I wish Production wasn't dying

[motosapiens]

6 hours ago, GrumpyOne said:

Years ago, i asked how you could shoot at a target, through a wall, and not get an FTE, when all all walls are supposed to be "inpenetrable". 

The only answer I got was "They shot at the target". I countered with "They shot at the wall and the wall, by the rules, is inpenetrable"..."The target was behind the wall, therefore they shot at the target"

 

i don't see how that's any different than missing a target and not hitting a wall. You shot at it but missed. pretty simple.

[IHAVEGAS]

14 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

i don't see how that's any different than missing a target and not hitting a wall. You shot at it but missed. pretty simple.

 

Except you never were in a position where it was possible to shoot at it, you shot at a wall from a position where you could not even see the target if it was a real wall (in the case where I saw it). 

 

If you don't get the FTE it might be worth it sometimes, instead of making a mad dash to get to that one steel just wack away at the clubs range equipment and take the mike. 

[GrumpyOne]

18 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

i don't see how that's any different than missing a target and not hitting a wall. You shot at it but missed. pretty simple.

Except in just missing a target, the bullet passes through nothing but air, not an inpenetrable wall. 

By definition, inpenetrable means that in cannot be penetrated by anything. Therefore, if you shoot at a target on the other side of the wall, you have absolutely zero chance of hitting said target, so you haven't shot at a target at all, but shot at the wall.

[IHAVEGAS]

48 minutes ago, GrumpyOne said:

Therefore, if you shoot at a target on the other side of the wall, you have absolutely zero chance of hitting said target, so you haven't shot at a target at all, but shot at the wall.

 

2.2.3.4 - "All such barriers are considered to represent a solid plane .....  Shots cannot be fired through the barrier except at designated shooting ports or designated openings"  - Seems to support giving the FTE.

 

Dunno. For paper I'd call it 2M FTE, but am willing to be educated. 

[GrumpyOne]

3 minutes ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

2.2.3.4 - "All such barriers are considered to represent a solid plane .....  Shots cannot be fired through the barrier except at designated shooting ports or designated openings"  - Seems to support giving the FTE.

 

Dunno. For paper I'd call it 2M FTE, but am willing to be educated. 

My thoughts as well...but not how NROI sees it.

[motosapiens]

if you guys are talking about a situation where someone can't see the target at all and just blows holes through the nearest wall in the general direction of the target, I guess I'd agree. I've never seen that. If someone was moving when they did it, it seems like it would be a clear dq as well. Since I've never seen it despite RO-ing 10k or so shooters, perhaps I don't need to stress about it too much.

 

what I have seen is where a wall hides part of a target, and someone misses the non-hidden part of the target and hits the wall. Or they don't lean out far enough around something, or they forget about  dot offset and hit the lower frame of a shooting port. i.e., they can see a target, and are aiming at a target, but simply miss it.

[Sarge]

21 minutes ago, GrumpyOne said:

My thoughts as well...but not how NROI sees it.

How does NROI see it then? Just two mikes?

[GrumpyOne]

9 minutes ago, Sarge said:

How does NROI see it then? Just two mikes?

It was years ago when I wrote them about it, but IIRC, yes, just 2 mikes.

[GrumpyOne]

25 minutes ago, GrumpyOne said:

It was years ago when I wrote them about it, but IIRC, yes, just 2 mikes.

 

[GrumpyOne]

I knew there was a thread on it here that Troy commented in..

 

 

[Joe4d]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

if you guys are talking about a situation where someone can't see the target at all and just blows holes through the nearest wall in the general direction of the target, I guess I'd agree. I've never seen that. If someone was moving when they did it, it seems like it would be a clear dq as well. Since I've never seen it despite RO-ing 10k or so shooters, perhaps I don't need to stress about it too much.

 

what I have seen is where a wall hides part of a target, and someone misses the non-hidden part of the target and hits the wall. Or they don't lean out far enough around something, or they forget about  dot offset and hit the lower frame of a shooting port. i.e., they can see a target, and are aiming at a target, but simply miss it.

my thoughts as well, at what point did you shoot at the target or at the wall ?  Like your port ,, 1 inch 2 inch ?  Historically rules try to avoid ruling on intent and score actions..

[IHAVEGAS]

31 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

my thoughts as well, at what point did you shoot at the target or at the wall ?  Like your port ,, 1 inch 2 inch ?  Historically rules try to avoid ruling on intent and score actions..

 

When it happened in my case the shooter was roughly 7 yards away from being able to access the only port that would have allowed a scoring hit. 

[happygunner77]

5 hours ago, GrumpyOne said:

Except in just missing a target, the bullet passes through nothing but air, not an inpenetrable wall. 

By definition, inpenetrable means that in cannot be penetrated by anything. Therefore, if you shoot at a target on the other side of the wall, you have absolutely zero chance of hitting said target, so you haven't shot at a target at all, but shot at the wall.

 

But most walls now are see through mesh and shooters CAN see the targets. Or they shot the target at a corner and hit the wall edge in a full diameter. 

[GrumpyOne]

8 hours ago, happygunner77 said:

 

But most walls now are see through mesh and shooters CAN see the targets. Or they shot the target at a corner and hit the wall edge in a full diameter. 

See through or not, by the rules, walls are impenetrable, doesn't matter what they are made of. 

To clarify, I'm not talking about an edge hit or corner hit. I'm talking about a target, fully behind a wall, where a shooter takes a shot at it through the wall purposely to remove movement to another shooting position (so they would get the M's but not the FTSA).

[Joe4d]

13 hours ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

When it happened in my case the shooter was roughly 7 yards away from being able to access the only port that would have allowed a scoring hit. 

I agree its wrong,  
There is a point along a wall where there is no way you could engage the target, there is also a point along the edge where you could have tried to engage but hit the wall ? Where is that point ? Would have to have fault lines on the walls. As the current way rules are enforced judgement is removed. Which often is a good thing.
ALthough it can also be a bad thing,,, 
I agree with you ,  didnt shoot at the target, but can agree with the ruling also.
 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2021 by Joe4d

[Sinister4]

2 hours ago, GrumpyOne said:

See through or not, by the rules, walls are impenetrable, doesn't matter what they are made of. 

To clarify, I'm not talking about an edge hit or corner hit. I'm talking about a target, fully behind a wall, where a shooter takes a shot at it through the wall purposely to remove movement to another shooting position (so they would get the M's but not the FTSA).

Always thought the walls should be "non see through" and made of something you can see a hit on them,  mesh walls I do not care for but every club around me uses them 

[IHAVEGAS]

6 hours ago, Joe4d said:

I agree with you ,  didnt shoot at the target, but can agree with the ruling also.

 

Yea, there is a lot of job security with fuzzy rules  .  

[IHAVEGAS]

6 hours ago, Sinister4 said:

Always thought the walls should be "non see through" and made of something you can see a hit on them,  mesh walls I do not care for but every club around me uses them 

 

Wind + weight + cost + safety , my local club used solid walls for several years - I get where you are coming from but was happy to see the new mesh walls arrive. 

[Russty]

The thread is about wishing Production wasn't dying. Not walls. 

[IHAVEGAS]

2 hours ago, Russty said:

The thread is about wishing Production wasn't dying. Not walls. 

 

Dang, if I'm not getting in trouble with the moderators then I'm riling the thread police!

[motosapiens]

walls are more interesting. no one cares about production anymore.

[GrumpyOne]

1 hour ago, IHAVEGAS said:

 

Dang, if I'm not getting in trouble with the moderators then I'm riling the thread police!

Hmmmm. 

[Joe4d]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

walls are more interesting. no one cares about production anymore.

lol,, yeh cause its dying cause 10 round limits in 19 round guns is dumb

[BritinUSA]

It’s dying because USPSA watered down another division so that appealed to more participants that wanted an easier tool to use.

[Boomstick303]

Or is it dying because the division did not keep up with evolving technology?

 

Much like Revo and Single Stack, right?

 

Rules set up for specific pieces of equipment should probably evolve with the times/technology or it most likely will not be relevant in the future regardless of the sport. That’s my take at least.