10 Round Limits Help Our Fellow Shooters.

[Chuck D]

My buddy Gary writes: "Would it not be logical then to create an Open 10 for those shooters in the restricted states? Why Limited and not Open?"

Well Gary...why not? You seemed to champion and create SSD due to the perceived "need" to protect the 1911 SS platform. Would it be much of a stretch to protect the same platform after you screwed a comp and a scope mount on that SS 38 Super? If memory serves me correctly, it was the BOD decision not to create an Open 10 division. One would assume that the decision not to do so would best be explained by those whom voted against the idea...not those members who supported the idea.

"Magazine capacity does not indicate competitiveness."

This is bull...through and through. If this were not the case, we'd NEVER see the likes of an STI/SV/Para platform gun enter this sport. The P-9 was hot rodded in the early 90's because it held 15-16 rounds of major 9 vs. 10+1 of 38 Super in a SS 1911 platform. I get SO tired of hearing this and then seeing a 95% ratio of hi-cap guns in competitors holsters at EVERY match I attend and reading post after post of how to squeeze an extra round or two into a magazine.

Solving this problem is so God awful simple. If the number of divisions is a concern, why not relegate SSD and L10 to category status under Limited Division? We get to keep L10 all be it in category format and utilize ONE classification for Limited and L10. SSD can be utilized in the same fashion. Revolutionary thinking huh?

Of course...I would NOT support this plan if USPSA didn't apply the same standard to SSD.

There is much more that meets the eye here in regards to the lobbying effort to strip USPSA members of L10. I just wish those responsible would be brave enough to publically state their intentions instead of hiding behind the "we have too many divisions", "only sandbaggers hide in L10", and " why not Open 10 if Limited 10 is needed so badly" argument.

How hard would it be to leave the USPSA members in the 6-7 capacity restricted states alone?

Edited May 9, 2006 by Chuck D

[North]

I shoot L-10 and limited; I use a 1911 SS 45ACP for both. I use 10 round Mags. I have a race holster, and I place my mag carriers where ever the heck I want them. I'm saving up for a S_I and I will shoot limited. The first local match I won happened to be limited.

The fastest way for a new shooter to shoot limited is by starting out in L-10 with thier single stack 1911.

If I wanted to shoot IDPA, I would. But I joined USPSA and I like it. I tried the IDPA and didn't like it.

Whats next tactical reloads and use of cover?

If L-10 goes away, so will I.

[Coach]

Leave Limited 10 alone. Leave Production alone. Single stack is great for those who want to shoot it. Leave it alone. Why single stack does not allow ten round magazines if hard for me to understand, but if that is what they want fine.

Why do we have too many divisions? I don't think we do. If some people want to start a single shot muzzle loading division fine.

[Bigbadaboom]

"Open 10"

Why not?

It would be a great show of how much we really do care for our brother/sister shooters in those States where they are getting screwed by their State Government.

The problem is that so many members have a "What's good for me and my view" attitude. Why can't we take a "My fellow Shooters have problems with their State laws so let's work around thier local laws so that we call all shoot together" attitude. Within the United States there are States where folks can't have more than 10 rounds in a mag. We belong to the United States Practical Shooting Association. With this said then why is it so difficult to pull away from individual peeves, gripes and grievances and do Whatever the hell it takes to help our fellow shooters. All of this "Mine's good for me so to hell with what is good for you" attitude is a big part of why our rights have deteriorated so much.

I'm not wanting this to turn into a political thread. I want this to be a "Let's figure out how we can give every law abiding person in the U.S. who wishes to shoot this sport as many options as possible to do so" thread.

[Lurper]

So, new shooters with 1911 style 45s are forced to use 8 round mags potentially on 9 round arrays. The people most unsure of themselves (new shooters) are put in a situation where they can't miss and must reload everytime a foot moves? If they chose a non-single action, then they can have 10 rounds and maybe a miss or 2, but not the major power single stack user.

If L-10 goes away, the 9 round arrays need to go also. All classifiers should provide for a minimum of 1 mandatory reload so shooters must prove their reload skills under time pressure rather than buying their way out of having to reload.

It seems ironic, but new shooters should start in open where they only focus on shooting then advance to limited then production or single stack as their skills increase and planning and performing multiple reloads isn't a problem. Instead, it's the opposite.

You hit the core of the issue that no one seems to notice. IF a course is properly designed, there should be little or no advantage to magazine capacity. In the early years, most shooting positions had 6 shot arrays. That was considered a neutral set-up. If that concept was followed, competitve advantage through magazine capacity would be a non-issue. The problem is that it requires more work on the match director/course designer. The other issue is that as more people joined the sport, some of the better ideas were not passed on.

I don't particularly care for the other classes outside of open either way. If it were up to me, there would be three classes: open, stock and revolver. No arbitrary limits on mag capacity (it's ironic how we blast congress for imposing an arbitrary limit and then do the same) or anything else. The reality is that a good shooter is competitive in any class with any gun. Shooters should strive to become a good shooter, not a good L10, productionor open shooter. I find the mindset that we need to bend the rules or create new classes to attract new sponsors/shooters troubling. The sport grew before this mindset creeped in and would have continued to grow without it.

Do you really think the sport would be less fun without all of the different classes?

[Vlad]

Do you really think the sport would be less fun without all of the different classes?

Yes, I do. With no limits we would all be shooting MAC-10's for the 30 round capacity. As fun as that much be, it isn't really practical. And that pesky P is still in the name of the sport. No one in their right mind would carry a Open gun or even keep one in their night stand, for more reasons then I want to list. Most Limited guns are only a step behind, some of them are actual "real" guns. If you break up the game into open, stock, revolver, with no capacity limit, you just kicked out that P and all new shooters who don't own a super wiz bang, never needs to be reloaded, open gun with a Dillon 650 attached to the bottom of it.

[Gary Stevens]

Chuck your premise is flawed. Nowhere in my statement of intent on the 1911 Division was there a mention of the need to protect it. I personally feel it needs no protection. Perhaps a re-read of the intent is in order.

Since I have previously stated my hesitance to eliminate L-10 I don't see any reason to repeat it again. However, I don't think the threat/promise of quitting if L-10 goes away is the best way to further your position. Many who were big names in the sport are gone for one reason or another, and life goes on. When I get to thinking I am really important to the sport I stick my hand in a bucket of water, pull it out and look at the size of the hole that is left. Then things come back into focus.

Gary

[ipscbob]

I shoot L-10 and limited; I use a 1911 SS 45ACP for both. I use 10 round Mags. I have a race holster, and I place my mag carriers where ever the heck I want them. I'm saving up for a S_I and I will shoot limited. The first local match I won happened to be limited.

The fastest way for a new shooter to shoot limited is by starting out in L-10 with thier single stack 1911.

If I wanted to shoot IDPA, I would. But I joined USPSA and I like it. I tried the IDPA and didn't like it.

Whats next tactical reloads and use of cover?

If L-10 goes away, so will I.

North, all excellent points. These are just the attitudes that WILL drive some shooters out of the sport. Forums like this can be destructive in that they give people a chance to voice things anonymously that they probably wouldn't voice face to face. I have never heard this kind of negative elitist attitude about USPSA out of this forum. Well.....actually, maybe in an article in last months front sight

[Nebraskan]

As a new shooter, I have been attending a weekly indoor match on Tuesday nights, in addition to the weekend matches, trying to get as much match trigger time as possible. As it is a small indoor range, we are generally limited to 16-22 shot stages. I do download my STI to shoot L10 only to practice reloads in a match situation. I feel I am cheating myself of an opportunity to learn if I blaze through the stage on one mag. The Tuesday night match is the only time I shoot L10, but I for one is glad it is there.

[Genghis]

In response to two of the threads in this, um, thread:

Open 10! Bring it on! I switched from Limited to Open to remove distractions (that pesky sight alignment, reloads, etc.). Now what meager reloading skills I had have atrophied. Open 10 would let me use a dot and comp, but require me to brush up on reloading skills.

I don't see how anyone can say that mag cap doesn't make a difference. With 29 rounds in my Open gun I don't have to reload on a lot of stages, which absolutely cuts my time. With my P14.45 Limited gun, I have 14+1 (17+1 with extensions). This means one or two reloads each stage. On a course of less than but close to 29 rounds, I don't really get to choose where to reload. With a couple of whiffs on steel, I have another unplanned reload. Even where there is a reload, I can reload anytime after the first few shots and before the last few shots.

[LPatterson]

I don't particularly care for the other classes outside of open either way. If it were up to me, there would be three classes: open, stock and revolver. No arbitrary limits on mag capacity (it's ironic how we blast congress for imposing an arbitrary limit and then do the same) or anything else. The reality is that a good shooter is competitive in any class with any gun. Shooters should strive to become a good shooter, not a good L10, productionor open shooter. I find the mindset that we need to bend the rules or create new classes to attract new sponsors/shooters troubling. The sport grew before this mindset creeped in and would have continued to grow without it.

The reason there is an Open Division is because shooters that didn't have comps and optical sights were getting beaten by those that did. Open Division has 170mm mags but Limited can only have 140mm so lets let Limited play with 170mm mags, then the only difference would be optics. If you had followed Revolver Division rulings you would remember that revolvers originally were allowed 8 before the change was made to 6 rounds between reloads or play in open.

The sport has a lot more shooters because we allow so many divisions and if we don't start supporting each other don't expect other shooting disciplines to support us if the government decides to regulate what caliber we can shoot as has been done in other countries where IPSC is the regulating body.

[Bigbadaboom]

This thread isn't the place to discuss whether or not reloads make a difference in competition. It's not about Hi-cap mags vs. 10 round mags.

This thread is about supporting fellow shooters in areas of the United States where they can only run 10 rounds in a magazine and still giving them th ability to shoot outside their respective States and compete with the rest of the United States.

Please help keep this thread on track with the issue with which it was premised.

I'm still waiting to hear how "Hiding", "Sandbagging", "To many divisions" or whatever is a good excuse to screw those shooters located in restrictive law locations.

Also, Single Stack division will not replace L10. They have two totally seperate purposes so Single Stack can absorb it's own thread also, please.

EDIT:

Open Division has 170mm mags but Limited can only have 140mm so lets let Limited play with 170mm mags, then the only difference would be optics.

I really like this idea.

Edited May 9, 2006 by Bigbadaboom

[Waltermitty]

As a dedicated "Limited 6" shooter, this discussion is kinda humorous. Particularly after shooting a match with an 8-reload-8 classifier.

I carry a "B" card, but I was soundly beaten by a "U" revolver shooter; he just happens to be a GM in everything else. Therefore, my official position is that the equipment isn't the most important factor in the game.

While I tend to be a "more divisions is great!" kinda guy, it's the administration of the matches and USPSA itself that gets expotentially more complicated every time we add a divison.

I strongly feel that if we put our energies into improving the course design rules, and consolidate or simplify some of the equipment rules, we could accomodate those geographic areas with certain legal restrictions without burdening those other areas that don't suffer the same constraints. I think we would also have better matches in general.

9 shots per shooting position is, frankly, pretty simplistic. Moving it back to 8 or up to 11 really doesn't get us much of an improvement. I think we can do better, and do it without creating a huge burden on course designers or greatly increasing adminstrative overhead.

Will a person with a 30 round mag always have an advantage over a person with a 10 round mag? Sure, as long as course design rules encourage hose-fests at 4-target arrays from 3 shooting positions. Which, if you will notice, is the generic default course description for a very large number of stages you see at typical matches...

[Chuck D]

"Chuck your premise is flawed."

As usual....

"Many who were big names in the sport are gone for one reason or another, and life goes on. When I get to thinking I am really important to the sport I stick my hand in a bucket of water, pull it out and look at the size of the hole that is left. Then things come back into focus."

No Gary...I'm not important...L10 is important. Without it...I and some others have little reason to participate any longer. Seems a simple concept to grasp...

The overwhelming majority of posts here support L10 and Production Division as they are currently. I thank them for their support.

It's difficult for people to understand what it's like for us in capacity limited states unless you live in one. All I ask is that you keep the above fact in mind.

"I'm still waiting to hear how "Hiding", "Sandbagging", "To many divisions" or whatever is a good excuse to screw those shooters located in restrictive law locations. "

Me too... and it's been a LONG wait.

Edited May 9, 2006 by Chuck D

[norbs007]

Let's say that today, 05/08/2006, Joe Shooter sitting at his office in San Francisco is cruising the net and comes across this site or another and reads how great USPSA/IPSC is. Joe decides that he's going to look into getting into this sport. He shops around and finds a range and decides "This is great. I'm going to get into this." Joe starts looking for a gun. He decides he likes Limited and finds out that the "Zip-Bang" gun for Limited is the wide body S_I/PARA/Caspian.....etc......etc. Well, in California you can't get ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds so Joe decides he'll shoot Limited 10. He gets a Kali legal S_I and all his stuff and goes out and starts practicing and gets good and decides he's going to shoot the nationals. By the time Joe gets to the Nationals the 10 round rule has been completely done away with. No more L10 so Joe has to compete in Limited division but due to the laws of his State he doesn't have any mags that hold more than 10 rounds plus all of his training has centered around reloading per L10 shooting. Joe just got screwed not only by his States Government but also by USPSA members who screamed "Get rid of L10 and all 10 round limits".

Sorry, but I just got to throw this in. It is possible that by next month Joe Shooter will be out of luck. Unless he lives outside of San Francisco he won't be allowed to own a handgun .

I strongly support L10 and Production, I would hate to see nice people go if these divisions were to be eliminated. I believe USPSA will not be as strong as it is now without these divisions.

[Clyde]

Celebrating Diversity

I hope L-10 remains - I will continue to shoot a SSTK in L-10 and SSTK just cause - It's so darn fun.

I believe L-10 and Production to be good for new shooters to the sport.

[Middle Man]

Waltermitty (momentarly not in a fantasy world ) said: I strongly feel that if we put our energies into improving the course design rules...I think we would also have better matches in general.

Spot on! Good course design, creative course design can negate some capacity advantages. Some target setups can greatly hinder dot shooters while being nothing new or difficult to an iron sight shooter.

Is it all too cliche to say...the indian, not the arrow so what's capacity really got to do with it at the end of the day? An excellent, highly skilled shooter with only 10 rounds will, a vast majority of the time, score better than an average shooter with high caps.

Edited May 9, 2006 by Middle Man

[Lurper]

Do you really think the sport would be less fun without all of the different classes?

Yes, I do. With no limits we would all be shooting MAC-10's for the 30 round capacity. As fun as that much be, it isn't really practical. And that pesky P is still in the name of the sport. No one in their right mind would carry a Open gun or even keep one in their night stand, for more reasons then I want to list. Most Limited guns are only a step behind, some of them are actual "real" guns. If you break up the game into open, stock, revolver, with no capacity limit, you just kicked out that P and all new shooters who don't own a super wiz bang, never needs to be reloaded, open gun with a Dillon 650 attached to the bottom of it.

What someone carries has nothing to do with the sport. I believe that in the old days there was much more "P" than there is today, so I don't understand how you arrived at your conclusion.

The reason there is an Open Division is because shooters that didn't have comps and optical sights were getting beaten by those that did. Open Division has 170mm mags but Limited can only have 140mm so lets let Limited play with 170mm mags, then the only difference would be optics. If you had followed Revolver Division rulings you would remember that revolvers originally were allowed 8 before the change was made to 6 rounds between reloads or play in open.

The sport has a lot more shooters because we allow so many divisions and if we don't start supporting each other don't expect other shooting disciplines to support us if the government decides to regulate what caliber we can shoot as has been done in other countries where IPSC is the regulating body.

Oh really? So in the old days when you run what you brung didn't count? Open class was the only class. Comps and open sights don't make winners and losers, ask the Burner. Good shooters make winners and losers. IF courses are properly designed, the only advantage high caps have is one less chance for a mistake. There are plenty of good shooters with single stacks that will beat good shooters with high cap. When the stages are designed properly, high cap has no real advantage.

Properly designed courses negate the need for any classes other than open, stock, revolver.

As for our friends in restrictive states, the best thing we can do to help them is to advocate that they become politically involved. One of the premises of limiting magazine capacity is that there is no "sporting" use of high capacity magazines. By limiting the number of rounds loaded, we are making a de facto argument that supports that premise.

[Vlad]

What someone carries has nothing to do with the sport. I believe that in the old days there was much more "P" than there is today, so I don't understand how you arrived at your conclusion.

In the old days they didn't have wide body 2011's and C-More's. As soon as those showed up there was a clear need to change the rules.

Oh really? So in the old days when you run what you brung didn't count? Open class was the only class.

What was the attendance? How many members did the organization boast? What was the price of entry.

The old days, in any context, are rarely better days when put into proper light. Sitting back and remembering the "good old days" is always a fun and relaxing experience, but almost no one sits back and talks about the "bad old days", often a lot more of them then the good ones. How many states allowed concealed carry in the good old days?. How many gun models where competitive? Heck, how many where on the market? When it comes to hanguns and handgun sports these, right now, are the good days.

In the "old days" we used sharp sticks and rocks, but they are hard on the targets and reloads are bitch. The sport needs to grow or die, and need to adapt to current uses of firearms. We need to keep "practical" in mind, and sometimes that means "What guns are practical in combat?" and sometimes that means "What limitations do we have to deal with when translating real world concepts to a game?" and other times it means "How do we make the sport grow?". I can bet money that NEVER will the answer to these questions be "Lets go to a one size fits all sharp stick".

[Bigbadaboom]

Oh really? So in the old days when you run what you brung didn't count? Open class was the only class. Comps and open sights don't make winners and losers, ask the Burner. Good shooters make winners and losers. IF courses are properly designed, the only advantage high caps have is one less chance for a mistake. There are plenty of good shooters with single stacks that will beat good shooters with high cap. When the stages are designed properly, high cap has no real advantage.

Properly designed courses negate the need for any classes other than open, stock, revolver.

As for our friends in restrictive states, the best thing we can do to help them is to advocate that they become politically involved. One of the premises of limiting magazine capacity is that there is no "sporting" use of high capacity magazines. By limiting the number of rounds loaded, we are making a de facto argument that supports that premise.

This is not the topic of this thread.

[Chuck D]

"As for our friends in restrictive states, the best thing we can do to help them is to advocate that they become politically involved. One of the premises of limiting magazine capacity is that there is no "sporting" use of high capacity magazines."

Oh really.....

Lets talk about NY for a minute. We have a wealth of NRA members, we even have our own lobbying body... The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. We even have a second political lobbying arm called the Shooters Committee on Political Education (SCOPE) working on our behalf. What we also are is a "Blue State" and it doesn't take a Political Science major (which I am by the way) to figure out that as long as gun control advocates have a stranglehold on the political process...change will be difficult at best. Worthy of note...it was a Republican governor that passed mag cap restriction bills in N.Y. giving credibility to the theory that gun laws transend political party. If you research the issue, I'd bet you'd find similar conditions in the other capacity restricted states. Forgive me if I take offense to your post as I do find it offensive that you contend that your "assistance" in advocating political involvement is the solution for the shape N.Y. is in.

L10 allows us to compete on a national level without the need to borrow magazines or break the law by owning and/or assembling what we as a matter of law have been prohibited to do. N.Y. isn't as bad off as California in as far as enforcement goes but I have little doubt that enforcement measures are forthcoming. We are stuck with a system that hinders our ability to enjoy what others around the country possibly take for granted. USPSA was kind enough to provide a remedy for us not only to compete on a national level but attract new shooters as well. It is my hope that they stick to their word and continue to honor their agreements.

Edited May 9, 2006 by Chuck D

[Ron Ankeny]

In addition to legal restrictions, there are socio-economic reasons to support L10, Production, and SSD. We need a place for shooters on a budget to play. If we only had Open and Limited, we never would have been able to even get a club off the ground (locally).

[iweiny]

Oh really? So in the old days when you run what you brung didn't count? Open class was the only class. Comps and open sights don't make winners and losers, ask the Burner. Good shooters make winners and losers. IF courses are properly designed, the only advantage high caps have is one less chance for a mistake. There are plenty of good shooters with single stacks that will beat good shooters with high cap. When the stages are designed properly, high cap has no real advantage.

While I agree that a GM with a Revolver can tromp all over me with an Open gun that really is not the point. That is like saying Dale Earnhardt can beat my subaru with a Pinto. Of course he can, he does it for a living. I drive 10 miles to work each day and expect my subaru to last for 200,000 miles.

As a new USPSA shooter, and someone who lives in a not so gun friendly state, I recognize the need to get more people involved in the sport. Because if you want to talk politics the best thing we can do is get some of those on the fence into the sport. Get them to come out with their HK, Sig, frelling whatever. Then when they are into it, I mean REALLY into it, hook line, and sinker, you tell them, "oh sorry, you cant compete at the world level because you have voted against those types of guns". Now that my friends is getting politically active. The other untapped resource is women shooters. That is a place we really need to turn things around. Non-shooting women are, by far, the hardest to speak with when I talk about my shooting... That is until I tell them my wife shoots with me. Then the attitude softens and I can see the curiosity in their eyes... (But I digress.)

So what is the best way to get Joe Shooter into the sport. Give them a place where they can feel welcome and like they can win something. Be it divisions or classes. Classes are particularly good because they can track their progress and make personal goals. Lorrie is so happy to be a C shooter and is really working hard to become a B. Every major sport out there has some classes; weight limits for wrestlers and boxers, limits on equipment in auto racing, and here is a great example: http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/_Rainbo...Times-Top16.pdf

I think that was the point of this post. Divisions and classes are, when done properly, good for our sport. Because in the end the more people shooting the better off we all are.

Ira

[Bigbadaboom]

As for our friends in restrictive states, the best thing we can do to help them is to advocate that they become politically involved.

I agree with helping them get more involved in Government issues but that doesn't mean that we should just say "If you can't get legislation changed then too bad". I'm talking about what "WE" as USPSA/IPSC members can do for our fellow shooters within the sport. We should all get more invloved in retaining our rights but we also need to help our Comrades in enemy territory.

[hidurango]

I am a watcher from the side at the moment, and all this talk of mag capacity makes me wonder, how many rounds are shot on average?

I am thinking of going to my first match and since I do have a production gun (1 on the list and 1 not) so I was wondering ho many mags do you need (since they can only contain 10)?

Thanks, this is a great forum.

Edited May 10, 2006 by hidurango