carry optics question

[22h2]

I bought a SPo1 slide from CGW its been milled for optics and use it on my SP01 shadow frame, would this be legal for carry optics?  

 

Thanks 

[jkf74]

12 hours ago, 22h2 said:

I bought a SPo1 slide from CGW its been milled for optics and use it on my SP01 shadow frame, would this be legal for carry optics?  

 

Thanks 

Yes this legal to do. 

[22h2]

thanks jkf74 I was concerned because the SP01 slide has the firing pin block that the shadow doesnt use, I was concerned when the slide was modified to work with the shadow it wouldnt be legal for carry optics.

[Bench]

You just may want to dig a bit deeper for the legality of it all. AppD7 for CO 21.1 says

"ALL factory safety mechanisms, whether

internal or external, must remain functional".

So if you are removing the FPB on the SP-01 slide you will probably be outside of what 21.1 indicates.

 

JM$.02

[jkf74]

1 hour ago, Bench said:

You just may want to dig a bit deeper for the legality of it all. AppD7 for CO 21.1 says

"ALL factory safety mechanisms, whether

internal or external, must remain functional".

So if you are removing the FPB on the SP-01 slide you will probably be outside of what 21.1 indicates.

 

JM$.02

This is a very good point that deserves more thought. I was just thinking on the ability of swapping slides. 

[22h2]

What about the rule that says u can buy aftermarket slides? Idk that’s the reason I was asking the shadow doesn’t use the firing pin block that is in the sp01 Slide. 
 

SLIDES:

You may replace the slide with an OFM or

aftermarket slide. 

 

how would I get the correct answer on this? 

[BentAero]

Send a detailed email to USPSA.

[22h2]

Good point Bentaero 

[Bench]

The question in my mind is when you swap parts between different models by definition what pistol does one now have. In your case is it a Shadow or is it a SP-01 and if it's still defined as a Shadow then FPB probably can come out. If defined as a SP-01 then the CO rule applies.

[22h2]

I agree Bench it’s a unique situation and with my experience the frame with serial numbers always stands as the firearm, no matter what u can’t change that the serial number and it cant be altered, but not sure how the rule applies in this case or for this class. If I Bought another slide by another manufacture it would not have the fpb in it either. 

[mreed911]

Note: NROI had a blog post up about this/something similar, but now it's completely gone - vanished without a trace.

 

https://nroi.org/q-of-month-results/the-production-gun-list-in-2020/ in case you can find an archive of it

[22h2]

I received an email this morning from USPSA stating  the slide is legal.  

[rowdyb]

And the new slide has a hole for the firing pin block but one isn't in place?

[waktasz]

If the "gun" is a Shadow (frame) then you aren't removing a safety by using a slide with a provision for the firing pin block. The gun never had one. 

[22h2]

Rowdy yes it’s a sp01 slide,

to waktasz point if I purchase any slide it has to work with the shadow platform. 

 

 

[Whoops!]

21.1 is specifically with regard to throating and polishing.

 

So, if you polish the fpb to the point where it no longer works, but keep it in the gun, you are violating that section.

 

However, removal of safeties is covered by 21.5 and 22.1 - and those sections state that only external safeties can not be removed.

 

The reason the polishing aspect is not allowed is because of the safety hazards (or even competitive advantage) it could create in some platforms by adjusting the safety mechanism to do something other than intended.

 

[waktasz]

21.1  ALL Factory safety mechanisms, whether 
internal or external, must remain functional. 

[Whoops!]

With regard to polishing and throating - read the header for 21.1.  
 

I design regulations for a living - the way they read is that subtext to a header applies to the header.  In this case, that header is polishing and throating.

 

If it applied to everything - there would be no need for another section that says external safeties must remain functional.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Whoops!

[MemphisMechanic]

22 hours ago, Whoops! said:

and those sections state that only external safeties can not be removed.

 

 

Implying, therefore, that internal safeties can? Have you had your gun function tested by those DNROI-trained staff dudes at a major match?

 

I understand how you arrived at your interpretation of things, but in this case clearly USPSA goes with “ALL safeties must work. Not just externals.”

 

In the case of this gun yes he’s legal.
The gun (serialized frame) did not come with a FPB.

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by MemphisMechanic

[Whoops!]

Actually, in this case, it is extremely clear that USPSA does not require the internal safeties - by the way the book is written.

 

As a result of the part of the book talking about internal small parts.

 

If DNROI intends for the rule to be interpreted any other way - his book needs to be rewritten.

 

IPSC requires all internal safeties to remain functional.

 

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by Whoops!

[Russty]

Whoops!, you are a bit too much of an expert, I think. While you are probably correct that, as the regulation is written, an expert could parse your interpretation; as a rule to follow, though, it's pretty clear that internal safeties must be functional. But, reading for gaming, you may have found a loophole. I doubt that you'll be able to fit through said hole, though. 

[waktasz]

1 hour ago, Whoops! said:

Actually, in this case, it is extremely clear that USPSA does not require the internal safeties - by the way the book is written.

 

As a result of the part of the book talking about internal small parts.

 

If DNROI intends for the rule to be interpreted any other way - his book needs to be rewritten.

 

IPSC requires all internal safeties to remain functional.

 

 

 

21.1  ALL Factory safety mechanisms, whether 
internal or external, must remain functional.


Not sure how else that that can be interpreted 

[Whoops!]

Either way, the teams of people I work with, both in creating and interpreting regulations, would very clearly interpret that the note on internal and external safeties remaining functional only applies to throating and polishing of components.

 

There is a way regulations are interpreted in America.  If people want to try and write requirements, in America, they should do it appropriately, as Americans.

 

This is a whole field of study.  It needs to remain consistent so that rules can be consistently applied.

 

There’s a simple way to do this.

 

Make the section I’m attaching clearly apply to both internal and external safeties.  Otherwise, anyone who says differently is wrong.