Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Banning a shooter, L1 match


Bakerjd
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Russty said:

What behavior led to the possible ban? 

 

Verbal abuse of competitors is the last big squabble that I have seen result in a near ban (public declaration of what happens if there is a next time). 

 

Even pcc shooters need to be treated with a certain amount of respect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to wonder as well what the competitor did that would be cause for a ban.  Is he dangerous, or is something more serious like he won't tape and reset?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A coupe of years back, we had to ban an individual from the club.  It was the classic example of never practicing, never dry firing and showing up at matches with every aftermarket gizmo on this gun. 

 

He was DQ'ed in three consecutive L1 matches for breaking the 180, sweeping himself and in the last case his gun got hung up on a barricade and he broke the 270.  The loaded gun swept about 5 people, mostly range staff.  We went to the club's Board of Directors and they wrote him a receipt requested, registered letter informing him he could no longer shoot USPSA events at the club.

 

BC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, RadarTech said:

6.4.4 is the rule you are looking for.... but look at the follow up rule 6.4.5 for what has to be done after that.

Thanks. This is what I was looking for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BillChunn said:

A coupe of years back, we had to ban an individual from the club.  It was the classic example of never practicing, never dry firing and showing up at matches with every aftermarket gizmo on this gun. 

 

He was DQ'ed in three consecutive L1 matches for breaking the 180, sweeping himself and in the last case his gun got hung up on a barricade and he broke the 270.  The loaded gun swept about 5 people, mostly range staff.  We went to the club's Board of Directors and they wrote him a receipt requested, registered letter informing him he could no longer shoot USPSA events at the club.

 

BC

 

I think my club needs to do that. There is a guy here that I don't think anyone can keep track of how many times he's DQ'd. The approximate number is north of 20 last I heard. Everyone has seen him DQ at some point. Several rounds have been sent over the berm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I think my club needs to do that. There is a guy here that I don't think anyone can keep track of how many times he's DQ'd. The approximate number is north of 20 last I heard. Everyone has seen him DQ at some point. Several rounds have been sent over the berm. 

 

Those types of instances will force the following:

- Lawsuits and the associated court and attorney costs

- Building overhead baffles

- Forced closure of the club (or at least USPSA activities) if the above item 2 is ruled by the judge and the club cannot or does not comply.  Any yes they will require proof or an inspection.

 

It happened here in Michigan.  The club had to build overhead baffles to keep the judge happy and the club open.  The rule for setup became "no blue sky ever available from any shooting position".  It really restricts stage design.  But the club is still open.

 

If rounds are going over the berm from this guy, IMHO serious action has to be taken immediately.  If one of those rounds strikes and kills someone, the proverbial feces will hit the oscillator.

 

HH

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, BillChunn said:

 

Those types of instances will force the following:

- Lawsuits and the associated court and attorney costs

- Building overhead baffles

- Forced closure of the club (or at least USPSA activities) if the above item 2 is ruled by the judge and the club cannot or does not comply.  Any yes they will require proof or an inspection.

 

It happened here in Michigan.  The club had to build overhead baffles to keep the judge happy and the club open.  The rule for setup became "no blue sky ever available from any shooting position".  It really restricts stage design.  But the club is still open.

 

If rounds are going over the berm from this guy, IMHO serious action has to be taken immediately.  If one of those rounds strikes and kills someone, the proverbial feces will hit the oscillator.

 

HH

 

 

I don't have any say at the club, but I've expressed my concern as have others. I was told about a year ago they talked to him and told him if it persisted he'd be done. Of course I know of 8 in the last year. I'm not the only one who's mentioned the issue and I believe concerns have been sent to HQ of the sport he shoots the most. But I don't think anyone wants to be the bad guy. He also travels to a lot of majors, where clubs may not know of his reputation. 

 

So for now I just try not to squad with him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I don't have any say at the club, but I've expressed my concern as have others. I was told about a year ago they talked to him and told him if it persisted he'd be done. Of course I know of 8 in the last year. I'm not the only one who's mentioned the issue and I believe concerns have been sent to HQ of the sport he shoots the most. But I don't think anyone wants to be the bad guy. He also travels to a lot of majors, where clubs may not know of his reputation. 

 

So for now I just try not to squad with him. 

 

A recommendation would be for all of you to take it to both the Match Director and the Board of Directors of the club.  Believe me, the BoD will not appreciate getting blind sided by a process server showing up with a court summons or lawsuit paperwork.  From their perspective, it would just be simpler (and less costly) to get rid of USPSA all together.  So it boils down to whether you want to continue to shoot there and take action or do nothing and watch the club go under.

 

If there is a Safety Officer or an incident reporting form, start with that to document all the DQ's.

 

HH

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BillChunn said:

 

A recommendation would be for all of you to take it to both the Match Director and the Board of Directors of the club.  Believe me, the BoD will not appreciate getting blind sided by a process server showing up with a court summons or lawsuit paperwork.  From their perspective, it would just be simpler (and less costly) to get rid of USPSA all together.  So it boils down to whether you want to continue to shoot there and take action or do nothing and watch the club go under.

 

If there is a Safety Officer or an incident reporting form, start with that to document all the DQ's.

 

HH

 

 

This club already did away with USPSA for unrelated reasons. The shooter in question doesn't really shoot much uspsa now that it's gone from that club. I only shoot there a few times a year now. The MD and a couple other regulars for this match are on the BOD. Maybe I'll have a chat with one next time I'm there and see where they stand on the situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

This club already did away with USPSA for unrelated reasons. The shooter in question doesn't really shoot much uspsa now that it's gone from that club. I only shoot there a few times a year now. The MD and a couple other regulars for this match are on the BOD. Maybe I'll have a chat with one next time I'm there and see where they stand on the situation. 

 

So it's already gone.  It would be interesting to find out why, especially since there were USPSA competitors on the Board.

 

HH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BillChunn said:

 

So it's already gone.  It would be interesting to find out why, especially since there were USPSA competitors on the Board.

 

HH

 

Essentially the BOD and the USPSA MD's didn't see eye to eye. There are IDPA members on the BOD, not USPSA shooters. The MD's decided it wasn't worth the trouble and stopped. So technically If someone wanted to run the match and deal with the BOD it could become a club again. I don't see it happening because everyone I know locally that might be interested probably wont step up knowing what the last guys had to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the details.  Looks like the BoD doesn't have the clubs best interest in mind when they stopped a revenue flow from a similar type of competition.  

 

We are in the process of starting up another club here in Michigan (Oakland County Sportsmen's Club) and are getting an enormous amount of support from the existing IDPA group along with the BoD.   The first USPSA match brought in just over $1,000.  Around here, money talks.

 

HH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/26/2021 at 10:35 AM, Racinready300ex said:

 

Essentially the BOD and the USPSA MD's didn't see eye to eye. There are IDPA members on the BOD, not USPSA shooters.

That happened to a club here in MI. It was one of the better matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 71Commander said:

That happened to a club here in MI. It was one of the better matches.

If I remember correctly, they were told that they were no longer welcome at that facility and started another club at a different facility (Oak Hill?)

 

BC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, BillChunn said:

If I remember correctly, they were told that they were no longer welcome at that facility and started another club at a different facility (Oak Hill?)

 

BC

That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...