LPatterson Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Hello I received my RO recert and 2 questions have me wondering if I know what I am doing. Question: Are all paper targets deemed impenetrable? My answer Yes & No. Rule 9.1.5.1 Bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target and continues on to stike the scoring are of another paper target, the hit on the subsequent paper target will not count for score or penalty, as the case may be. Rule 9.1.5.3 Bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper of metal target, and continues on to strike the scoring area on the subsequent paper target will also count for score or penalty, as the case may be. And the correct answer is: Beeeeeeeep Second question leads to a lot of other questions: What is ready condition for a single-action, self loading pistol? 8.1.2.1 deals with the question but raised a couple of others. 8.3.1 "Load And Make Ready" - This command signifies the start of "the course of fire". Under the direct supervision of the Range Officer, fit eye and ear protection, and prepare the handgun in accordance with the written stage briefing. The competitor must then assume the required start position. At this point, the Range Officer will proceed. The start position for the course of fire says prepare handgun per rule 8.1.1 and 8.1.2. The competitor draws the handgun and loads a magazine BUT does not chamber a round and holsters the gun. Per 8.1.2 the competitor has not satisified the ready condition so the competitor has not complied with the start position so the RO can not proceed. But in 8.1 "However, in the event that a competitor fails to load the chamber when permitted by the written stage briefing, whether inadvertently or intentionally, the Range Officer must not take any action, as the competitor is always responsible for the handling of the handgun. How is it possible to have it both ways? CM 99-61 Start Position: Sitting in chair, back fully against rest with both palms flat on table and knees under table. The RO reads this verbatum as the written stage briefing which does not specify gun condition so is the shooter to assume that rule 8.1 is the controlling element even though it reads "......when permitted by the written stage briefing...." Now what? Help I have a headache!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
open17 Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Q. Are all paper targets impenetrable? A. Yes---9.1.5 Q. What is the ready condition of a single action self loading pistol? A. Chamber loaded, hammer cocked, safety engaged.----8.1.2.1 Fold, insert into supplied envelope, send. If you have QUESTIONS about the rules, ask John Amidon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 It is possible to overthink the questions and their answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 I've gotten only partial credit on my two most recent re-cert exams on at least one question each, by overthinking the questions..... Think lowest common denominator --- better yet, try to think as if you'd flunked English.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 USE YOUR SEARCH FUNCTION ;) No, seriously ... get on USPSA.COM and pull up the Adobe version of the rule book (current edition 2004 Green Book) and try using the search function for the questions you are stumped on. I did, and was impressed at how I went DIRECTLY to the answer. I did not pass GO. I did not collect $200. But I did finish my test in record time, and faxed it in yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Absolutely! You'll find applicable rules out there that you didn't even realize existed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted March 31, 2007 Author Share Posted March 31, 2007 My answer was based on the presumption that I may have to explain to some range lawyer at the Nationals why their shot through an impenetrable piece of paper got them a hit on a no shoot. What I would like someone to answer for me is why we have conflicting rules after so many rewrites. How about some reponses to my second question. One rule says chambering a round is the competitors problem. Another rule requires that I not start a shooter until they have satisified the start position required in the WSB. Why are there do this requirements in one rule that are countermanded in another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 My answer was based on the presumption that I may have to explain to some range lawyer at the Nationals why their shot through an impenetrable piece of paper got them a hit on a no shoot. Hint: 9.1.5.1 and 9.1.5.3 are not contradictory. One says wholly and one says partially. Therein lies your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 First question : Paper targets are impenetrable when struck with a FULL DIAMATER hit. If you see a FULL diamater hit on a target at Nationals (or anywhere else) how could you give a shooter a hit on a no-shoot from behind the shoot target? You can't. That's why 9.1.5 wording ends with IF Then below it 9.1.5.1 goes on to state Bullet strikes wholly within the scoring area of a paper target. And you'll notice 9.1.5.3 goes on to explain the partial condition of a bullet strike. We don't have countermanding rules. We have rules, and then we have exceptions & conditions of those rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted March 31, 2007 Author Share Posted March 31, 2007 My answer was based on the presumption that I may have to explain to some range lawyer at the Nationals why their shot through an impenetrable piece of paper got them a hit on a no shoot. Hint: 9.1.5.1 and 9.1.5.3 are not contradictory. One says wholly and one says partially. Therein lies your answer. If the paper truely is impenetrable, then a hit any where on the paper should not result in a penalty on another target. If I shoot the target from the penalty side I do not get the score on the non penalty side so how can I get a score on one target and a penalty on another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 If you shoot the target from the penalty side, then the other side does not exist. We can only assume one side of each target exists in each course of fire, otherwise we would have some SERIOUS 180 violations. FULL DIAMETER is the key phrase here. Remember this is a GAME, not a crime scene. We have to draw the line somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Full hit...in the "scoring area"... You shouldn't have shoot-throughs at teh nationals anyway. Another rule requires that I not start a shooter until they have satisified the start position required in the WSB. Why are there do this requirements in one rule that are countermanded in another. We went around on that one way back when. You might dig up a good thread on that with the right rule numbers and search... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 What I would like someone to answer for me is why we have conflicting rules after so many rewrites. How about some reponses to my second question. One rule says chambering a round is the competitors problem. Another rule requires that I not start a shooter until they have satisified the start position required in the WSB. Why are there do this requirements in one rule that are countermanded in another. I don't see the problem: The start position is separate from the gun ready condition. I know of no rule that requires me to not start a competitor, if they haven't complied with the gun ready condition; only if they haven't assumed the proper start position.... If the paper truely is impenetrable, then a hit any where on the paper should not result in a penalty on another target. If I shoot the target from the penalty side I do not get the score on the non penalty side so how can I get a score on one target and a penalty on another. The only reason we have a non-scoring border on targets is to aid the RO in finding evidence of a hit. It would be just as easy to manufacture the targets without the edge perf --- but it would be harder to spot partial Deltas. The non-scoring border aids us in doing that, at the cost of having to deal with learning how to score hits on either side of as well as those that bisect the perf..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted April 1, 2007 Author Share Posted April 1, 2007 Snip..I don't see the problem: The start position is separate from the gun ready condition. I know of no rule that requires me to not start a competitor, if they haven't complied with the gun ready condition; only if they haven't assumed the proper start position.... I disagree that the start position is separate from the gun ready condition as they are both in the Start Position portion of the Course Of Fire and the 03 & 06 series of classifiers included rules 8.1.1 & 8.1.2. Rule 8.3.1 says"...prepare the handgun in accordance with the written stage briefing". The rules for eye & ear protection MUST be satisfied but the rule regarding the gun ready condition in the WSB does not. I don't know at what point in time the provision of rule 8.1 was expanded to covermaking unloaded gun starts the shooters problem. What I am trying to do is let newer shooters reading this know that they need to thoroughly read all the rules to understand why Range Officers make the decisions that they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin c Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Full hit...in the "scoring area"...You shouldn't have shoot-throughs at teh nationals anyway. Bingo. Poor stage design. If the front paper target is lying directly over the rear target, then the partial diameter hit on the front target will give a partial diameter hit on the rear. No question there. If the targets are separated, unless you were counting shots on the array, you won't be able to tell if a complete hit on the front target left a technically nonscoring hole on the rear, unless the rear target face is hard covered over the entire area that might be hit by a shoot through (then no score regardless of the hole being from a shoot through or a separate shot). Steel hard cover in front of scoring targets could be a real HA (do you score spatter or not?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 8.1 ...The ready condition for handguns will NORMALLY be as stated below. 8.1.3 Course of fire may require ready condition which are different to those stated above. In such cases, the required ready condition must be clearly stated in the written stage briefing. If gun ready condition is not spelled out in the WSB, it will be as 8.1.1 and 8.1.2. And if the shooter fails to load the chamber, it is the shooter's responsibility according to 8.1. Gun ready IS seperate from starting position as Nik pointed out unless the course requires the gun ready condition to be different. WHY ARE WE ARGUING ABOUT THIS?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Bell Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 My answer was based on the presumption that I may have to explain to some range lawyer at the Nationals why their shot through an impenetrable piece of paper got them a hit on a no shoot. Hint: 9.1.5.1 and 9.1.5.3 are not contradictory. One says wholly and one says partially. Therein lies your answer. If the paper truely is impenetrable, then a hit any where on the paper should not result in a penalty on another target. If I shoot the target from the penalty side I do not get the score on the non penalty side so how can I get a score on one target and a penalty on another. I don't know how you can score anyway. Perhaps you guys are super ROs, but it would seem damned hard to determine, after the fact, whether a hit on a no shoot came from a shot at another target or a penalty hit on the no shoot. If you can tell the difference reliably, you're a better person than I am. Lee 8.1 ...The ready condition for handguns will NORMALLY be as stated below.8.1.3 Course of fire may require ready condition which are different to those stated above. In such cases, the required ready condition must be clearly stated in the written stage briefing. If gun ready condition is not spelled out in the WSB, it will be as 8.1.1 and 8.1.2. And if the shooter fails to load the chamber, it is the shooter's responsibility according to 8.1. Gun ready IS seperate from starting position as Nik pointed out unless the course requires the gun ready condition to be different. WHY ARE WE ARGUING ABOUT THIS?!?!?! The rules issue may not be clear, but the situation is familiar. At a recent club match, when told to load and make ready, I inserted a mag, racked the slide and replaced the mag with a full one. Neither the RO nor I was aware that the gun had failed to chamber a round . . . until I tried to take the first shot. That kind of screwed up the stage, both because of the time lost realizing I had a problem and racking the slide again before taking my first shot as well as playing pure hell with my reload plans (8 round single stack). The point is, however, that there was never any question whose fault the problem was. The RO did his job as well as he could. I failed in mine. That's what I get for rushing things before it's time to rush. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 (edited) The rules issue may not be clear, but the situation is familiar. The rules are clear. I don't see any way around it. They are all related to each other. You can't read just one rule or part of one rule and say that they contradict a part of another rule. Your situation is a perfect example that the shooter is responsible for chambering of a round. You wouldn't expect the RO to be chamber checking every shooter who comes to the line. Now, if the course calls for a different start condition (usually will be "empty chamber"), then the RO should be checking the gun and making sure that the chamber is empty. What I am trying to do is let newer shooters reading this know that they need to thoroughly read all the rules to understand why Range Officers make the decisions that they do. Not only newer shooters, but even a lot of older (experienced) shooters also. Edited April 5, 2007 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 Sedro scored my answer wrong on the 'impenetrable' question. (My answer: "Only if bullet strikes wholly within scoring area") So I wrote John Amidon and asked him. The sticking point to me is that the rules specify "the scoring area" of a target, whereas the recert exam does not. So I quoted 9.1.5.1 through 9.1.5.4 on my exam answer. I didn't ask his permisson to quote his reply, so I won't presume. But the gist was that the exam will be rephrased so it refers to the scoring area of the target. As a former teacher who's had students dispute exam questions, I can sympathize. My tests were always better after the second or third goaround Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted April 17, 2007 Author Share Posted April 17, 2007 Sedro scored my answer wrong on the 'impenetrable' question. (My answer: "Only if bullet strikes wholly within scoring area")So I wrote John Amidon and asked him. The sticking point to me is that the rules specify "the scoring area" of a target, whereas the recert exam does not. So I quoted 9.1.5.1 through 9.1.5.4 on my exam answer. I didn't ask his permisson to quote his reply, so I won't presume. But the gist was that the exam will be rephrased so it refers to the scoring area of the target. As a former teacher who's had students dispute exam questions, I can sympathize. My tests were always better after the second or third goaround Thank you Jane because your answer exactly mirrored mine and was why I started this post in the first place. I must have done alright with the rest of the answers because I have been recertified again. I love the new overlays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 Ok I must have missed something.. How do you know what they marked wrong once you submitted the exam? I just got my "Congratulations " letter. but they don't say what I missed or got right! Just curious Carl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 Some people ask for their test back. If you don't ask, they don't send it back. Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 Ok I must have missed something.. How do you know what they marked wrong once you submitted the exam? I just got my "Congratulations " letter. but they don't say what I missed or got right!Just curious Carl In the cover letter they sent with the exam, they said if you want your graded answer sheet returned you need to enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope. My answer sheet was returned with an X through my answer and another through my rule citations for that question (question #5 on my exam). Next to the "wrong" answer, the grader had pencilled in "-10 p58" Page 58 is the page from which my rule citations were taken, hence my writing John Amidon to ask for a clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 Jane, It is a guy thing never read instructions until all else fails including asking your buddys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistral404 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I did not ask, they did not tell. I just passed. 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