Tape on Glasses

[PJONES5]

enough enough

pat

[Bones]

I have to disagree on this one even if IDPA HQ says it's OK. Tape on glasses is not suitible for everyday wear.

Please folks, let's not go down this road. You can disagree all you want, my question was on the IDPA rules, not peoples opinions of the rules.

Flex,

Thanks for cleaning up the "real world" post . I got my IDPA magazine with my membership, and there was a good article about how IPDA is a game, and it is only a game, and it not the "real world."

I just wanted to know whether or not I needed to learn to change the technique that I use for shooting or not, becaue I messed up a few times the first couple matches because I was't using my normal glasses and it was frustrating.

I am not interested in trying to bend the rules. If puttting something on the lenses is against the rules I won't put anything on them, period. If it ok, I will.

I have no doubts that I can hit targets without the tape if it came down to it, but I'm trying to avoid the .5 second penalty for non A hits is what I'm trying to do. I have a visual handicap, and I'm going to use my tape to overcome it.

It is indeed a game. These are a few of the rules:

1) The 2nd paragraph under Puropse on page 4.

2) Section E2, under Equipment on page 11.

3) draw an inference from Appendix 1 - Equipment, Miscellaneous , especially section 1 "Knee Pads & Elbow Pads" on page 40.

3) and finally section D, under Organization on page 55.

I would ask an MD how he/she is predisposed to interpreting the rules before issuing a challenge or beginning an unproductive discussion and be prepared to politely comply. Your probability of succeeding on match day in an open, contentious discussion by waiving letters in the MD's face is likely quite low.

Shoot well and be safe -

Craig

[ima45dv8]

I would ask an MD how he/she is predisposed to interpreting the rules before issuing a challenge or beginning an unproductive discussion and be prepared to politely comply. Your probability of succeeding on match day in an open, contentious discussion by waiving letters in the MD's face is likely quite low.

Sounds like good advice.

[RePete]

I have to disagree on this one even if IDPA HQ says it's OK. Tape on glasses is not suitible for everyday wear.

Please folks, let's not go down this road. You can disagree all you want, my question was on the IDPA rules, not peoples opinions of the rules.

Flex,

Thanks for cleaning up the "real world" post . I got my IDPA magazine with my membership, and there was a good article about how IPDA is a game, and it is only a game, and it not the "real world."

I just wanted to know whether or not I needed to learn to change the technique that I use for shooting or not, becaue I messed up a few times the first couple matches because I was't using my normal glasses and it was frustrating.

I am not interested in trying to bend the rules. If puttting something on the lenses is against the rules I won't put anything on them, period. If it ok, I will.

I have no doubts that I can hit targets without the tape if it came down to it, but I'm trying to avoid the .5 second penalty for non A hits is what I'm trying to do. I have a visual handicap, and I'm going to use my tape to overcome it.

I'm the person that mentioned real world. And I still say the same.

BUT, you have to take responsibility for that because at no time did you mention that you had a visual handicap, for which I'm sorry. Knowing that changes the complextion of the question. I would not have a problem with the tape under those circumstances.

[Ben Stoeger]

I have to disagree on this one even if IDPA HQ says it's OK. Tape on glasses is not suitible for everyday wear.

I agree. It is not suitable for everyday wear, but where in the IDPA rulebook does it say, or better yet define, anything about everyday wear?

Angel

From page 11

E 2. Allowed equipment will meet the following criteria:

A. Practical for self-defense use.

B. Concealable - All equipment will be so placed

that, when wearing an open concealment garment

with your arms extended to your sides and parallel

to the ground, it can NOT been seen from the front,

rear or sides.

C. Must be suitable for and worn in a manner that is

appropriate for all day continuous wear.

[bruce282]

I have to disagree on this one even if IDPA HQ says it's OK. Tape on glasses is not suitible for everyday wear.

I agree. It is not suitable for everyday wear, but where in the IDPA rulebook does it say, or better yet define, anything about everyday wear?

Angel

From page 11

E 2. Allowed equipment will meet the following criteria:

A. Practical for self-defense use.

B. Concealable - All equipment will be so placed

that, when wearing an open concealment garment

with your arms extended to your sides and parallel

to the ground, it can NOT been seen from the front,

rear or sides.

C. Must be suitable for and worn in a manner that is

appropriate for all day continuous wear.

Well I guess shooting glasses might past muster, but no way hearing muffs do.

Bruce

[A_Med]

I have to disagree on this one even if IDPA HQ says it's OK. Tape on glasses is not suitible for everyday wear.

I agree. It is not suitable for everyday wear, but where in the IDPA rulebook does it say, or better yet define, anything about everyday wear?

Angel

From page 11

E 2. Allowed equipment will meet the following criteria:

A. Practical for self-defense use.

B. Concealable - All equipment will be so placed

that, when wearing an open concealment garment

with your arms extended to your sides and parallel

to the ground, it can NOT been seen from the front,

rear or sides.

C. Must be suitable for and worn in a manner that is

appropriate for all day continuous wear.

Well I guess shooting glasses might past muster, but no way hearing muffs do.

Bruce

My point exactly. Thanks. And this obviously is referring to holsters, etc.

Angel

Edited June 5, 2007 by A_Med

[Bones]

Angel/Loves2Shoot,

We'll have to agree to see things differently (pun intended).

I have a chronological handicap. I'm old. Now, if I just find that blasted time machine that I wear behind the centerline of my hip....

Best of Luck and shoot well,

Craig

[Loves2Shoot]

Well, since the folks who's game it is says it is OK for THEIR game, I don't understand all the objections.

DVC and thanks all. ~ Scott

[Ted Murphy]

Guess if I were to bring up the shooters who have a custom shooting glasses set up with a custom lense on the dominent eye focused for the exact distance from the eye to the front sight and the other for distance we'll go another two pages.

Edited June 6, 2007 by Ted Murphy

[PJONES5]

Guess if I were to bring up the shooters who have a custom shooting glasses set up with a custom lense on the dominent eye focused for the exact distance from the eye to the front sight and the other for distance we'll go another two pages.

[/quote

Bad Dog!!!!!!!! No Biscuit

pat

[Gregg K]

Guess if I were to bring up the shooters who have a custom shooting glasses set up with a custom lense on the dominent eye focused for the exact distance from the eye to the front sight and the other for distance we'll go another two pages.

Hey! Quit looking in my range bag!

[Jim Watson]

Guess if I were to bring up the shooters who have a custom shooting glasses set up with a custom lense on the dominent eye focused for the exact distance from the eye to the front sight and the other for distance we'll go another two pages.

Not to mention the people who have had their eyes Lasik treated to that configuration.

[Mayonaise]

I'm actually one of those guys that when I hit my mid 40's my already bad vision started to change, again. I wear contacts with the dominant eye focused for reading distance and the non-dominant focused for long distance.

I like actually like being able to read w/out pulling having to whip out reading glasses.

Having a hard focus on the front sight isn't such a bad idea also.

Guess I'm a "gamer" now unless I scribe "5.11" on the lenses.

[Duane Thomas]

Actually, when I recently got a new eyeglasses scrip, I took my Glock 34 into the optometrist's office with me, had him measure the distance from my eyes to the front sight, and set up the glasses for that. I do wear those glasses all the time. It seems to cause no problems.

[RobMoore]

Not to mention the people who have had their eyes Lasik treated to that configuration.

Lasik helps distance and near vision.....and night vision. The only downside is bright sunny days bother me more.

[Mayonaise]

Actually, when I recently got a new eyeglasses scrip, I took my Glock 34 into the optometrist's office with me, had him measure the distance from my eyes to the front sight, and set up the glasses for that. I do wear those glasses all the time. It seems to cause no problems.

I had one of my sons do that at home. I got the new prescription. Put the new lenses in at the eye doctor's office and went in the restroom for a few discrete sight pictures.

[Duane Thomas]

[Hot Brass]

I called my eye doc and told her what I wanted. She told me to bring the gun in. When I did she performed the better/worse part of the exam while I was looking at the sights. She said her husband is an MD and carries a gun to work every day. (Mayo, my eye doc is about 1 mile from your house.)

When I went to get my glasses, the guy said their experience suggested not getting the lens where it had perfect focus on the front sight because then the target would be out of focus. What he recommended was to go 1 power higher. This gave good clarity to the front sight without blurring the target. I've had the glasses for 3 or 4 years and they work great and could be worn every day on the street or driving.

The place I went to get my prescription filled is Morgan Optical (www.morganoptical.net) I was impressed with their knowledge of the shooting sports.