Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse

[dirtypool40]

ok, I may have been a little vehement in my earlier post, and would like to stand up and tone it down a little.

1.) I would not work another match where that anti shooter ATTITUDE was prevelant. That was a long match and while I had fun I know some folks were under the gun (nice pun) and may have come off as harsh or punitive. The guy running that match may not have been the problem. But that attitude WAS expressed at the SO meeting and several times aftewards, and not just by the MD. IMHO it's not the way to "win friends and influence people".

2.) I've been reminded ( by one who was there) of the stage where I was shown the target at the 180 after I unloaded and showed clear. They tell me it was no where near the 180 and was deemed safe. OK, maybe I would have seen the target if I had hugged cover, but I moved latterally to get behind cover instead of towards the "threats". This cost me "down 10, FTE", but reguardless of how the stage was set up, there was definite "gotcha giggling" from this particular SO. Again I still feel this is the wrong attitude for any sport.

Lastly, I don't mean to demean anyone's efforts in hosting or working matches. I have put on big matches myself and continue to work them as time allows. I worked one last weekend and am working one this wekeend. While it is not a thankless job, it is high stress, largely volunteer effort and sometimes we don't aquit ourselves in the best possible fashion.

I hope we can learn from past experiences, and apologize if I ruffled any feathers.

Edited October 4, 2005 by dirtypool40

[f250sd]

I feel that IDPA is becoming very punitive in its rule enforcement.  I don't know if this is coming down from headquarters, or if it is just the attitude of some MD's and SO's that feel they are there to look for making calls on shooters.  MD's and SOI's should choose who they make SO's carefully, especially at major matches.

     A call against someone in a major match sould be defenate, plain black and white, not ones interpretation or opinion, and not to "take back our sport" mentallity.  Remember we're not playing for money, or even for prizes.

     I wish IDPA headquarters would come out with a complete rulebook that gives definate means of the broad rules,  as well as update interpretations on their web page.  I think this would solve a whole lot.

Brad V

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Brad,

Please give examples. Making broad statements like this isn't constructive without facts.

Mark

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mark,

I'm talking about the sudden focus on , personal walk through/rehersal, calls. I feel it really needs to be addressed to avoid problems in the future. This issue came up with a shooter in my sqaud earlier this year at a major match, and now at the nationals, as well as other matches peaple have posted about. With our state match being held this month it would be nice to know what is legal and what is not.

Why doesn't IDPA just allow a quick walk through, not rehersal, for the shooter on deck while others or taping, and state such in the rule book? It would seem to level the playingfield and end these judgemental calls.

What else can be done to bring this issue to a rest?

Edited October 4, 2005 by f250sd

[dirtypool40]

I think they do allow a sort of mass, no finger pointing or spot picking walkthrough.

I heard the 05 FL State was run like that with no blind stages and that it went well.

Anyone know for sure what the latest is?

[Joe D]

Just another dumb IDPA rule. One can get all the stage "looks" one needs on your way to tape.

[Mayonaise]

  Why doesn't IDPA just allow a quick walk through, not rehersal,  for the shooter on deck while others or taping, and state such in the rule book?  It would seem to level the playingfield and end these judgemental calls.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As Dirtypool40 mentioned this is legal. I have yet to shoot a stage (other than blind stages) where you weren't given a walk through or a stage briefing. The detail given and time allotted are usually up to the MD and the SO. As long as it's done consistantly from squad to squad I don't see a proble.

JoeD is right. If you aren't sure about the COF past targets or ask a question.

I see this as making a mountain of a mole hill deal.

Mark

[Vlad]

I preface this by saying I dont shoot IDPA, but i'm confused. It is not ok to walk the course and decide where you are going to shoot things from, but it is COMMON USAGE to walk the course pasting and decide (in your head) where you are going to shoot from? Seriously, I want to understand this because it sounds odd to me. I can have my own private walkthrough as long as it doesnt look like I am and I paste a hole or two, and this is OK with everyone, but if I do the same and I dont paste a target I'm a cheater?

Edited October 4, 2005 by Vlad

[Headshot45]

Vlad,

I shoot IDPA exclusively for right now, and to answer your question....as stupid as it sounds, yes....

The whole point is the "Swan Lake" choreography of it all......but if you can think and analyze without the histrionics of the dance, then by all means plan it out in your head.

My opinion, and unfortunately, most of the IDPA bashers haven't had the luxury of getting to shoot COF's designed by people who understand the rationale of proper course design. That is a MAJOR component of the class when I, as an SOI, teach new students getting certified to be an SO. A perfect scenario-style COF has a very simple walk through briefing. It sounds like this;

" OK, listen up.....this is Stage 2......the Start position is____. On the signal, go to cover and engage them as you see them.....any questions?"

I know, sounds simple enough, but will it really work? At the 2005 Florida State match 4 of the 10 COF's were that simple....the COF wasn't necessarily simple, as there was movement, reloading, non-threat targets and such, but the COF was laid out in a format that was easy to understand, had a few different ways to shoot it, and had MINIMAL judgement calls by the SO's....and there was no need to choreograph....just look at it, assess your strategy, and see what happens....

Frank

[DougBarnes101]

I to will preface this post with the fact that I don't shoot IDPA. And it mostly because of one reason! The Failure to do Right! I like USPSA's way of taking care of this. If the rule book doesn't say that you can't do something then go for it. Believe me I am no gamer as anyone who has ever seen me shoot will attest to. (D class shooter forever and a day) It just seems to me that if I find a loop hole that was over looked by the course designer and I shoot that way and did not violate any of the published rules or the stage description I should not be penalized later because it offends someone's definition of what is right and wrong. I am sure that not alot of these penalties have been assessed but in my opinion if one was given it was too many. I hope I did not ignite too much flame but that is my $0.02.

[Headshot45]

Doug,

That is not the purpose or the definition of the FTDR rule....if it is used that way in your area I am sorry, but it is not used that way down here...

I get a kick out of watching somebody figure out my COF's and hose them...in fact, I love it the very few times somebody has outthought me and my designs....but I haven't been out thought much not because I am smarter than everybody, but because I have designed COF's since 1979 in IPSC and since 98 in IDPA, and I have seen it all...well maybe not yet, but I know to expect the unexpected......and to me, that is the fun of designing...not to outsmart the shooter, but to allow the shooter to outsmart me....and I have shaken the hand of many shooters for a flawless performance on a stage that everybody else thought was too hard until this shooter figure a way to "Beat the Clock"

Frank

[XRe]

IDPA is still a young sport - and some of these issues (inconsistent applications of penalties, for instance) are things that get evened out over time. Unfortunately, they tend to give folks a bad taste....

I encountered some of the same sort of things in USPSA a long time ago, believe it or not. MDs trying to assess procedurals for things that, in the end, were course design failures, etc - ie, they got pissed cause their course got gamed. Those things have gotten better as the rules have been reworked, and the membership has been better educated on proper rules application.

I suspect that these sorts of things will get better in IDPA, as well, if the rules are refined over time, etc.

[p99shooter]

To me, there is a clear difference between walking through a stage to paste targets, and performing a rehersal. A rehersal means that you are acting out parts of your future performance when you shoot the stage.

That includes things like standing at a shooting position, planting your feet, leaning around the edge of cover and checking your foot positing to make sure you're still behind cover. This is what got someone a warning (not a procedural) at a regional match this year. This is not something that someone pasting targets would normally do.

I guess that what I am trying to say is that there is more to a rehersal that just seeing where the targets are. It involves acting out the steps. Someone just looking at targets, IMO, doesn't count as a rehersal.

[f250sd]

I think headshot45 has some great points, if every one in IDPA adopted his mentallity I think it would be a great step forward for IDPA.

Brad V

Edited October 4, 2005 by f250sd

[ozzy1038]

It's funny to me that there are so many sensitive people that we have to use disclaimers like "I'm not IDPA bashing". Why can't people express their views and opinions without people going off the deep end? With so much of anti gun America on our cases I would think we as shooters would be a tighter knit group. Sorry if I'm off topic but come on, some people are too thin skinned. They are just games and fun ones to boot. Beats standing in one spot on the firing line and shooting a bullseye any day.

[vincent]

The whole point is the "Swan Lake" choreography of it all......but if you can think and analyze without the histrionics of the dance, then by all means plan it out in your head.

Brings to mind the rule that you can wear knee pads, they just have to be hidden from view.

[Bob Vogel]

I can give a quick example of something that is being seen as punitive and subjective...at least in attitude.

This is pure hearsay...coming from me...but, it is one of the stories going around...  Take it for what it's worth.

There was a bay with more than one stage in it.  A shooter was going down range during reset...and looked over at the stage next door.  He was told not to look over there.  Then, he was questioned as to if he was even down range taping targets (he showed that he, did indeed, have pasters).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is my first time replying on this forum and I am still trying to figure everything out as I am somewhat computer illiterate. I had to reply to this post from flexmoney as I was this shooter and it did indeed happen as he stated. It was not until I produced the pasters from my pocket and showed the SO that he became satified. I love IDPA and USPSA and will continue to shoot both, However, after shooting IDPA solidly for over four years this shocked even me.

[dirtypool40]

IDPA is still a young sport - and some of these issues (inconsistent applications of penalties, for instance) are things that get evened out over time. Unfortunately, they tend to give folks a bad taste....

I encountered some of the same sort of things in USPSA a long time ago, believe it or not. MDs trying to assess procedurals for things that, in the end, were course design failures, etc - ie, they got pissed cause their course got gamed. Those things have gotten better as the rules have been reworked, and the membership has been better educated on proper rules application.

I suspect that these sorts of things will get better in IDPA, as well, if the rules are refined over time, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Even with my short amount of expereince compared to most on this forum I have seen a continued evolution of USPSA towards better and better course design, rules and sportsmanship. As I have posted before, I went out to USPSA with a BAD attitude, fostered by the first generation IDPA rulebook and all the crap the gun rags were spouting about IPSC.

Yes, even back in 98 when I started there were folks that would game a stage just to try and ruin it. No, they did not win matches or friends. Course design continues to evolve away from box to box with three targets in front of each and we can still improve. Being willing to improve and evolve is what makes that sport the best and most objective out there.

[Joe D]

Some of the Stages I designed for the Alabama IDPA Championship match had more than one way to shoot them. I pushed the MD to let me put in the stage info on one of the stages "Start at position P1 then shoot them as you see them." Guess he was not quite ready for that yet. Maybe next year.

[Mayonaise]

Some of the Stages I designed for the Alabama IDPA Championship match had more than one way to shoot them. I pushed the MD to let me put in the stage info on one of the stages "Start at position P1 then shoot them as you see them." Guess he was not quite ready for that yet. Maybe next year.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Joe,

I give credit where credit is due. You're stages were good. It takes time to learn how to design good stages. Having you as a shooter made me learn the curve quicker then I would have. You gamer, you. If I made a mistake, 'ol Joe here was quick to find it and exploit it.

Have fun this weekend.

Mark

Edited October 5, 2005 by Mayonaise

[PHolsted]

The worst example of the anti-shooter attitude I ever saw was the 04' State Match I worked.  The MATCH DIRECTOR of all people was breifing us (the staff) as to how we were gonna teach those shooters, and catch them at this, and how we'd stop that and if you suspected this then drop the FTDR on them.  This rant went on BEFORE the match even started!!!  I just stood in the back shaking my head. At match I have run I always started the staff meeting with something like "We have a lot of folks who spent time and money to come to our party.  They are our guests, please make sure they have fun.  All ties go to the runner."

In shooters in this sport it is all of our responsibilities to call foul if we se it. If you were going to be an SO and were doing a SO brief and the MD told you and the other SO this then someone should have stepped up to plate and told him he was wrong for his attitude and the COF needed to be changed it indeed had some type of traps in it. If we as shooters, SO’s and MD’s do not stand up when we see something wrong then all we do is add to that kind of behavior.

Patrick

[PHolsted]

I preface this by saying I dont shoot IDPA, but i'm confused. It is not ok to walk the course and decide where you are going to shoot things from, but it is COMMON USAGE to walk the course pasting and decide (in your head)  where you are going to shoot from? Seriously, I want to understand this because it sounds odd to me. I can have my own private walkthrough as long as it doesnt look like I am and I paste a hole or two, and this is OK with everyone, but if I do the same and I dont paste a target I'm a cheater?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you are missing the point. At the start of every CoF the SO of that stage should give everyone a walkthrough the stage an answer any and all questions before the first shooter puts round down range. That being said the first shooter shoots and the tapers go down range. So do you get to see the targets and think about how you are going to shoot the stage when you up, of course doe this mean you a cheater? NO But If you are the next shooter and you are standing in the shooting position go to grab your gun like the buzzer just went off and walk the CoF as if you were shooting it then that would be a BIG YES. Another example of this would be if there were lets say three COF on one bay and all the other shooters and SO moved to the next COF brief and you stayed on the one that was just went over and you started walking over it moving thru it like you would if you were shooting then yes again.

I believe another area of the rule book covers this to know and in the sprite of the game. We all know when we push the line or even go over them. It how we handle our selves when we get caught and also how the SO handles them self when they see you do it. If I seen you break one of the rules I would never run over and start yelling at you that you are a cheater. I would talk to that person about what I think I saw and see how he responds. There will be times when I will have to give it to them even though they do not think they broke the rules. If I seen it happen I seen it happen it’s all in how the SO addresses the shooter and how the shooter addresses the SO.

We are all here to have fun and play a game some more that other and take it a little too far. When we see this we have to make sure that no mater if you are a SO, CSO, MD or a shooter stand up for the rules weather you like them are not they are the rule of this game and we all need to follow them to the best of our ability.

Patrick

[MBaneACP]

A small piece of thread drift...I've been fascinated with the implications of Malcolm Gladwell's book BLINK, which examines how quickly the mind processes information.

I bring this up because, extrapolating from some of Mr. Gladwell's observations, the "rehearsal" action that so much of IDPA's rules are designed to head off takes place in the first SECOND or two that an experienced shooter looks at a stage. Mr. Sevigny glances at a stage, blinks once, and he KNOWS FLATLY how he's going to run that stage.

That's consistant with my observations of FOR-REAL TACTICAL GUYS, who are endlessly running scenarios in their heads, vis-a-vis my much-told story of lunch at McWhatever with a couple of Brit SAS guys and a couple of SWAT trainers. In the middle of the burgers, one of the SAS guys looks at the SWAT guy and says, "Who're the head shots?" Without hesitation, the SWAT guy indicates three people. "You missed the girl behind the counter," the Brit says. "Can't see her hands, so she's a header." The other Brit tells me, "Don't worry; you'll get used to it. Eventually, it won't even seem creepy."

Michael B

[Mark Perez]

.."The other Brit tells me, "Don't worry; you'll get used to it. Eventually, it won't even seem creepy."

Michael B

and here I was thinking I needed professional help for picking out target ref-points on shirts worn by others on the street!

[dirtypool40]

Yeah, my roomate went all tacti-cool on me once he got a badge and IPSC was taking a lot of bad mouthing by those that thought planning was bad.

I told him that if he ever got out of a car on an unknown risk stop or approached a felony suspect and did NOT already know who was getting shot first or which way he'd move "at the beep" he was already WAY behind the game.

Game life. It is a GAME, survive it.

Damn, I sound tough.

[diehli]

Damn, I sound tough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tuff, even.

[PHolsted]

That's consistant with my observations of FOR-REAL TACTICAL GUYS, who are endlessly running scenarios in their heads, vis-a-vis my much-told story of lunch at McWhatever with a couple of Brit SAS guys and a couple of SWAT trainers. In the middle of the burgers, one of the SAS guys looks at the SWAT guy and says, "Who're the head shots?" Without hesitation, the SWAT guy indicates three people. "You missed the girl behind the counter," the Brit says. "Can't see her hands, so she's a header." The other Brit tells me, "Don't worry; you'll get used to it. Eventually, it won't even seem creepy."

Michael B

Good post Mr. Bane

One question though. Did at any point any one of the guys you were eating with drop their Big McWhatever sweep like they were going to draw there firearm and go through the motions of engaging threat targets while moving to cover? I doubt it. I think you make a fine point to being able to rehearse a CoF in your head with out the need to go through all the motions and draw unwanted attention to your self in an IDPA Match (Game).

Thanks again for your post and keep up the good work on the Shooting Gallery. I try never to miss an episode. Thank God and technology for the DVR. LOL

Patrick