The rules as they are work just fine.

 

You missed the point. I didn't say change "if finished", but at "if clear". If you have already unloaded and showed me clear, you are crazy to reload and purposefully take another shot. The time time wasted is almost always just as damaging as the penalties or other lost points. Is it possible that it could happen sure. But all the ones I have seen (and done myself) come after "If finished" which I have no issues with, not after "if clear". 

[pjb45]

NO DQ.  The gun can be fired if there is no magazine in the gun.  That is what happened.  Was it an OOPS? Perhaps.  But an OOPs in not a DQ offense if the criteria for a DQ are not met.  Motor/Sarge are right on.

 

OOPS was a technical term given to me by the former head of the NROI-John A.  

 

Range Lawyers exist.  You may not like them but that is your problem.  Most of the time, RL are more knowledgable and help keep match administration moving along.