Jwickersham Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 (edited) At a local match today the SO was not backing up fast enough for the shooter and the shooter blew past and behind the SO sweeping him with his gun. I was keeping score and the SO, myself and that shooter concurred that the shooter should be DQ'd. If the shooter had stopped he would have been given a reshoot due the interference. But the MD gave the shooter a reshoot said that sweeping the SO was due the interference and did not matter. What say ya'll? Edited June 18, 2006 by Jwickersham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfish Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 The MD made the correct call. I believe if you watch the "how to run a match" video, they go into some detail stating that if just such an event happens, it's the result of the SO not paying attention or being in the wrong place and that the shooter should not be penalized for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmap Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 MD definitely made the right call. You can't penalize the shooter for being "too fast" for the SO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Nesbitt Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 What about Safety Rule S1 (A) ? Endangering any person, including yourself? I think the DQ should stick. The shooter knew he was going to be moving fast. The SO didn't. Perhaps a word of caution to the SO from the shooter would have been appropriate. I think the current rule book tops the old video. I did a quick look through the book and couldn't find anything about SO interference and reshoots. Just that the SO should stay out of the way of the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwickersham Posted June 18, 2006 Author Share Posted June 18, 2006 Thanks Bill I certified under you several years ago. And figured it better to error to the side of safety. Also the shooter concurred with the DQ for that reason. The rule book allows for a reshoot on the classifer if the SO interferes with the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Nesbitt Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Jim, I remember you and the class. Coldest day on record I think. Many of us shoot more than one sport and the rules kind of run together some times. The only thing I could find in the IDPA rule book says reshoots for the entire 30 round stage of the classifier may be shot due to gun problems and/or mental shooter errors for the purpose of accurate classification only if the classifier is NOT part of a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 I've motored past SO's a few times. SO's always underestimate the speed of the fat guy. I never swept the SO when I did this, but came close once. SO should have yelled stop before he got deep into the soup BTW. I know sometimes it happens too fast. I don't think it should be a DQ. Shooters don't have eyes in the back of their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mscott Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 I had the RO get a bit too close today in a USPSA match and seen it in his face when I turned about 150 degrees to shoot a target on the other side of the course. He was in no danger, but closer than I would have liked. I would think sweeping an RO would be a DQ since you really should be aware of everything going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwickersham Posted June 19, 2006 Author Share Posted June 19, 2006 (edited) This is the only thing that I can find in the LGB about a reshoot: C 11. No shooter can re-shoot a stage or string for gun or “mental” malfunctions except when shooting the “Classifier” match for classification purposes. If the classifier is part of a scored match, no re-shoots are permitted. Re-shoots are allowed for stage equipment malfunctions or SO interference with the shooter. Since this was not a gun or "mental" malfunction, the shooter would have been awarded the re-shoot. As far as the shooter having eyes in the back of his head, the shooter was facing up range with his gun down range. By the way the shooter is also an SO and SO'd the majority of the Match. Edited June 19, 2006 by Jwickersham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Nesbitt Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Thanks for finding C 11. I skipped right over that. I'm still finding new things in the new rule book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusher Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 I don't think it should be a DQ. Shooters don't have eyes in the back of their heads. Nor do I I too have on occasion blown by ROs most of the time they have been "new" to ROing and action shooting sports in general and truely underestimate the speed at which competitors can move and shoot. No point in penalizing the competitors for being fast, after all it is the time that determines the winner(s) in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Watson Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Big Jake rules. My fault, his fault, nobody's fault, he points a loaded gun at me, he has "endangered any person" and he is done for the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bayoupirate Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Ted's right. The RO's job 1 is safety. The moment he realized that he was ahead of a shooter's 180, he should have given the "STOP" command. This would assure the safety of all, especially himself. I too have overrun RO's and have even seen video of myself slowing down my feet on stages to avoid running in to RO's. I usually take a proactive role as a shooter and tell RO's the direction I'm taking off and that I'll be moving very fast. Most stages are designed with the shooter in mind and no thought of how an RO might have to follow a shooter through the course, backwards in many cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 It is the SO's responsibility to keep everyone safe. He should have been thinking ahead and maintained a safe distance beforehand so he didnt get into this situation. This was not the shooters fault. Especially if the course of fire required rear-ward movement. This should have been in the SO's mind-set before the first shot was fired. NOT A DQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f250sd Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 NO DQ.... If the shooter was going through te CoF as scripted, and the S.O. moves in the way, or does not move out of the way, knowing the shooter is coming, its the S.O. that has "Endangering any person, including yourself?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 IMO, if a SO is going to DQ a shooter for the SO screwing up, the SO should DQ himself/herself from the match also because the SO is just as guilty for breaking a safety rule. If the SO is not capable of staying behind the shooter at all times, that person should not be a SO in the first place. I have shot a stage where it was a RO trap. I was the first shooter on the stage. The stage had an U shaped hallways with lots of ports. You went forward, left, then backwards. When I took that first step backwards, the RO was just coming around the corner and realized he was now downrange from me with nowhere to go. The only reason I didn't have my gun pointed straight into his chest was because I turned almost to 180 as I took the first step back to get lined up for the next port. I didn't get DQ, the RO was just happy I turned the gun. I do know of a incident at a big match where the RO knocked the shooter's gun out of the holster after the buzzer, it was a total freak accident. RO was going to give a reshoot. MD happen to see the gun hit the ground and ordered a DQ since rules are rules. The RO even argued against the MD on that call, but MD's decision stood. The RO couldn't stop apologizing to the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 That is absolute nonsense. That MD was a moron. If the SO knocks my gun out of my holster he is the one that needs a DQ, not me. I knocked a timer out of a SO's hand once while drawing. Did I get a reshoot? Darn tooting I did. Where has all the common sense gone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 If the SO is not capable of staying behind the shooter at all times, that person should not be a SO in the first place. Absolutely! Where has all the common sense gone? +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 I think the responsibility for the loaded gun ought to be on the person that is actually holding the loaded gun. DQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 The shooter should be concerned with shooting...and only shooting...that is why there is an RO and scorekeeper there also.,..you can't hang every damn thing on the shooter... If you are RO'ing Carl Lewis, are you going to give him some room or try to stay in his pocket...Hope you got 9.8 speed 'cause Carl can do 9.9... It is the responsibility of the RO and anyone else administering the stage to stay out of the way of the shooter...period.. MD made the RIGHT call...if they touch you, impede you or cause you to alter your method of shooting the stage by something they do or their position...reshoot period... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusher Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 I think the responsibility for the loaded gun ought to be on the person that is actually holding the loaded gun. And it's the RO's RESPONSIBILITY to maintain a SAFE STAGE/PIT for which a COMPETITOR is to shoot in. If the RO fubars the stage for ANY COMPETITOR as a result of his OWN INEPTITUDE send the RO packing give the shooter a Re-SHOOT with a new (COMPETENT) RO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gb32 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 This is a pretty interesting situation. I'm a lefty and have clobbered coutless SOs on the draw, not to mention nearly running over some backing up. I really believe that the fault lies with the woolgathering SO but I can understand Flex and others views as well. I know that if I was the MD/Rangemaster I would have a very serious discussion with the SO. My $0.02, for what its worth, Gary Byerly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the duck of death Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Joe D, I agree, I got too close to a shooter and clipped his elbow on the draw. I gave him the option of a re shoot. If you can't keep up with the shooter get out of the So business. NO DQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul B Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 I don't care what action shooting sport it is. If someone gets muzzled in a course of fire the person controlling the gun must go bye, bye. Anything else is asking for a major catastrophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 The shooter should be concerned with shooting...and only shooting...that is why there is an RO and scorekeeper there also.,..you can't hang every damn thing on the shooter... The shooter shouldn't be concerned with safety??? I want no part of running any shooters that think like that. Period. If the Range Official gets in the way and screws up, sure the shooter gets another crack at the game. If the shooter fails one of the 4 basic laws of gunhandling...game over. (Quite possibly, the game of life for the person they cover with their loaded gun.) game vs. safety Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now