Match DQ's, or not?

[Flexmoney]

The steel was supposed to be engaged from a previous position.

The shooter doesn't do what they are "supposed" to do, and then we have to figure out how to apply the rules.

Another case of non-freestyle stage design...leading to an issue.

[AikiDale]

Shooting the steel is a DQ.

Please cite the rule --- I've had this conversation with a RMI. RMI's position is that there should be a physical barrier preventing the shooter from shooting steel too closely.....

I'm really leaning toward 10.4.7 trumping 2.1.3

That is my thought exactly. 10.4.7 DQs a shot at less than 7 meters on steel. 2.1.3 gives the stage designers an out by suggesting a physical barrier 'where possible.' The lack of a barrier does not give the shooter permission to violate 10.4.7. The shooter is responsible for not breaking the rule. Good stage design is, well, good. Not breaking the safety rule is required.

[AikiDale]

This weekend at a local USPSA match, a safe and competent 12-year-old junior shooter (not my kid, by the way) pulled his gun out of his holster when the RO began to give the LAMR command. BUT, there was a problem--instead of saying "Load and make ready," the RO instead said, "Do you know and understand the course of fire?" By the time it registered on anybody, the gun was out of the holster and pointed downrange.

The RO pointed out the issue to the kid, and explained that technically that was a DQable offense, and the kid nodded his acknowledgement. Then the RO gave the LAMR command and the kid shot the stage and finished the match.

Now, I understand we're not supposed to relax the rules at local matches, the safety rules are absolute, DQs help people learn, and all the rest of that jazz. But despite the attitudes of the absolutists on this forum that seem to just relish the idea of issuing DQs at every available opportunity, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this kid did not need to be DQ'd. There was no actual safety violation. No real danger to anyone. The young shooter learned that he needs to listen closely to the range commands and not assume the RO is going to use the correct litany--but he learned it in a way that didn't cause him a disproportionate amount of humiliation and disappointment.

Sometimes a little dose of common sense is what we all need to get through the day, y'know?

Amen. The first thing out of the RO's mouth should be LAMR just so we are all on the same page. Several ROs stand between the shooter and the course of fire when engaging in pre COF banter in order to indicate by their position that LAMR is not appropriate. This is especially true when the RO and the shooter do not speak the same language.

[JThompson]

The steel was supposed to be engaged from a previous position.

The shooter doesn't do what they are "supposed" to do, and then we have to figure out how to apply the rules.

Another case of non-freestyle stage design...leading to an issue.

This happens a lot for indoor ranges Flex... it's very hard to design new stages without running into "freestyle" issues. When you only have about 30 degrees to deal with, instead of 180, it's not easy to make freestyle COFs. I do try, but the steel is always an issue. I'm not trying to make an excuse for bad course design, but suggesting a reason why freestyle is less then optimal for a diverse COF on an indoor range. This can lead to the possibility, of someone being to close to steel at some point. We call it out in the walk through if this is the case. I love freestyle and try to design my courses with a simple direction. Start with gun in X position and engage targets as visible.

[HoMiE]

This weekend at a local USPSA match, a safe and competent 12-year-old junior shooter (not my kid, by the way) pulled his gun out of his holster when the RO began to give the LAMR command. BUT, there was a problem--instead of saying "Load and make ready," the RO instead said, "Do you know and understand the course of fire?" By the time it registered on anybody, the gun was out of the holster and pointed downrange.

The RO pointed out the issue to the kid, and explained that technically that was a DQable offense, and the kid nodded his acknowledgement. Then the RO gave the LAMR command and the kid shot the stage and finished the match.

Now, I understand we're not supposed to relax the rules at local matches, the safety rules are absolute, DQs help people learn, and all the rest of that jazz. But despite the attitudes of the absolutists on this forum that seem to just relish the idea of issuing DQs at every available opportunity, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this kid did not need to be DQ'd. There was no actual safety violation. No real danger to anyone. The young shooter learned that he needs to listen closely to the range commands and not assume the RO is going to use the correct litany--but he learned it in a way that didn't cause him a disproportionate amount of humiliation and disappointment.

Sometimes a little dose of common sense is what we all need to get through the day, y'know?

Amen. The first thing out of the RO's mouth should be LAMR just so we are all on the same page. Several ROs stand between the shooter and the course of fire when engaging in pre COF banter in order to indicate by their position that LAMR is not appropriate. This is especially true when the RO and the shooter do not speak the same language.

+1

[Sharyn]

Just to clarify, here's a picture of the stage with the "fault line" provided for engaging the steel. You can see the steel in the rear, left. I thought the course description was pretty clear... as well as the bright orange line in the middle of the COF.

I think the problem was the COF, not the shooter. The "fault line" was placed farther than 7 yards from the steel. You cannot DQ someone because they crossed your arbitrary fault line. That would be a procedural for not following course description. Once the RO stopped the shooter, a proper procedural could not be assigned, so it was a reshoot.

[GENE S]

Not to change the subject, but has anyone heard anything on the new multi-gun

range officer classes that may be in the making.?

I do enjoy shooting three gun and do beleave that some rules need to

written down and used in the matches.

Gene

A-793

[Jim Norman]

Just to clarify, here's a picture of the stage with the "fault line" provided for engaging the steel. You can see the steel in the rear, left. I thought the course description was pretty clear... as well as the bright orange line in the middle of the COF.

I think the problem was the COF, not the shooter. The "fault line" was placed farther than 7 yards from the steel. You cannot DQ someone because they crossed your arbitrary fault line. That would be a procedural for not following course description. Once the RO stopped the shooter, a proper procedural could not be assigned, so it was a reshoot.

\

Without a physical barrier we are to place a charge line at 8 meters from the steel. If the shooter faults the line, but does not move closer than 7 meters, he gets a proceedural per shot, if he moves closer than 7 meters he gets the DQ. Maybe I am not getting this, but I fail to see a problem with this. Yes, a waist high barrier is nice but if we have a stage where the steel is down range, but we are going to be able to see it again as we progress through the COF we have two choices, Put up walls so that once you are past the last shooting point, you can no longer see the steel. All well and good, but on Sunday morning with limited support and maybe limited supplies, at a Level One match, we can say "Engage Steel from FFZ A ONLY, Engaging steel from any other postion will be a match DQ.

Or maybe I am wrong?

Jim

[zhunter]

Sharyn

Thanks for posting the photo!!!

When I started this thread, it was not to get confirmation of the DQ, it was to ask the question. I KNOW that the RO was VERY unhappy about running with the guy and then he started to blast away at the steel, and THAT is why he stopped him. The RO did not feel safe in my opinion.

I did not think the stage description was adequate in stating the steel had to be taken from a certain point. But, everyone else seemed to ahve figured out what was "supposed" to happen.

But, as others have said, SAFETY is always first.

[Sharyn]

eta: The match fee was $100... Level I, but hardly your Sunday afternoon lead sling.

Without a physical barrier we are to place a charge line at 8 meters from the steel. If the shooter faults the line, but does not move closer than 7 meters, he gets a proceedural per shot, if he moves closer than 7 meters he gets the DQ.

Exactly. I believe the question was "DQ or not?" I attempted to provide some additional information that may have affected the call.

Jay, steel shot from (in your opinion) less than 7 yards, DQ or not? So, what was your question?

Edited November 14, 2007 by Sharyn

[Flexmoney]

All well and good, but on Sunday morning with limited support and maybe limited supplies, at a Level One match, we can say "Engage Steel from FFZ A ONLY, Engaging steel from any other postion will be a match DQ.

Or maybe I am wrong?

Jim

Jim,

That is how we used to do it when I started out. (If you pull up some of the stage designs from Jeff Maass you will see a lot of stages like that...with the reference that engaging the steel beyond a certain point was considered a DQ...with a referenced rule.)

But, with the "freestyle" change of the green (and red?) rule book, we got away from having steel in the cof that the shooter could later see...and engage from closer than the legal distance.

Freestyle kinda took away some of that steel. Which, I think proved to be safer. Having shot stages the old way, if a shooter missed a piece of steel and didn't realize it until later...it was hard to fight the urge to shoot it again, often from a position that was too close for comfort.

[Jim Norman]

No argument, which is one reason we have an exemption, not a blanket rule. It is far better to block the view after the safe point has been passed, but it can be difficult for a small club,. and occasionally it can occur at a larger club where as the final walk-around is performed, the MD sees the "oops" and the only correction is an additional fault line.

Jim

[Flexmoney]

That is not the only correction. You can pull the stage, and the stage designer and setup crew will have to eat a healthy dose of tough love.

You can pull the steel, change the walk-thru and announce the correction needed on the score sheets.

You can fix it. And, delay the start of the match by 5...10...15 minutes.

Any of the above takes a bit of courage to do, but they fall in line with what is the right thing to do.

Further, I am not so sure the Level 1 exemption would even be applicable:

2.1.3 Minimum Distances – Whenever metal targets are used in a course of fire, precautions must be taken so that competitors and match officials maintain a minimum distance of 7 meters (22.96 feet) from them while they are being shot. Where possible, this should be done with physical barriers. If Charge Lines are used to limit the approach to metal targets, they must be placed at least 8 meters (26.25 feet) from the targets so that the competitor may inadvertently fault the line and still be outside the 7 meter (22.96 feet) minimum distance.

Note that the above say "must" and "while shot", not should, and not if shot from the prescribed position.

In the above case, my call would be to throw out the stage, but the shooter has also earned their DQ. (It sucks for everybody. And, could have been avoided through stage design.)

[zhunter]

eta: The match fee was $100... Level I, but hardly your Sunday afternoon lead sling.

Without a physical barrier we are to place a charge line at 8 meters from the steel. If the shooter faults the line, but does not move closer than 7 meters, he gets a proceedural per shot, if he moves closer than 7 meters he gets the DQ.

Exactly. I believe the question was "DQ or not?" I attempted to provide some additional information that may have affected the call.

Jay, steel shot from (in your opinion) less than 7 yards, DQ or not? So, what was your question?

Sharyn

I was under the impression it was a DQ, but he got a re-shoot, that was why I posted this. As for the Junior, I do think that it is a grey area, as I hate to see a young lady be DQ'ed, but safety is a must.

So, to answer your question, I think it should have been a DQ, but I was not the RO or MD

[Sestock]

I hope that the host club learned a lesson here and will avoid DQ traps on future matches.

[Topmaul]

The stage should be disigned so that things like this are not going to happen, I would not think a DQ was warranted by shooting a bit close sorry.

As a father of a Junior shooter it would depend on the situation but I have seen junior shooters DQ in past.

Safety has to be built into everything we do, and rules are rules. If the stage was unclear then give the benifit of the doubt to the shooter.

DQ traps are unfair espically to juniors and new shooters but also to some of us old timers with slipping mindes.