Holstered handgun question

[Fireant]

This came up last weekend:

Shooter has his belt/holster rig in the back of the car. Handgun is holstered as per 5.2.2, but it is not secured to their person yet as per 5.2.1 is this allowed? When the shooter picks up the rig it is "on their person" and "secured to a belt" but, Not at the waist yet, but safely holstered and secured to their person. I don't read into this rule that this practice is not allowed. One new RO about had a heart attack over this. Even after reading the rule over and over, I don't see this as a DQ offense. What do you think?

Edited April 26, 2008 by Fireant

[rtr]

Having a gun in a holster that is being carried in a method other than on the person's waist is similar to carrying a gun in a case. As long as the rig is being carried securely (ie the person isn't dangling it upside down) then I'm fine with it.

[Religious Shooter]

In three gun I do that all the time. I just unbuckle my straps and put my belt with the holstered gun in the car... and drive to the next stage.

I would hope that that isn't a problem.

[HoMiE]

Really shouldn't be doing that...

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=18318

[Nik Habicht]

This came up last weekend:

Shooter has his belt/holster rig in the back of the car. Handgun is holstered as per 5.2.2, but it is not secured to their person yet as per 5.2.1 is this allowed? When the shooter picks up the rig it is "on their person" and "secured to a belt" but, Not at the waist yet, but safely holstered and secured to their person. I don't read into this rule that this practice is not allowed. One new RO about had a heart attack over this. Even after reading the rule over and over, I don't see this as a DQ offense. What do you think?

Amidon ruled on that in 1990 apparently and said it was a no go. Link is on the second page of the thread that Homie linked to......

Of course you could always ask the question again.....

[Religious Shooter]

Really shouldn't be doing that...

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=18318

Why?

The link you pointed out too is not really the same thing. I'm talking about taking the entire belt belt off with the holstered handgun.

According to what the link Amidon rulled:

(John Amidon @ 1990 www.uspsa.org/inside_nroi.html (not currently available at that URL))

WHEN IS A HOLSTER NOT A SAFETY DEVICE? There has recently been a lot of discussion about competitors who bag their guns without removing them from the holster. They simply loosen the buckle and slip off the holster, gun and all, and place it in a gun bag. In the past this activity was allowed, but it should no longer be tolerated and will be considered unsafe gun-handling.

IMO this is significantly different than what is being discussed in his thread.

[FranDoc]

This was discussed at our RO class last month.

To specify situation:

2-part 'velcro' gun belt (like most of us use), holster & mag pouches attached to outer belt, gun (empty, hammer down) in holster.

Question: can you remove the outer belt with the gun still in the holster and place the whole assembly in your gun bag?

Answer from RO Instructor (Jay Worden): No. DQ-able offense; I believe it's categorized under unsafe gun handling.

This came up two or three times and it always got the same answer.

[Nik Habicht]

The link you pointed out too is not really the same thing. I'm talking about taking the entire belt belt off with the holstered handgun.

According to what the link Amidon rulled:

(John Amidon @ 1990 www.uspsa.org/inside_nroi.html (not currently available at that URL))

WHEN IS A HOLSTER NOT A SAFETY DEVICE? There has recently been a lot of discussion about competitors who bag their guns without removing them from the holster. They simply loosen the buckle and slip off the holster, gun and all, and place it in a gun bag. In the past this activity was allowed, but it should no longer be tolerated and will be considered unsafe gun-handling.

IMO this is significantly different than what is being discussed in his thread.

This was discussed at our RO class last month.

To specify situation:

2-part 'velcro' gun belt (like most of us use), holster & mag pouches attached to outer belt, gun (empty, hammer down) in holster.

Question: can you remove the outer belt with the gun still in the holster and place the whole assembly in your gun bag?

Answer from RO Instructor (Jay Worden): No. DQ-able offense; I believe it's categorized under unsafe gun handling.

This came up two or three times and it always got the same answer.

That's pretty much the way that I've heard it from every NROI RMI I've ever asked about it. What does being able to take the belt off with a holstered handgun buy anyone? Are there too many steps to the safety table? Is it too difficult to case or bag the gun? The alternative is running the risk for a match DQ under 10.5 --- is that really worth it?

10.5 Match Disqualification – Unsafe Gun Handling

Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to:

[Religious Shooter]

That's pretty much the way that I've heard it from every NROI RMI I've ever asked about it. What does being able to take the belt off with a holstered handgun buy anyone? Are there too many steps to the safety table? Is it too difficult to case or bag the gun? The alternative is running the risk for a match DQ under 10.5 --- is that really worth it?

With pistol only matches it buys you zip.

But in pistol-only matches you don't have to switch weapons and reconfigure your belt multiple times like you do in MG/3Gun. In MG/3Gun it buys you a lot of time and comfort.

If you note that Amidon says that it was legal BEFORE. Now whatever happened in 1990 it became illegal.

I don't see how this practice is unsafe. If you done right you don't sweep squat anybody when you take the belt and gear off.

But as I see it there hasn't been a ruling by Amidon that's been presented here. What he ruled on and what this thread is about are two different things. What the "NROI RIMI" is saying doesn't appear to be based on an Amidon ruling.

[Religious Shooter]

I'd like to also add that this "DQ'able" practice is being done every day, hour, minute by our police, sheriffs and armed forces personnel.

[Nik Habicht]

That's pretty much the way that I've heard it from every NROI RMI I've ever asked about it. What does being able to take the belt off with a holstered handgun buy anyone? Are there too many steps to the safety table? Is it too difficult to case or bag the gun? The alternative is running the risk for a match DQ under 10.5 --- is that really worth it?

With pistol only matches it buys you zip.

But in pistol-only matches you don't have to switch weapons and reconfigure your belt multiple times like you do in MG/3Gun. In MG/3Gun it buys you a lot of time and comfort.

If you note that Amidon says that it was legal BEFORE. Now whatever happened in 1990 it became illegal.

I don't see how this practice is unsafe. If you done right you don't sweep squat anybody when you take the belt and gear off.

But as I see it there hasn't been a ruling by Amidon that's been presented here. What he ruled on and what this thread is about are two different things. What the "NROI RIMI" is saying doesn't appear to be based on an Amidon ruling.

Amidon ruled that it's not o.k. to remove a holstered handgun from the belt and wave it around, put it in a bag, put it in a trunk, etc. How is taking the entire outer belt with holstered handgun off any different than removing a holstered handgun from your belt? If anything, I'd suggest you'd be more likely to waive the belted handgun around wildly.....

(And no -- the you isn't meant to point at you specifically --- it's just how the sentences flowed out of my brain.....

I'd like to also add that this "DQ'able" practice is being done every day, hour, minute by our police, sheriffs and armed forces personnel.

And that has absolutely squat to do with USPSA rules. Last time I checked the law enforcement and military establishments didn't observe the 180 either, yet you're probably not recommending that we abandon that, right?

[Religious Shooter]

Amidon ruled that it's not o.k. to remove a holstered handgun from the belt and wave it around, put it in a bag, put it in a trunk, etc. How is taking the entire outer belt with holstered handgun off any different than removing a holstered handgun from your belt? If anything, I'd suggest you'd be more likely to waive the belted handgun around wildly.....

????

With all due respect... have you actually taken off a stiff web belt with a holstered handgun? What you wrote is just flat out not true. It is actually a lot less likely to be waived around.

They are two different things. Try them out yourself. If you are waving around the gun when taking off the belt... you aren't doing it right.

I'd like to also add that this "DQ'able" practice is being done every day, hour, minute by our police, sheriffs and armed forces personnel.

And that has absolutely squat to do with USPSA rules. Last time I checked the law enforcement and military establishments didn't observe the 180 either, yet you're probably not recommending that we abandon that, right?

It's applicable in that they do it LOADED and it has been done for DECADES. It's applicable in that the practice has a VERY safe history. I bring it up to those that are close minded and/or unfamiliar about the practice.

If you bag a gun and you waive around that bagged gun... is that poor gun handling? How many times have you carried around your gun in a bag and have swept people? Gun bag material isn't going to contain a fired bullet. Are we going to start DQ'ing these people?

[Nik Habicht]

O.K. let's see --- we've had this rule interpretation since 1990, NROI has been teaching it in classes at least since 2002 when I took my RO class, the topic was raised again when Guga Ribas released the holster that could be removed from its mount, and I'm still not understanding the problem you're having with the rule......

For what it's worth, I've shot with Safariland belts from 2001-2007; for about the last year I've been using a CR Speed belt. It's stiff, but depending on how a shooter handles the belt, the gun can move around, can invert, and can theoretically drop out of it's holster. I see that same thing happening with gun rugs --- it comes down to competitor awareness, but the farther a competitor's hands get from controlling the gun, the more likely there is to be a problem......

For what it's worth, my gun rug is carried muzzle down directly to my bag, it might not work for everyone, but it works for me.......

We prohibit any number of things that are not necessarily unsafe in the interest of achieving a double redundancy standard --- where people would have to break two or more safety rules before someone would wind up hurt, in part to account for the different levels of gun handling savvy we see at matches.....

One of my favorite three-gun matches has one simple safety rule --- don't point a gun at anyone, loaded, unloaded, cased or not. Doing so is a match DQ. I'm perfectly comfortable shooting that match --- but I'm not advocating that we change USPSA safety rules to that standard either.....

What's the issue with bagging and unbagging the handgun at a safety table at a 3-gun match? Not enough safety tables? That's a problem for the match administration.....

[Religious Shooter]

So pretend the ironing board is my trunk... you would DQ me for this???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvlzEpHQ6mk

[Fireant]

So pretend the ironing board is my trunk... you would DQ me for this???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvlzEpHQ6mk

That's basically what I'm talking about.

[shred]

So, for the people that think it's ok to take off the belt and gun and all, can I, on walkthrough, turn on my dot, lock the gun in the holster, remove the outer belt, hold the gun up and walk through the stage checking out the sight picture? That would be really cool.

This is well settled for USPSA-- removing holster (on or off the belt) with a gun in it anywhere but a safe area is a no-no.

[Religious Shooter]

The video... was that unsafe? You would DQ the shooter?

Yes or no... you would or would not DQ me based on that video?

BTW the video is VERY different from the scenario that you are introducing. If you can't see a difference between the scenario you are putting forward and from what is in the video...

[Nik Habicht]

The video... was that unsafe? You would DQ the shooter?

Yes or no... you would or would not DQ me based on that video?

BTW the video is VERY different from the scenario that you are introducing. If you can't see a difference between the scenario you are putting forward and from what is in the video...

RS,

Yup -- that would be a match DQ under section 10.5 of the current USPSA rules. Considering the responsibilities and liabilities that all ROs and match directors assume when they agree to fulfill those responsibilities, do you really expect us to tell you that violating a safety rule is o.k.? Do you expect us to ignore an NROI ruling --- when adhering to these rules and interpretations forms a pretty substantial basis of any defense to a lawsuit?

Locally, I suspect you wouldn't do well at arbitration either.....

Now is what you're doing really unsafe? No -- in this particular instance not, but it has been decreed to be an unsafe action, by people with way more experience in playing and officiating this game than I have.

As far as Shred's scenario and your video --- one could lead to the other, or to some permutation thereof, that we wouldn't be really comfortable with either....

Again I'm curious --- what is your particular issue with following the rule? How badly does it inconvenience you? I've answered yours --- want to take a crack at mine?

[Religious Shooter]

Again I'm curious --- what is your particular issue with following the rule? How badly does it inconvenience you? I've answered yours --- want to take a crack at mine?

I have issue with it in that it calls what I did in the video unsafe gun handling. I mean for Pete's sake did I even touch the gun?

By DQ'ing me you are grouping the practice with: an accidental discharge, sweeping people with a loaded gun, breaking the 180 with a loaded gun... etc. That's crazy. DQ for what was done in the video?!??!

I also have an issue in that there is a difference in what Amidon ruled in 1990 (taking a holstered gun off the belt and bagging it) and what is being discussed. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. If the RO's you have talked to are basing it in the 1990 decision... they have taken it upon themselves to interpret the rule.

How many times do you shoot 3 gun a year?

Say I come off a pistol stage. The next stage involves pistol and shotgun. What would I have to do?

1. Drive to the next stage.

2. Go to the trunk. Take off the magazines from the holders and leave it in the trunk. Get shell holders from trunk.

3. Go to the safety area. Unholster the gun. Take off the belt. Reconfigure it for the stage. Put the belt back on. Reholster the pistol.

4. Go back to the car. Get the loaded magazines. Charge the holders with shells.

5. Go shoot.

VS.

1. Drive to the next stage.

2. Go to the trunk and unbelt. Put the shotgun shell carriers carriers on the belt. Strap on the reconfigured belt. Load the carriers.

3. Go shoot.

Next time you shoot 3 gun at a non-USPSA match... compare the two.

[Religious Shooter]

Yup -- that would be a match DQ under section 10.5 of the current USPSA rules.

..

Now is what you're doing really unsafe? No -- in this particular instance not, but it has been decreed to be an unsafe action, by people with way more experience in playing and officiating this game than I have.

If you think what I did wasn't "unsafe"... why would you think those people would?

I mean... did I wave the muzzle wildly? Other than a person laying down right in front of me, would I have swept other shooters with the muzzle?

So you don't think it was unsafe... Yet you would DQ me or any other shooter you saw doing it? Don't you see something wrong there?

Just following orders?

[Nik Habicht]

Yup -- that would be a match DQ under section 10.5 of the current USPSA rules.

..

Now is what you're doing really unsafe? No -- in this particular instance not, but it has been decreed to be an unsafe action, by people with way more experience in playing and officiating this game than I have.

If you think what I did wasn't "unsafe"... why would you think those people would?

I mean... did I wave the muzzle wildly? Other than a person laying down right in front of me, would I have swept other shooters with the muzzle?

So you don't think it was unsafe... Yet you would DQ me or any other shooter you saw doing it? Don't you see something wrong there?

Just following orders?

RS,

Dopey logic --- Shooter is way downrange and breaks the 180, doesn't even come close to pointing the gun at anyone, muzzle never leaves the berm. By description it's not unsafe --- but we'd issue the DQ anyway, as required by the rulebook --- which by legislative fiat has identified those actions that are deemed likely to threaten the safety of match participants. Sure -- you're going to grab people with those rules on occasion, who were not particularly unsafe in that moment, all in the interest of "the greater good....."

This may be one of those East Coast - West Coast and USPSA-NonUSPSA differences too --- locally we pretty much don't drive from bay to bay, because most ranges are too small. So you've got more people in close quarters, and no more than a few steps from a safety table.

Now --- I'm not interpreting a 1990 decision, I'm not reading into it, I'm going off material taught in my Level 1 RO class, material that is still being taught today. Don't like the rule/the way NROI is teaching it/the current version of whatever interpretation they are using? Time to contact Amidon and your Area Director to lobby for a change......

At a non-USPSA match it's all good, as long as the gun is pointed in a safe direction, and you're not violating any of the matches' safety rules.....

[ddjm]

Nik is absolutely correct on this matter. Rule 5.2.1 is very clear. The NROI level 1 workbook even states "You can't strip off belt with the gun in the holster (considerd unsafe gun handling)". It's a just say no. Experienced persons can do this without breaking the 180 or "wave the muzzle wildly", but the rules are for all levels of experience beginner through expert.

Would someone DQ you? They should if the match is run under current USPSA (blue) book. If not a USPSA match, well that's another story.

Respectfully,

Darren

[Religious Shooter]

Dopey logic --- Shooter is way downrange and breaks the 180, doesn't even come close to pointing the gun at anyone, muzzle never leaves the berm. By description it's not unsafe --- but we'd issue the DQ anyway, as required by the rulebook --- which by legislative fiat has identified those actions that are deemed likely to threaten the safety of match participants. Sure -- you're going to grab people with those rules on occasion, who were not particularly unsafe in that moment, all in the interest of "the greater good....."

How is that dopey logic?

Of all the 180's I've seen, probably only one of them involved someone getting swept. I wouldn't have any problems issuing that DQ.

I think you got dopey argument there (how about that!!! ). Of the 180's you have seen, how many of them have involved people getting swept?

Now --- I'm not interpreting a 1990 decision, I'm not reading into it, I'm going off material taught in my Level 1 RO class, material that is still being taught today. Don't like the rule/the way NROI is teaching it/the current version of whatever interpretation they are using? Time to contact Amidon and your Area Director to lobby for a change......

At a non-USPSA match it's all good, as long as the gun is pointed in a safe direction, and you're not violating any of the matches' safety rules.....

How about not blindly following what some dude told you in a class? How about thinking for yourself?

In your judgment you don't think it is unsafe. But you will issue the DQ because of unsafe gun handling. Just because some dude told you so. Dopey thinking.

Have you ever unbagged/bagged a longgun at your car while you were are at a USPSA MG/3G match?

[chuckw]

In your judgment you don't think it is unsafe. But you will issue the DQ because of unsafe gun handling. Just because some dude told you so. Dopey thinking.

Boy, you sure are stubborn/argumentative. If I think driving at 120 mph on the I95 while talking on my cell phone is safe for me, despite what some dude told me is illegal, is that OK with you?

The rules are the rules. If you don't like them, try to get them changed, but don't expect people to ignore rule violations just because you don't agree with a particular rule.

[HSMITH]

Well, I blindly follow what some dude told me at a class because that dude told me what the rules of the game are. If I don't follow the rules I go home, like it or not, so I am compelled to either play by the rules or just stay home.

I get your point, it is a PITA, it isn't categorically unsafe but it isn't categorically safe either. It IS the rule.