Personal Injuries:

[Skywalker]

This quote from VP:

With some safety issues, such as a squib load or personal injury, you're not entitled to a reshoot.

coming from the "Distracted By Loud People While Shooting, Thought somebody shouted STOP" thread in this forum, deserves some discussion or at least to be properly addressed.

I think it is worth a new thread, anyway.

I think that there are certain cases in which personal injury should entitle a re-shoot, but I'd like to get some opinions on this.

I've personally witnessed these two cases:

Case no.1: a shooter, shooting at a popper at the safe distance of 12 metres, was injured by a ricochet. A lead shaving from his shot ripped through the upper part of his nose, causin him severe bleeding. The shooter was wearing normal corrective glasses, and that part was not safely covered; had he worn shooting glasses probably the whole accident wouldn't have happened.

When the shooter was done his emergency rescue treatment, he was entitled a re-shoot on the ground of range/equipment failure causing him to be injured and not enabling him to finish the COF.

Case no.2: a shooter, while running in a long course, stumbled into a hole in the ground, lost his balance and (while never breaking safety) fell on the ground. He stopped there and, after some debating with the RO and RM, was entitled a re-shoot on the ground (terrible pun, I know) of a deteriorated ground, part of range/equipment failure.

IMHO, at least the first case was a fair re-shoot, even if I'm partial to consider the second too a fair re-shoot: it is to be regarded as poor stage conduct from the RO that allowed the stage to be shot with such a dangerous hole in the ground.

Both the injuries that resulted from range failure (ricochet and hole in the ground) were such to prevent the shooter finishing the COF, and (as RO) I wouldn't feel comfortable in not entitling a re-shoot for such situations.

In any case, your valuable opinions are (as usual) greatly appreciated.

[Vince Pinto]

Um, just so you know, I'm not ignoring you, OK? I'm just giving other guys time to respond before I come in and start spanking.

Yeeeeeeeeeee-haaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[lynn jones]

imho,

case 1 & 2 you're s.o.l. (sh*t out of luck)

case 1 sorry but thats why we wear safety glasses. that's why there is a minimum distance.

case 2 the only way to get a reshoot , is if the RO fell on you after you fell.

lynn jones

[Ron Ankeny]

I am certainly no expert, but I have been immersed in the freaking rulebook for two days because of the RO class I am taking. About an hour ago I had to cite 6 rules that entitle a competitor to a reshoot. Problems with the range surface doesn't appear to be grounds for a reshoot but maintaining a safe surface is the responsibility of the range officials, rule 2.1.5 and 4.4. Frankly, I don't think a reshoot was "required" and I think the stage could have been scored after the last shot including misses and FTE penalties.

As for the injury from the popper, I see nothing that would require the RO to allow a reshoot. Suppose I was tanking a stage real bad and stopped shooting while engaging steel and shouted, "Ouch, I have something in my eye." Unloaded, etc. under the supervision of the RO then proclaimed, "I got it out, I'll be ready for a reshoot in a couple of minutes." What then?

[Skywalker]

Ok, while Darth lets us debate before using his own "Force", I'll try to clear my thoughts on the thread I started.

The Popper injury case IMO falls under the "range equipment failure". How else could you consider a popper that shoots back lead onto you, causing you to bleed?

This is not the way the popper is supposed to work.

BTW, poppers should be teached in Universal Studios on how to gracefully fall down when properly hit; this one probably was a taliban popper .

For the same reason, Ron, I don't think your example can relate to this accident: the shooter was visibly bleeding from his nose, and had to be medically treated before he was able to attempt a re-shoot (it took him a fair amount of time to regain his composure).

In this case I suppose that, since the accident happened disregardless of all safety issues that were indeed satisfied, it could be considered equipment failure.

Lynn, no rule in the rulebook says you have to wear safety glasses instead of corrective ones (they are referred only as "eye protection"), moreover, the shooter was actually compliant with the safety distance from pepper popper, so there is nothing that can be charged on his side (otherwise he should have been DQed).

Actually I suppose (but I couldn't have a close look at the popper) the accident happend due to a "not-so-smooth surface" of the popper, that, in this unlucky event, got struck in a particular spot where lead was shaved off the bullet and ricocheted.

Regarding the ground issue: rules only address the actions a RO can perform "to provide adequate safety for competitors and officials", but what will happen if the range surface does not provide this safety, and the RO does not perform any maintenance action?

[vluc]

having already gone thru what Ron is now doing, I understand his comment. A richocet is not a range failure as the popper itself did not fire back at you. It is one of the risks inherent with the sport (IMO). Should dust that is kicked up when coming to a stop and enters the eyes be considered a range failure as well?

Hole in the ground, well...it is freestyle, you are able to shoot the course anyway you want. The hole in the ground is consistent to all shooters and we all have a responsibility to know where we are going and what we are doing. Again, should ruts that are left or low spots from rain be smoothed over and filled in so that a perfect pristine surface is available for us to play on? perhaps our bays should be covered with astro-turf or indoor/outdoor carpet? Not meaning to be offensive, just a comment.

Yes, we have the responsibility as Match Director's RO's to provide as safe a field as we can.

[A33435]

Case no.1: a shooter, shooting at a popper at the safe distance of 12 metres, was injured by a ricochet. A lead shaving from his shot ripped through the upper part of his nose, causin him severe bleeding. The shooter was wearing normal corrective glasses, and that part was not safely covered; had he worn shooting glasses probably the whole accident wouldn't have happened.

When the shooter was done his emergency rescue treatment, he was entitled a re-shoot on the ground of range/equipment failure causing him to be injured and not enabling him to finish the COF

Ok, this is a case of sh*t out of luck.

But even if there is no rule wich would have entitled this shooter a reshoot

could a RO give him a reshoot just because it would be reasonable?

And what if not the shooter but the RO was hit in the same way by the lead shaving?

I case 2,

Once i almost lost balance (carpeted indoorrange) because there was still brass on the range

wich made me slip because while running i stepped on it.

It was one of my first matches and i just felt lucky because i didn't fall.

The RO took the brass i crushed and checked if it was my own brass.

It wasn't the case and he asked if i wanted a reshoot.

My experience and thoughts....

Adrie

[Ron Ankeny]

skywalker67:

I can assure you that every club in our area would grant a reshoot to the person who was hit by the splatter. I was simply browsing the rulebook and I didn't see anything about personal injuries. If I was the RO, I would stop the competitor on the bases of checking him (because of the ovbious injury and severity) to see if he could safely complete the COF. I would even offer to unload his pistol. Common sense tells me as RO I could intervene and grant a reshoot on the basis of my action rather than the action of the shooter. I would also pull the popper from service.

[JeeDee]

Ok guy's,

Case 1.

This one I am not sure. If I would see the injury I would probalby stop him, check him and give him a reshoot. As a RO I have to be sure that a competitor is able to shoot safely and an injury as this makes me wonder. Beter safe then sorry.

Case 2.

As RO I would try to avoid these situations and try to level out the surface before starting the match. But if somebody stumbled into a hole in the ground, lost his balance and fell on the ground, sorry this is his own doing. I would probably point out the risk if the surface was bad and would try to make it as equal as possible for every competitor but I would be reluctant to give him a reshoot.

In Adrie's case I would probably give him a reshoot since it is custom in our region (same as Adrie) to make sure there is no brass lying around for competitors to step on.

[Shooter Grrl]

Sorry guys, no reshoots for any of them. Trust me on this, I've spent ALOT of time getting familiar with the gravel at the ranges where I shoot... one instance the rope from the prop wrapped around my foot and tripped me, and all you can do is get up and keep going or not if you're too hurt. This IS a dangerous game we play, and falling down is part of the dangers, ask Robbie

Remind me someday to describe ALL the bad things that have happened to me during matches - i'm especially unlucky...

[Vince Pinto]

OK, I've been a good boy long enough ......

The condition of the range surface is not grounds for a reshoot. If a competitor believes the surface of the range is either unsafe or significantly different to the condition presented to previous competitors, they can request match officials take corrective action under Rule 4.4.2. before they attempt the COF.

Personal injuries are also not grounds for a reshoot. Competitors are personally responsible to protect themselves from the hazards inherent with using firearms, and this includes wearing eye protection designed to offer protection against splatter. If a competitor chooses to wear "street" glasses made of glass instead of shooting glasses made of more suitable materials, this is clearly a personal (and poor) decision for which the competitor must bear full responsibility.

As an aside, there have been occasions where I have not allowed a competitor to attempt a COF under my control because he was wearing eye protection which I can best describe as "John Lennon glasses". These offer little or no protection, especially when the competitor tilts his head downwards and peers over the top of the frame while actually aiming, thereby exposing his naked eyes directly to potential splatter.

Not on my shift.

If a competitor believes that a metal target or other range equipment has deteriorated to a condition which is unsafe (e.g. a popper with excess pitting), he can request match officials to repair or replace it prior to making an attempt at the COF.

[Skywalker]

Vince, thanks for letting me know IPSC official position on this issue.

I must admit that your argumentations convinced me on the "range surface" case, but I still think that in the "injury" case a re-shoot could have been more fair. The injury could have happened to the shooter hands or other body part: if the competitor is compliant with all safety issues, and gets injured, he should not be penalized.

IMO, in this case Ron and JeeDee have a point in mentioning their behaviour as RO:

If I would see the injury I would probalby stop him, check him and give him a reshoot. As a RO I have to be sure that a competitor is able to shoot safely and an injury as this makes me wonder. Beter safe then sorry.

Anyway, as Garibaldi, the Italian Hero that unified Italy, said to the Italian King in 1866 (during a military campaign): "Obbedisco" (I will obey).

Or, better: I don't agree but I'll bring myself into the line with rules.

At present you "Force" seems to be stronger than mine: still have to progress in the Jedi's arts (don't believe in what Erik Warren posted in the Humor forum ).

Shooter Grrl, even if Murphy rules, sharing all the bad things that can happen during matches could be helpful for anybody, just to be prepared in case of.

BTW, Vince, I always thought that Elton John's glasses were the most ridiculos/horrible ever seen .

[Vince Pinto]

Hi Sky,

Thanks for your additional comments.

Hey, I'm human too (or at least a related species), and I'd feel unbelievably bad about not letting a competitor reshoot after a personal injury, but I also know it would be virtually impossible to create a comprehensive list of "reshootable" and "non-reshootable" injuries, and ROs need to be objective.

BTW, if you dare come to my range wearing "Elton John" glasses, I'll definitely DQ you for Unfashionable Accessories 'coz they are sooooo 1980's.

Of course you can always file an appeal with the Fashion Police ...........

[Ron Ankeny]

OK Vince, I agree with your position 100 per cent from the "legalistic point of view", if the shooter stops. However, if I am the RO and I stop the shooter when I see blood running down his face, wouldn't my action entitle the shooter to a re-shoot, and wouldn't my action be defendable on the basis of insuring competitor safety? The original post uses the words "severe" and "ripped" and I am thinking big time ouch that might require medical attention.

PS:

I am speaking from personal experience now. I was once struck in the forehead by a copper jacket. This was not at an IPSC match. The jacket was about .125 wide and .375 long. It entered between my eyes, struck my skull, turned and traveled under the skin and along my forehead before partially exiting. There was blood every where, in my eyes, on my face, down my chest... I couldn't believe how such a tiny thing could draw so much blood and almost knock me down. I find it hard to believe that an RO wouldn't stop me, especially at a club match.

[Nik Habicht]

Ron,

At a club match absolutely! After all we have club matches to play nicely with other and to have fun. Since we give new shooters all kinds of breaks and coaching, we'd probably do it for injuries too. At a major --- no chance of a reshoot. I think the competitor has to be responsible enough to identify potential hazards when he plans his run ---- in much the same way he identifies potential 180 traps, etc. ---- and sometimes bad stuff happens that prevents us from finishing a run, i.e. a gun breaks or a squib load. I think your options are as Vince described ---- if you see a hazard during the walkthrough, ask match officials to correct it before your run.

[Vince Pinto]

Guys,

The other thing I'd like to add is that considering the millions of rounds we shoot downrange every year worldwide, the incidence of personal injuries is so tiny, they don't even register on the scale, and this is evidence of the importance we all place on range safety.

Having said that, on those extremely rare occurrences where a more serious injury prevents a competitor from completing his attempt at a COF, I'm confident that senior match officials and/or an Arbitration Committee can consider each case on it's merits and take whatever action they deem to be appropriate.

[lynn jones]

i thought i'd share this very important safety issue with regards foward falling pepper poppers.

and yes, this happened to me.

lynn jones

[Ron Ankeny]

Guys, I am not being clear. I am actually talking about a different issue, in a way. I understand why the re-shoot is not mandatory, I understand how it could be abused, and I am in agreement with what the ruling would be. I also understand that the ruling could go to arbitration and be discussed on it's own merits.

I guess what I am asking is if I (as an RO) see the injury and yell stop, would the shooter get a re-shoot and would my actions as RO be appropriate?

[lynn jones]

ron,

if you yelled stop, as a ro, there would indeed be a reshoot given. however, as an ro, you would not be doing your job. this would be like calibrating a pepper popper with your hand, after a protest.(bad)

watch out here comes vince.

lynn (my head still hurts) jones

[Nik Habicht]

Ron,

I Guess I'd equate it to a potential squib. If the injury is severe enough that I feel the competitor can't complete the course of fire safely, I'll stop him and that's it. The shooter can go to arbitration ---- I consider it an incident akin to finding the barrel blocked when you check for the squib. How do I make that decision? If the shooter's streaming enough blood that his vision is impaired would be one example, impaired or erratic movement would be another though really, if the injury is serious enough, I'd guess that the competitor would stop himself because he'd realize he couldn't continue. In the incident you described, do you think you would have been able to finish a COF?

[Vince Pinto]

Ron,

There are a number of rules which deal with specific cases where an RO can stop a competitor and then award a reshoot (e.g. 8.6.3, 5.7.6.2, 5.4.2 etc.), but none which specifically deal with an RO stopping a competitor for a personal injury.

Moreover, my guess is that a competitor with a personal injury which prevents him from continuing his attempt at a COF would invariably stop of his own accord, not as a result of RO intervention. I seriously doubt such an injury would be apparent to the RO before it was apparent to the competitor.

So, to answer your question, if an RO stops a competitor, this would fall under 8.3.5 but, while the RO has the right to issue a stop command for any reason, there are no specific provisions for a reshoot.

Hence if this occurred, the correct procedure would be for the RO to deny an appeal for a reshoot, and the matter could be appealed to the RM or an Arbitration Committee.

[Ron Ankeny]

Thanks guys. I am learning a lot.

[Vince Pinto]

Ron,

One more thought occurred to me.

If a competitor suffers a personal injury which you think looks bad due to blood flow, and you "interfere" and stop him when he's apparently quite willing to continue, how would you feel if he's awarded a reshoot then he gets a DQ during the reshoot?

Rock .......... Ron .......... Hard place

A bit off topic, but my first experience of a similar incident was many moons ago when I was a rookie RO and I was running a guy through my stage when, halfway through his attempt at the COF, I noticed a popper hadn't been reset, so I stopped him and gave him a reshoot. Of course this was a no-brainer and I had no option, and stopping him early just saved him a few rounds.

During the reshoot, he had the Mother of All Jams and then he had an AD while clearing it. Man, I felt soooooooo bad.

The lesson I learnt from that incident was to thoroughly check that my stage was properly restored before I let the next guy shoot, because a "reshoot then DQ" arising from what amounted to range crew brain fade is something which I never want to experience ever again.

Hence my advice is not to stop a competitor unless he's guilty of a safety infraction. If he's hurt bad enough, he'll stop.

[Nik Habicht]

Vince,

Thank You. As another rookie R.O. (less than a year) I'm soaking this info up. Thanks for sharing your Experience....

[Skywalker]

Hence my advice is not to stop a competitor unless he's guilty of a safety infraction. If he's hurt bad enough, he'll stop.

Sorry Vince, but I can't agree with you on this.

The competitive rush is such that many shooters won't stop until the end of the COF, even if they are badly hurt. Rule 11.1.1 implicitly acknowledges this when saying "It is recognized that at the more significant levels of competition, the outcome is much more important to the individual competitor."

Lynn, as RO, my first concern shall be safety, and, if in my opinion the hurt competitor is not able to safely complete the COF, I have the duty to stop him, preventing more serious accidents to happen. And, yes, I think I'm doing my job correctly.

I think this should fall under the provisions of the RO judgement discretionality in running the stage.

I will gladly accept Vince's assertion that this interfering action won't grant "per se" a re-shoot, and the whole matter shall be submitted to the RM and/or Arbitration Committee. But if, in my opinion, the competitor "needs" to be stopped because he is hurt and may be in danger, I will stop him.

The combined procedure Ron and Vince suggested seems more viable to me: the RO will have the discretionality of judging if a hurt competitor shall be stopped or not. If the RO decides to stop him, on the grounds of a potentially dangerous injury, the re-shoot provision shall be debated and decided by the RM/Arbitration Committee.

Anyway, as Ron has already stated, thanks everybody for the lessons I'm getting here.

BTW, Lynn, the same popper accident happened to me with a backward falling popper activating a bobber: I reset the popper from behind, then leaned forward to pick up the bobber activating stick and ... ka-blang .