Is this a Disqualification ("DQ")?

[BritinUSA]

36 minutes ago, GrumpyOne said:

Can't you guys just get along and agree to disagree? 

If everyone did that, the internet would collapse.

Edited June 2, 2021 by BritinUSA

[Nevadazielmeister]

1 hour ago, Shootingaggie said:

This is teaching me to be extra careful with my PCC in the future. 

 

Thank you for this comment. This is the whole reason for me starting this thread. I want others to learn from my friend's mistake. I think as RO's we need to apply the rules evenly across the entire spectrum of events, from Level I to Level III. I feel that it is our duty to educate the shooters so they don't get in trouble at the bigger matches. Better to go to Dairy Queen locally than drive for hours home fuming.

[Southpaw]

So did this guy get DQed for turning the dot on or just for looking through optic with it pointed at the sky as we can see in video? I don't think we got a clear answer on this?

[BillChunn]

This thread has also reminded me about handling my carbine.   A cart is used and parked next to the PCC staging area.  When the competitor before me finishes the stage and it's been reset, the carbine is picked up from the cart (which already has it muzzle down) and it's walked to the stage, still with the muzzle down.  After LAMR command is received, the dot is checked for the correct level of brightness on a downrange target.  The red dot on my carbine actually turns itself off when it is not moved for a certain period of time.  So checking it has become part of my routine.

 

BC

[Jayohee]

12 minutes ago, Southpaw said:

So did this guy get DQed for turning the dot on or just for looking through optic with it pointed at the sky as we can see in video? I don't think we got a clear answer on this?

The shooter in the video pulled the PCC out of the bag while pointing at the berm and looked at his sight. The “looked at his sight” took place at the berm not the sky. Not sure if that changes things for anyone, but it’s important to add that in since the video doesn’t show you everything. 

[mreed911]

1 hour ago, Nevadazielmeister said:

This is the whole reason for me starting this thread. I want others to learn from my friend's mistake. 

 

So what, specifically, was his mistake?  Was it something not shown in the video?

 

1 hour ago, Jayohee said:

The shooter in the video pulled the PCC out of the bag while pointing at the berm and looked at his sight. The “looked at his sight” took place at the berm not the sky.

 

Where do you see that in the video?

Edited June 2, 2021 by mreed911

[Jayohee]

14 minutes ago, mreed911 said:

 

So what, specifically, was his mistake?  Was it something not shown in the video?

 

 

Where do you see that in the video?

It’s not in the video. The shooter commented on the FB thread where he started the conversation. He said he unbagged the PCC while facing the berm and looked at his sight, then walked up to the line. 
 

The original post doesn’t contain all the info, hence why there seems to be a lot of confusion. The shooter didn’t look at his sight in the sky, he looked at it while pointing at the berm. 
 

Personally I think it sucks to be DQ’d for it. But I also wouldn’t be able to do that with my CZ. 

[Mcfoto]

I’d just like to say that if the OP intended this to be an educational thread, he failed. As an RO without a lot of experience with PCC (they are not allowed at my home club-another thread) I followed to gather some information. Things started with a where’s Waldo analysis of the video that had me seeing things no one else did-my first guess was he broke the 180 while muzzle up. Then we delved into a discussion about when you can check your dot. Finally, we find out the DQ was called for something not in the video. I would have preferred a thread that stated, “my friend got DQed for X, do you know a rule for that?” Why throw out the red herring of a video that doesn’t even show the actual action but just an RO calling it?

[UpYoursPal]

8 minutes ago, Mcfoto said:

I’d just like to say that if the OP intended this to be an educational thread, he failed. As an RO without a lot of experience with PCC (they are not allowed at my home club-another thread) I followed to gather some information. Things started with a where’s Waldo analysis of the video that had me seeing things no one else did-my first guess was he broke the 180 while muzzle up. Then we delved into a discussion about when you can check your dot. Finally, we find out the DQ was called for something not in the video. I would have preferred a thread that stated, “my friend got DQed for X, do you know a rule for that?” Why throw out the red herring of a video that doesn’t even show the actual action but just an RO calling it?

Yeah, I feel the same way.  It would be helpful if someone were to make a thread that compiled rule infractions unique to PCC that you might not see if you're just used to running pistol shooters.

[broadside72]

14 minutes ago, UpYoursPal said:

Yeah, I feel the same way.  It would be helpful if someone were to make a thread that compiled rule infractions unique to PCC that you might not see if you're just used to running pistol shooters.

 

Here you go https://uspsa.org/viewer/2021-USPSA-Competition-Rules-March-2021.pdf

All the PCC rules lined out just as "clearly" as pistol rules are.

[UpYoursPal]

2 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

 

Here you go https://uspsa.org/viewer/2021-USPSA-Competition-Rules-March-2021.pdf

All the PCC rules lined out just as "clearly" as pistol rules are.

Exactly, clear as mud.

[outerlimits]

58 minutes ago, Jayohee said:

It’s not in the video. The shooter commented on the FB thread where he started the conversation. He said he unbagged the PCC while facing the berm and looked at his sight, then walked up to the line. 
 

The original post doesn’t contain all the info, hence why there seems to be a lot of confusion. The shooter didn’t look at his sight in the sky, he looked at it while pointing at the berm. 
 

Personally I think it sucks to be DQ’d for it. But I also wouldn’t be able to do that with my CZ. 

interesting.  i DM'd both RO's and that's not what i was told.  bottom line the shooter's home club allowed a certain action which is against the rules.  level 2 ain't playing around.  troy & carl both there so call was legit.

[Southpaw]

18 minutes ago, outerlimits said:

interesting.  i DM'd both RO's and that's not what i was told.  bottom line the shooter's home club allowed a certain action which is against the rules.  level 2 ain't playing around.  troy & carl both there so call was legit.

 

And what's that certain action?

[Eric802]

31 minutes ago, outerlimits said:

interesting.  i DM'd both RO's and that's not what i was told.  bottom line the shooter's home club allowed a certain action which is against the rules.  level 2 ain't playing around.  troy & carl both there so call was legit.

Are we going to continue to play the not-very-educational guessing game about what this guy did wrong?

[George16]

25 minutes ago, outerlimits said:

interesting.  i DM'd both RO's and that's not what i was told.  bottom line the shooter's home club allowed a certain action which is against the rules.  level 2 ain't playing around.  troy & carl both there so call was legit.

So did the RO who called the DQ tell you exactly the reason why the shooter got DQ’ed? What’s so hard about posting the main reason why he DQ’ed the shooter?

 

It’ll help other shooters from doing the same mistake if only the main reason is laid out in the open. Instead, we now have five pages when one page could had been enough to talked about and learn from it. 
 

Unfortunately, this is akin to talking to lawyers and politicians who can’t even give a straight yes or no answer when asked .

 

[ddc]

"certain actions"  really? 

 

Is there any place in this thread where it is laid out in black and white what the shooter's actions actually were?

[mreed911]

46 minutes ago, Eric802 said:

Are we going to continue to play the not-very-educational guessing game about what this guy did wrong?

 

His nipples get hard when he plays coy.

[Southpaw]

Thread title is "Is this a Disqualification". Now 5 pages later we still don't know what "this" is

[Out of Ammo]

21 minutes ago, Southpaw said:

Thread title is "Is this a Disqualification". Now 5 pages later we still don't know what "this" is

Bingo!

[IL-SIG]

This is stupid. Stop pu$$y-footing around and either describe the specific infraction or let’s all move on.  

[Shootingaggie]

One vote for Let’s all move on 

[Intheshaw1]

Can mods just delete this instead of locking it? Nothing was gained from all this discussion and it likely only made things worse.

[ima45dv8]

We could delete it, but I don't see that happening.

Seems it would serve better as a lesson on how to raise a rules issue. 

And how not to do it.

[BillChunn]

10 hours ago, Shootingaggie said:

One vote for Let’s all move on 

I second the motion.  All in favor, say "aye".   

 

BC

[Bagellord]

So what was the actual infraction? That would resolve this entire thread...