GeorgeInNePa Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 [Forum Administrator Hat on]By the way, are you a USPSA member...? For the record, this isn't an USPSA ONLY forum, and this isn't an USPSA topic. Even if it were, there is no need to question somebody's membership status. Non-USPSA members are certainly more than welcome in discussions on the Brian Enos Forums. Others have replied already, but I would like to also. The other poster seems to be of the opinion that this is a mistake on USPSA's part. I would just like to know if he/she is a USPSA member. I mean no disrespect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Plus there's that whole Canada thing, where shooters didn't oppose the gun registration plan because they were assured that participants in legitimate shooting sports would not be affected... and then, surprise, surprise, when the law was in place, it was decided that IPSC was *not* deemed a legitimate-enough sport to warrant an exemption...B No particuluar judgement was made regarding the legitimacy of IPSC. The law provides for a "competitor's exemption" to the 10 round limit, however, there were two factors which worked against IPSC: 1. The federal law would require that the provinces administer yet another licensing scheme if "high capacity licenses" would be issued - work they were not really that interested in. 2. Gun control groups came out of the woodwork to lobby against the issuance of such licenses claiming they would render the prohibition nearly meaningless. The final official conclusion (from memory) - "After consultation with sporting organizations and gun control groups, it has been determined that the needs of public safety outweigh the legitimate interests of sportsmen and no such licenses will be issued." No shooting sports received the exemption provided for in the Canadian law. As someone else has said, once you frame the argument as a balance between the "needs of a game" and "public safety", the cards are stacked for a losing battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 The other poster seems to be of the opinion that this is a mistake on USPSA's part. I would just like to know if he/she is a USPSA member. I mean no disrespect. Sorry for any mis-communication George. I just wanted to ensure that our IPSC members know that they, and their opinions, are welcome (on a forum that has a lot of USPSA shooters). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 The other poster seems to be of the opinion that this is a mistake on USPSA's part. I would just like to know if he/she is a USPSA member. I mean no disrespect. Sorry for any mis-communication George. I just wanted to ensure that our IPSC members know that they, and their opinions, are welcome (on a forum that has a lot of USPSA shooters). That's ok, I'm just tring to frame the discussion. I wanted to know where the other point of veiw is coming from. Is this a USPSA member that is unhappy with our (USPSA's) position or is this a non-member who wants us to change to their (IPSC) point of view. I've been shooting USPSA off and on since 1992, I've talked to a lot of shooters, I've yet to hear one of them say we need to follow the IPSC rulebook to the letter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schutzenmeister Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 {...}I've been shooting USPSA off and on since 1992, I've talked to a lot of shooters, I've yet to hear one of them say we need to follow the IPSC rulebook to the letter. I've been a USPSA member since 1993 and shooting very actively the entire time, both in the US and internationally. I would like to see the gap between the rulebooks narrowed or possibly even closed. As someone who shoots (so to speak) with one foot in each rulebook, I see the differences between the two as almost childish. Most of what I read here appears to be, quite frankly, written by people who don't seem to understand just how small those differences really are. As I have said before, there are places where I believe the IPSC version is a little superior, and other places where I believe the USPSA version has the edge. I do not believe that final elimination of the differences between the two versions of the rules would be a bad thing. I would actually welcome it. That being said, I sincerely doubt I will ever see it come to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnia1911 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 (edited) ...I see the differences between the two as almost childish....there are places where I believe the IPSC version is a little superior, and other places where I believe the USPSA version has the edge. I do not believe that final elimination of the differences between the two versions of the rules would be a bad thing. I would actually welcome it. That being said, I sincerely doubt I will ever see it come to pass. +1 Has the IPSC Rules Committee ever considered hiring an independent, professional mitigation service? Edited May 3, 2006 by omnia1911 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 {...} I've been shooting USPSA off and on since 1992, I've talked to a lot of shooters, I've yet to hear one of them say we need to follow the IPSC rulebook to the letter. I've been a USPSA member since 1993 and shooting very actively the entire time, both in the US and internationally. I would like to see the gap between the rulebooks narrowed or possibly even closed. As someone who shoots (so to speak) with one foot in each rulebook, I see the differences between the two as almost childish. Most of what I read here appears to be, quite frankly, written by people who don't seem to understand just how small those differences really are. As I have said before, there are places where I believe the IPSC version is a little superior, and other places where I believe the USPSA version has the edge. I do not believe that final elimination of the differences between the two versions of the rules would be a bad thing. I would actually welcome it. That being said, I sincerely doubt I will ever see it come to pass. Well I've never shot matches outside the US, the rule differences don't bother me. I like our Divisions, our power factor, I like IPSC's "load-em-up" Production Division but not their trigger pull limit and the fact you have to send the gun to the manufacturer to get it refinished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbadaboom Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 +1Has the IPSC Rules Committee ever considered hiring an independent, professional mitigation service? Just what we need. Another nose in the buisness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 I just hope this works out in the end. There is no way USPSA can stay with IPSC if ISPC doesn't allow another rules waiver. I'm not sure about Open and Revolver, but the other divisions, including our most popular, would be devastated. Just trashing the 20 extensions for my 2 Limited guns and buying legal versions would put me out somewhere around $1400. Production shooters may as well just buy new guns, ignoring anything that doesn't hold a bunch of ammo. L-10 and SS shooters can just go home and stay there I guess. I just can't see our members accepting IPSC rules. No doubt there would be a mass cry to drop out of IPSC. Surely this is obvious to the powers that be in IPSC. Of course all that is jumping the gun, but this is why I really hope all this works out in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Something else to factor in... Shooters in the US of A have a number of other shooting options to choose from as well. Just at my home club, there is : - USPSA - IDPA (new for us) - Steel Challenge - NRA Action Pistol (Bianchi) - Cowboy Action (SASS) - (IHMSA Silhouette, CMP, and others...) Dang...all that shooting...I wish my "home club" wasn't an hour away. Oh...don't forget some of the popular non-affiliated matches that do well without any input from a larger organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted May 3, 2006 Author Share Posted May 3, 2006 Something else to factor in...Shooters in the US of A have a number of other shooting options to choose from as well. Just at my home club, there is : - USPSA - IDPA (new for us) - Steel Challenge - NRA Action Pistol (Bianchi) - Cowboy Action (SASS) - (IHMSA Silhouette, CMP, and others...) Dang...all that shooting...I wish my "home club" wasn't an hour away. Oh...don't forget some of the popular non-affiliated matches that do well without any input from a larger organization. ... and then all the other games .. shotguns sports, benchrest, F class, class 3 games, and up to and including cannon matches. Just another one of those things that sets the US in a slightly different light then other regions. In some regions IPSC may be the big dog, in the US its just a another runt trying to get some warmth out of the puppy pile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caps Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 In some regions IPSC may be the big dog, in the US its just a another runt trying to get some warmth out of the puppy pile. Your statement is probably more profound than you realize! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnia1911 Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 (edited) +1 Has the IPSC Rules Committee ever considered hiring an independent, professional mitigation service? Just what we need. Another nose in the buisness. Might work better than the egos, power players, and personalities that seem to muck up the business end of the gears right now. Edited May 3, 2006 by omnia1911 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Omina1911, I just have to ask. Because I wonder about where your perspective comes from. Are you a US based shooter? Are you a USPSA member? OR Are you not US based and are you even an IPSC or USPSA shooter for that matter? Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbadaboom Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 (edited) Might work better than the egos, power players, and personalities that seem to muck up the business end of the gears right now. I don't see what you see. That's for sure. We have USPSA presenting an "Olive Branch" here, so to speak, to IPSC and you say that ego's, power plays, and personalities are mucking things up. This gives me cause to question "Your" motives and reasons here. I am now interested in knowing the answers to the questions asked about you by other members. Edited May 4, 2006 by Bigbadaboom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnia1911 Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 I sincerely wish the best of luck to both IPSC and USPSA in regards to their recent decisions. The sport will be forever changed. Hopefully, it will be for the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 Omina, How about you answer the questions several of us have put forth. We really don't care exactly who and where you are. We do not want your name and address. What we'd like to know, based on your posts on this thread is are you a USPSA shooter? Are you a US based shooter? are you even a shooter? Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckw Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 How about you answer the questions several of us have put forth. We really don't care exactly who and where you are. We do not want your name and address. What we'd like to know, based on your posts on this thread is are you a USPSA shooter? Are you a US based shooter? are you even a shooter? What does it matter? This thread is about the IPSC-USPSA relationship - it's not supposed to be a witch hunt about people who choose to keep a low profile, and this includes me. It's not a board requirement to reveal personal information, so who made you Sheriff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted May 4, 2006 Author Share Posted May 4, 2006 It is not about being sheriff. It is about understanding where people are coming from. Sometimes a person opinion or position doesn't make sense unless you frame it in the correct context. omnia1911 is free to ignore the questions, but someone who refuses to answer some simple non-intrusive questions, may find himself ignored in turn, or their opinion devalued. It isn't about cornering someone or accusing them that don't have the right to an opinion becuase they are or are not part of a certain region. It is about understand someones position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbadaboom Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 so who made you Sheriff? He's not a Sheriff and he doesn't play one on T.V.. But, He did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once. Sorry, couldn't resist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 CLOSED (until I sort this out, please hold off on sending me PM's for now) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts