Bullets Passing Through And Hitting Other Targets

[ExtremeShot]

For the first time I shot an "IDPA" style match last night. I usually only shoot IPSC and steel. I was OK with the shooting behind cover, slicing the pie, and retaining magazines, but what I didn't like was getting penalized for shooting a no-shoot that was placed behind a scorable target. They had a swinger that, when horizontal, covered a no-shoot that was behind it. Doing what I was taught, I shot it at the low spot on the way down.

I don't know diddly about IDPA....was this a legal stage design?

DM

[Merlin Orr]

Got gigged my last IDPA match for a scoring target shoot through to a no-shoot. I guess I should have been using frag bullets to avoid that over penetration issue....

[Jim Watson]

The IDPA rule is just the opposite of IPSC. Targets are considered penetrable and a shot that goes through one and hits another counts on both, whether threat or non-threat. The stage described was legit and is actually fairly common.

[Crusher]

I don't know diddly about IDPA....was this a legal stage design?

Yes it's a "legal stage design" and some of the more "interesting" stages incorporate the use of partial hardcover shoot targets, no-shoot placement, and moving targets to "force" accuracy as well as engagment points/angles in a stage.

From the IDPA Rules:

On a shoot through of a non-threat target that also strikes a threat

target, the contestant will get the penalty for the non-threat target

hit AND will get credit for the scored hit on the threat target. The

reverse also applies when a round on a threat target penetrates a

non-threat behind it. Hence the rule of thumb: all shoot throughs

count (except on hard cover).

[Hot Brass]

I don't know diddly about IDPA....was this a legal stage design?

Yes it's a "legal stage design" and some of the more "interesting" stages incorporate the use of partial hardcover shoot targets, no-shoot placement, and moving targets to "force" accuracy as well as engagment points/angles in a stage.

From the IDPA Rules:

On a shoot through of a non-threat target that also strikes a threat

target, the contestant will get the penalty for the non-threat target

hit AND will get credit for the scored hit on the threat target. The

reverse also applies when a round on a threat target penetrates a

non-threat behind it. Hence the rule of thumb: all shoot throughs

count (except on hard cover).

I prefer to avoid a non-threat behind a threat target when designing stages. It is very easy to require the shooter to be forced to leave cover in order to shoot the threat and avoid the non-threat. So in order to hit the threat (and avoid the non-threat) the shooter gets a PE for cover violation. This is a trap that should be avoided.

As far as the swinger that covers a non-threat during part of its arc, I don't consider that a trap. Remember Rule #4...

[TCK]

Just shoot hollow-points, they are more tactical...lol

I love USPSA!

[ExtremeShot]

++++1

I love USPSA!

[Bones]

Different games, different rules. It's all good.

The IDPA rule book is pretty thin - about 30-40 meaningful pages - large font and lots of pictures.

You can get a free copy on the IPDA website.

IDPA considers cardboard targets, and the threats/non-threats they represent, to be penetrable by 125 PF ammunition.

It's humorous to think you accepted hiding from cardboard targets but didn't believe your bullets would go through them.

Craig

Edited January 24, 2007 by Bones

[Merlin Orr]

Different games, different rules. It's all good.

Oh yea! All is good ... just a little memory work when changing between the two games.

[ExtremeShot]

Yep, I agree. Shooting is right up there with sex and ice cream. ....it's all good and I'll take any I can get.

Different games, different rules. It's all good.

....now if I can figure out how to have all 3 at the same time!!

Yep, I agree. Shooting is right up there with sex and ice cream. ....it's all good and I'll take any I can get.

[Bones]

Yep, I agree. Shooting is right up there with sex and ice cream. ....it's all good and I'll take any I can get.

Different games, different rules. It's all good.

....now if I can figure out how to have all 3 at the same time!!

Yep, I agree. Shooting is right up there with sex and ice cream. ....it's all good and I'll take any I can get.

Well (2) out of (3) ain't bad...

[Singlestack Wonder]

Just shoot hollow-points, they are more tactical...lol

I love USPSA!

Good to hear that you love USPSA............Has nothing to do with topic at hand.

IDPA rules call for penalties for bullets passing thru targets and hitting non-threat targets. In USPSA, targets are considered non-penetrable.

Two different sports, two different sets of rules............

[GmanCdp]

last yr at Al.state ,one stage had a 6 " plate activator at 10yards with a NT about 1 yd behind it...made you use the protruding objects on top of the slide for the 1st shot.....

[Joe D]

So you liked my stage. You should see what I have for you this year. Actually last year's match was a little too complicated. You won't see that dumb foot stage either. This year's match will as always have some challenging stages.

Edited January 25, 2007 by Joe D

[COF]

Well (2) out of (3) ain't bad...

What happened Craig? Did Kim catch you fondling your wheelgun again?

Actually, the match shot was not strictly an IDPA match. It was a weekly indoor shoot that loosely follows IDPA rules. - More of an organized cluster...I mean practice session

Edited January 25, 2007 by COF

[GmanCdp]

So you liked my stage. You should see what I have for you this year. Actually last year's match was a little too complicated. You won't see that dumb foot stage either. This year's match will as always have some challenging stages.

me??? i've ALWAYS liked the Al. state match...it's good to hear a master grumble between stages ...

[Dennis Sherman]

Well, according to the people who gave me the Safety Officer certification class, (S&W IDPA, circa 2001) you should not set out to trick the shooter. This means that if you put that type of target array in your stage, make notice in the stage walk through, pointing it out to the shooters. But you know, even when things are pointed out to me, I still f*&k it up at least once at every match. But having been married for 16 years, I have learned to accept things and smile.

[David Sinko]

Quite frankly I could never understand this concept of holding my fire because an innocent just happened to be standing behind somebody WHO IS POINTING A GUN AT ME! Any hesitation on my part will likely get me killed. Hitting a no-shoot that is next to a threat is definitely a bad thing, but hitting the threat and having the bullet pass through and strike somebody else is not morally reprehensible.

Dave Sinko

[COF]

Dave, you might not consider it morally reprehensible, but that civil suit will put you in the poor house. Besides that you violate two of the prime directives

-Never point a gun at something you are not prepared to destroy.

-Always be sure of your target and what is behind it.

[TCK]

Just shoot hollow-points, they are more tactical...lol

I love USPSA!

Good to hear that you love USPSA............Has nothing to do with topic at hand.

IDPA rules call for penalties for bullets passing thru targets and hitting non-threat targets. In USPSA, targets are considered non-penetrable.

Two different sports, two different sets of rules............

Humor intended in post, not pursecution...

[Joe D]

Dave, I have to agree with you. I would rather be in the poor house than in a box.

[David Sinko]

Too many competitive shooters confuse reality with range etiquette. In the course of routine business my muzzle will sweep MANY things which I am not prepared to destroy. In reality this simply can not be avoided. I am not pulling the trigger when this is happening and nobody gets shot. And there are times I am not afforded the luxury of knowing what's behind that threat target. Often the threat target needs to be destroyed NOW, and not after I take a peek and see what's behind it, or even blink. When the threat has a rifle and is dropping innocents with every pull of the trigger, should I not take the shot because of who is or may be standing behind him? That will depend on your point of view, which may or may not be the same as mine.

Dave Sinko

[Singlestack]

Folks,

Please leave the reality scenarios for some other forum. They have nothing to do with the shooting games.

Thank you

[solaritx]

For those that like to think that reality has a place in IDPA, then placing a No-Shoot behind a threat is (or can be) a realistic way to play the game. For these individuals, the basic gun rules come out.

For those that think of IDPA as a game, then placing a No-Shoot behind a threat is another simple way of making the shoot slow down and be accurate, not unlike a threat with extensive hard cover.

The difference is the penalties that are possible. Hardcover= misses and possible FTN. No-Shoot behind the threat means......well 5 seconds

Either way, real life of game, it is simple.....make the shot.

Garry N

[Morphire]

I prefer to avoid a non-threat behind a threat target when designing stages. It is very easy to require the shooter to be forced to leave cover in order to shoot the threat and avoid the non-threat. So in order to hit the threat (and avoid the non-threat) the shooter gets a PE for cover violation. This is a trap that should be avoided.

Not necessarily. A shooter can take the shots on the move and avoid the cover penalty. The non-threats can be used to force movement as well as accuracy.

Kevin

A26038

Chamblee, GA