Case Head Separation = Squib = DQ if cleared?

[Cuz]

1 hour ago, StealthyBlagga said:

By this logic, cycling the slide to clear an unextracted case or a misfired round would be a match DQ. Another example of the law of unintended consequences caused by an overly-micromanaging rules document.

This is what I was thinking as I read through this thread. If the extractor didn’t grab and extract the case on the first try, it’s an obstructed barrel. 
 

 

[Jollymon32]

Just now, Cuz said:

This is what I was thinking as I read through this thread. If the extractor didn’t grab and extract the case on the first try, it’s an obstructed barrel. 
 

 

BINGO!!!

This is what the original post states, "The case head is separated just enough so that the extractor cannot eject the case, however, the case head is still attached to the rest of the case."

 

This is an obstructed barrel - easily removed with a pocket knife - as we have been doing since time immemorial..... But according to the definition it is a "Squib" and a DQ if you try to clear it.

 

 

 

 

 

[Cuz]

I can’t wait for the NROI ruling on this one. I gotta go re-read those actual rules now that I’m thinking about this from a different perspective. 
 

[Sarge]

26 minutes ago, Cuz said:

I can’t wait for the NROI ruling on this one. I gotta go re-read those actual rules now that I’m thinking about this from a different perspective. 
 

It won't come out the way you are expecting. My bet is the final word will be, "A case head separation, or any other instance where part or all of a case is stuck in a chamber, IS NOT the same as a bullet lodged in the barrel". 

Calling those one in the same would lead to way too many conflicts. Such as, ammo that is too long getting stuck in the chamber after starting the COF now being called a squib. Or a simple stuck case that the extractor won't pull out. But yet if a stepped piece of brass separates, there is no obstruction, and therefore not a squib.

This would need rewritten as well. From the glossary- REMEDIAL ACTION 

The term used for correcting any problem to get the firearm back in operation, such as a jam, stuck bullet, or feeding problem due to issues with the magazine, ammunition or firearm.

[ltdmstr]

3 hours ago, Jollymon32 said:

But according to the definition it is a "Squib" and a DQ if you try to clear it.

 

Where in the definition does it say a broken case is a squib?

[Schutzenmeister]

5 hours ago, ChuckS said:

In 2004 we had this:

"5.7.1 In the event that a competitor’s handgun malfunctions after the
start signal, the competitor may safely attempt to correct the
problem and continue the course of fire. During such corrective
action, the competitor must keep the muzzle of the handgun
pointing safely downrange at all times. The competitor may not
use rods, or other tools to correct the malfunction. Violations will
result in a zero score for the stage."

 

 

It was fixed in 2008

2004 ... Our rules on this were in alignment with IPSC.  FWIW, the IPSC rule still reads this way.  Fixed?  I suppose that depends on one's point of view.

[ChuckS]

9 minutes ago, Schutzenmeister said:

2004 ... Our rules on this were in alignment with IPSC.  FWIW, the IPSC rule still reads this way.  Fixed?  I suppose that depends on one's point of view.

I was trying to avoid overt sarcasm  

[pjb45]

23 hours ago, Nolan said:

 

Then in that case (excuse the pun), if a shooter's gun failed to eject, i.e. left an empty case in the chamber and the shooter pried out the empty case with his pocket knife without first determining whether it was a partial case head separation, the shooter would be subject to DQ.

 

So how many on this forum should have been DQ'd for that offense?  I can think of one PCC only match where 98% of the match would have been disqualified!  LOL! 

 

Nolan

That was not my quote you cited but in the original thread. 

[Bagellord]

This is one of those things where common sense needs to prevail. it's very clear that the rule is meant for things like bullets being stuck in the barrel, or if the competitor somehow got dirt or mud stuck in the barrel. A stuck case was clearly not intended to be part of that rule.

[StealthyBlagga]

17 hours ago, Bagellord said:

This is one of those things where common sense needs to prevail. it's very clear that the rule is meant for things like bullets being stuck in the barrel, or if the competitor somehow got dirt or mud stuck in the barrel. A stuck case was clearly not intended to be part of that rule.

 

There is a sizable cohort of USPSA shooters and officials that insist the rules be applied AS WRITTEN... no ifs, buts or maybes. This is not a problem if the rules are written well, but alas that cannot always be said about USPSA rules.

[SGT_Schultz]

15 minutes ago, StealthyBlagga said:

 

There is a sizable cohort of USPSA shooters and officials that insist the rules be applied AS WRITTEN... no ifs, buts or maybes.

 

If flexibility in rule application is desired, IDPA is always waiting.

[Rookie]

Section 5.7 of the Multigun Rules (The USPSA version) reads much differently than the USPSA Competition Rules.  I was unable to find (for example) a statement specifically tying any attempt to clear a squib to an almost instant DQ.  Is a squib event that occurs during a Rifle, Shotgun or Multigun event inherently less risky?

[Schutzenmeister]

3 hours ago, Rookie said:

Section 5.7 of the Multigun Rules (The USPSA version) reads much differently than the USPSA Competition Rules.  I was unable to find (for example) a statement specifically tying any attempt to clear a squib to an almost instant DQ.  Is a squib event that occurs during a Rifle, Shotgun or Multigun event inherently less risky?

 

See USPSA Multigun 10.5.19.

[HCH]

On 8/3/2021 at 12:07 PM, StealthyBlagga said:

By this logic, cycling the slide to clear an unextracted case or a misfired round would be a match DQ. Another example of the law of unintended consequences caused by an overly-micromanaging rules document.

 

Exactly. I will not be DQing anyone for a malfunction—unless they’re clearing  a bullet stuck in the barrel. 

[Robertwil18]

11 hours ago, HCH said:

 

Exactly. I will not be DQing anyone for a malfunction—unless they’re clearing  a bullet stuck in the barrel. 

As an RO, how do you intend to tell the difference when they break out a tool and begin to try to dislodge an obstruction from the muzzle end of the pistol?  Could it be possible to have a stuck bullet in the barrel AND a case head separation that is what they are attempting to clear?  

[Cuz]

I wonder if you sort of draw the line at sticking something down the muzzle of the barrel???

 

if you can clear it from the back end maybe it’s ok to let them try???

[MHicks]

30 minutes ago, Cuz said:

I wonder if you sort of draw the line at sticking something down the muzzle of the barrel???

 

if you can clear it from the back end maybe it’s ok to let them try???

I'm not a rules expert but I think that will be the dividing line.

[HCH]

On 8/6/2021 at 5:47 PM, MHicks said:

I'm not a rules expert but I think that will be the dividing line.

 

I agree 

[Foxtrotx1]

Two questions: 

 

Are you allowed to retrieve equipment during a stage that is not on your belt? (assuming the rod was not on the belt)

 

Who brings a rod for clearing cases on a stage? I'm wondering what kind of brass they are using and what loads... 

[Boomstick303]

45 minutes ago, Foxtrotx1 said:

Are you allowed to retrieve equipment during a stage that is not on your belt? (assuming the rod was not on the belt)

 

No.  It is unknown if the malfunctioned gun is "loaded or not".

 

5.7.5 Under no circumstances is a competitor permitted to leave a course of fire in the possession of a loaded firearm (see Rule 10.5.13).

 

45 minutes ago, Foxtrotx1 said:

Who brings a rod for clearing cases on a stage? I'm wondering what kind of brass they are using and what loads...

 

Once the shooter has indicated to the RO the Malfunction cannot be cleared the RO will terminate the course of fire and is responsible to make sure the gun is safe to remove from the stage.

 

5.7.7 In the event that a Range Officer terminates a course of fire due to a suspicion that a competitor has an unsafe firearm or unsafe ammunition (e.g. a “squib” load), the Range Officer will take whatever steps he deems necessary to return both the competitor and the range to a safe condition. The Range Officer will then inspect the firearm or ammunition and proceed as follows:

 

Typically someone in the squad will have a zip tie or squib rod to verify if there is a squib in the gun.  I personally carry a zip tie for squib checks if someone needs it.  Not much for putting my hand in front of the muzzle when inserting a squib rod/cleaning rod.  The zip tie or squib rod/cleaning rod can not be given to the shooter during the course of fire.  Now if the shooter were carry those items onto the stage before the start signal they could use them, but I would argue using a squib rod/ cleaning rod could be construed as clearing a squib.  Therefore: a DQ.

[varminter22]

I'm late to read this topic.  I see the last response was over two months ago.  

 

Has there been a ruling from the NROI?