S2 no decocker

[Jeremyc_1999]

1 minute ago, HesedTech said:

According to the rules, no. However, "decocked" has to be defined as the hammer fully forward as stated in the rules. If you mean a gun with a decocker instead of a "safety" then the answer is still no.

 

I have guns which will allow the safety to be engaged with the hammer fully forward, "decocked" and others which can't be, however the rule remains the same; the safety is not required to be engaged when the hammer is fully forward.

 

Hope that answers the speculation. Me thinks you are trying to find and exception to the rule book. As always the final answer is the RO is the Captain and holder of safety. If they see or feel something is possibly unsafe or questionable then stop the shooter, unload, show safe and call the RM for an interpretation. 

Not trying to find an exception, was just discussing with a friend after a match when another shooter (was shooting a beretta) reholstered with gun decocked but didn’t engage the safety. My friend was ROing him at the time and didn’t do anything. They way I interpreted the rules was if the gun has a safety it has to be engaged whether or not it was decocked (USPSA rules)

[HesedTech]

2 hours ago, Jeremyc_1999 said:

They way I interpreted the rules was if the gun has a safety it has to be engaged whether or not it was decocked (USPSA rules)

I have only run a Beretta 92 once and the "safety-decocking lever" is not a the same as on the Tanfoglio or CZ, it allows the user to decock and put the hammer in a safe position. The question you should discuss is this, is the hammer fully down and or in a de-cocked position? 

 

According to the rules, at least to me, both of these are the same, "hammer fully down or de-cocked.” Neither requires the "safety" being engaged. As always this forum is for discussion only and rather than DQing the shooter get a ruling from the RM or whoever the match official is. 

 

I believe the rules do not state the safety has to be engaged when "de-cocked." However,  the original question was "half-cocked," (which we tend to go off on) and yes in my opinion the safety would have to be engaged because the hammer is neither fully down nor decocked.

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by HesedTech

[slavex]

DQ'ing at half cock? No, there is zero difference, between a gun with a decocker or one without, at least in the CZs when the hammer is at half cock, and the ones with a decocker aren't expected to apply their safeties when holstered. 

I too would agree that the idea behind the rule regarding half cock was that it wouldn't actually bump anyone until the start signal occurred, but the rule is written quite specifically, so the instant you put a manually decocked pistol into the holster at half cock, you're bumped. It is clearly state as being so

[jripper]

56 minutes ago, HesedTech said:

I have only run a Beretta 92 once and the "safety-decocking lever" is not a the same as on the Tanfoglio or CZ, it allows the user to decock and put the hammer in a safe position. The question you should discuss is this, is the hammer fully down and or in a de-cocked position? 

 

According to the rules, at least to me, both of these are the same, "hammer fully down or de-cocked.” Neither requires the "safety" being engaged. As always this forum is for discussion only and rather than DQing the shooter get a ruling from the RM or whoever the match official is. 

 

I believe the rules do not state the safety has to be engaged when "de-cocked." However,  the original question was "half-cocked," (which we tend to go off on) and yes in my opinion the safety would have to be engaged because the hammer is neither fully down nor decocked.

 

 

 

8.1.2.1 and 8.1.2.2 specify ready conditions for SA guns and DA guns.  DA guns do not have to have the safety on if hammer down or decocked.  

[HesedTech]

2 hours ago, jripper said:

8.1.2.1 and 8.1.2.2 specify ready conditions for SA guns and DA guns.  DA guns do not have to have the safety on if hammer down or decocked.  

Correct, but the controversy is a gun without a de-cocker being placed in half-cock. It is not the same thing.

 

A DA-SA gun without a de-cocker must have hammer fully down, period. If the shooter want to half-cock it then safety must be on like other divisions and the shooter gets bumped to Open. I think we are all saying the same thing. 
 

[slavex]

no we aren't all saying the same thing, a non decocker gun that is decocked to half cock doesn't need the safety on, it only needs the safety on if it's fully cocked. 

[HesedTech]

2 hours ago, slavex said:

no we aren't all saying the same thing, a non decocker gun that is decocked to half cock doesn't need the safety on, it only needs the safety on if it's fully cocked. 

Okay, we disagree.

 

Until there’s a clear ruling from the home office as an RO I will stop a shooter with a non de-cocker gun who holsters it in the half cocked position. The rule is clear and defines the type of guns, those with and those without a de-cocker. To decide there is something in between is personal opinion. 
 

“Manually decocking to half cock is not allowed and will be moved to open division.”

 

Open Division rule covered by 8.1.2.1 “hammer cocked and safety engaged.”

 

If the competitor is moved to open ALL the rules for Open apply, including safety engaged . The rules are quite clear and there isn’t any In between land.

 

Why is this so difficult and why would anyone want to compromise the rule and safety?

 

 

[GeneBray]

21 minutes ago, HesedTech said:

Okay, we disagree.

 

Until there’s a clear ruling from the home office as an RO I will stop a shooter with a non de-cocker gun who holsters it in the half cocked position. The rule is clear and defines the type of guns, those with and those without a de-cocker. To decide there is something in between is personal opinion. 
 

“Manually decocking to half cock is not allowed and will be moved to open division.”

 

Open Division rule covered by 8.1.2.1 “hammer cocked and safety engaged.”

 

If the competitor is moved to open ALL the rules for Open apply, including safety engaged . The rules are quite clear and there isn’t any In between land.

 

Why is this so difficult and why would anyone want to compromise the rule and safety?

 

 

If a loaded firearm is holstered and not a specified ready condition for the firearm, then I believe that is a DQ. 

[slavex]

because there is no difference between the hammer position on a decocker version and a non decocker version when it comes to the hammer at half cock, physically I mean. On the decocker version that is where a Production gun's hammer is put and stays, and no safety needs to be applied. The bump to Open for the non decocker version doesn't somehow make it unsafe for the hammer to be in that position. If it did, then the rule wouldn't bump you to Open, it would DQ you. 

[waktasz]

I'm fairly certain the decocking to half cock is an INSTANT move to open is a typo or f*#k up in the rulebook. Assuming the competitor cocks the hammer again and fully lowers it before holstering, the stage will start as normal. Someone should email Troy or their AD about it. I'm too lazy

[SGT_Schultz]

7 hours ago, GeneBray said:

If a loaded firearm is holstered and not a specified ready condition for the firearm, then I believe that is a DQ. 

 

There is only one instance in which you're right: holstering a handgun with the hammer cocked and no safety engaged.

 

Otherwise, no, it isn't a DQ.

 

 

[slavex]

@waktasz if it's a typo it's carried over to Carry Optics as well and a pretty significant one at that. 

[waktasz]

Copypasta

[IHAVEGAS]

4 hours ago, slavex said:

@waktasz if it's a typo it's carried over to Carry Optics as well and a pretty significant one at that. 

 

If I didn't think I'd get another "well, apparently you can't read" response (paraphrased) I'd send an email to HQ and ask if it was a typo. 

 

Maybe somebody of a more optimistic nature will. 

 

As I understood it part of the justification for losing our rulebooks (now available on Amazon for something like $9.00 ea ) was to be able to fix stuff like this efficiently. 

[HesedTech]

8 hours ago, SGT_Schultz said:

holstering a handgun with the hammer cocked and no safety engaged.

Sarge,

 

Which leads to the question, is a 1/2 cocked gun which is not a de-cocker considered “hammer not fully forward” and therefore it is back and requires the safety to be on when holstered and ready to start?

 

This is what needs to be clarified and therefore close the opinion gap. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by HesedTech

[SGT_Schultz]

1 hour ago, HesedTech said:

Sarge,

 

Which leads to the question, is a 1/2 cocked gun which is not a de-cocker considered “hammer not fully forward” and therefore it is back and requires the safety to be on when holstered and ready to start?

 

This is what needs to be clarified and therefore close the opinion gap. 

 

I agree it's a murky area.  I agree with @slavex interpretation, since decocker CZs drop the hammer to that spot.  It is not unsafe.  If it was the penalty would be a DQ and not a bump to open.

 

I don't have any CZs with a safety, so I don't know if the safety can even be engaged with the hammer at half cock.  Something tells me that it depends on how the safety was fitted to the sear in each individual gun.

 

The easiest thing to do is to do away with any mention of half cock in the rules.  The difference in the force it takes to pull the trigger is hardly measurable, and I've tried.  It's really only a difference in reach to the trigger.

Edited November 19, 2021 by SGT_Schultz

[HesedTech]

3 hours ago, SGT_Schultz said:

The easiest thing to do is to do away with any mention of half cock in the rules. 

Agreed

[slavex]

It's a pretty simple fix, add in "after the start signal" to the wording regarding being bumped to Open, and clarify that it also isn't a DQ to not have the safety on at half cock. And @SGT_Schultz is right, there isn't much difference in the trigger pull from half cock or full decocked, but, I wouldn't change the rule to allow half cocked starts for non decocker guns either.