IPSC Proposal for Mandatory Reloads

[G-ManBart]

[...] I would love the idea of bringing back the reloading skill in practical shooting[...]

Luca, I honestly believe for some stages/shooters it will be more worthwhile to eat the one or two penalties for not reloading at all on super high hitfactor stages...

This of course depends on the stage design, but -10 vs. +20 for shooting 4 A's in the time it takes to reload is easy math

+1

[spook]

I agree with everything you say (especially the civil manner thing )

But the text quoted is something I have to respectfully disagree with.

For some time now, some people, and in particular Vince Pinto, have looked for ways to deal with the capacity issue in Production (which is very good, IMO!)

There have been some great suggestions that were worth a good discussion and had a pretty good chance of winning over the majority of IPSC shooters (limiting magazine capacity or introducing the box rule come to mind).

But now, pretty much out of the blue, this certain proposal is suggested for all divisions. And it is suggested not only out of the blue, but also by the IPSC President.

I think it's a shame some other proposals don't make their way out of the discussions at the Global Village to the GA. Yet a proposal from above makes it's way to the GA without checking if there is any moral basis amongst the shooters. And all we can do in this case, is say yes or no to proposals from the chief.

I do not find this very democratic.

Bjorn,

I will have to (respectfully ... ) take exception to some of the above.

If you have followed the discussion (dating back to april) on this subject at the GV, you'll have noticed that the very initial proposal didn't came out of the blue, and it did came right from the beginning as aimed to all divisions.

It was april when it was first announced it was going to be brought to the attention of the Assembly.

Now, I agree that being IPSC president has some advantages that may be negated to IPSC members, i.e. being able to ask a motion to be added to the agenda without this having to be submitted to a RD, but I don't think this is really outrageous.

Moreover, if anybody has a proposal, all he has to do is to have his regional Director to forward it for inclusion in the agenda.

Well, it's hard to disagree with the above, so I won't

I didn't catch the "aimed at all divisions" part.

[Nik Habicht]

At this point I'd like to ask everyone to please remember their manners. Discussion and debate are fine --- but discussions about democracy, freedom of speech and which country fought for what will get this thread locked down pretty quickly. Please remember Brian's cardinal rule. Thank you!

[tightloop]

At this point I'd like to ask everyone to please remember their manners. Discussion and debate are fine --- but discussions about democracy, freedom of speech and which country fought for what will get this thread locked down pretty quickly. Please remember Brian's cardinal rule. Thank you!

It certainly would even up the divisions and give the shooters other than Open a chance to win the longer stages...IMO, the magazine capacity thing has gotten out of hand...I would vote Yes.

[Matt Cheely]

It isn't so bad on a 32 round course, but I'd hate to have to do 2 reloads on a 17 round COF.

BAD IDEA!!!

[Brazos Custom]

It would also allow USPSA limited shooters to shoot standard without having to have all new magazines, their 140mm mags would work just fine. It would also allow the open shooters to use their 171.25 mags in an ipsc match.

[Cardinal]

but I'd hate to have to do 2 reloads on a 17 round COF.

Agreed.

I think that most designers would simply stop building 17 to 20-25 round stages.

And you would possibly end up with either 16 round or 26-32 round stages

[Matt Cheely]

It would also allow USPSA limited shooters to shoot standard without having to have all new magazines, their 140mm mags would work just fine. It would also allow the open shooters to use their 171.25 mags in an ipsc match.

Good point. Also wouldn't have to worry about mag length when designing a modified gun.

[Wakal]

We are too lax on magazine capacity anyway...no one NEEDS more than five rounds loaded in the gun, as per SASS...that way, all the games will be fair!

Yet another great idea from the UN, err, IPSC

Alex

Edited September 26, 2008 by Wakal

[Thomas Moore]

I guess I'll put my $0.02 in the mix.

I like this one..."even out the playing field"

if you're crying becuase you can't beat an open gun on a 32 round stage and you're shooting a $300 POS production gun then you need to be slapped in the face and go stand in the corner.

if you want to win more stages then just shoot open. as for being too $$$ go buy a used open gun. shooting a 9mm open gun is cheaper than shooting a 40cal limited gun.

btw...

.... make sure you vote or we'll all be shooting airsoft.

have a nice day.

[shooterready]

NO.

What's next, shooting from cover....

[tightloop]

We are too lax on magazine capacity anyway...no one NEEDS more than five rounds loaded in the gun, as per SASS...that way, all the games will be fair!

Yet another great idea from the UN, err, IPSC

Alex

Instead of mandating reloads how about just limiting guns to flush fitting mags...the long mags hanging out of pistols is about as attractive as a dress on a hog...

[AikiDale]

We are too lax on magazine capacity anyway...no one NEEDS more than five rounds loaded in the gun, as per SASS...that way, all the games will be fair!

Yet another great idea from the UN, err, IPSC

Alex

I was thinking of a game where we shoot at an 8" plate at 10 paces with a muzzle loaded match lock pistol with an unloaded start.

[Mapzter]

Instead of mandating reloads how about just limiting guns to flush fitting mags...the long mags hanging out of pistols is about as attractive as a dress on a hog...

But then, how long before a manufacturer offers a grip that's an inch longer, with mags to match?

[Jim Norman]

There are two choices IF we want to end the capacity racce in Production (IPSC)

One, Impose a loaded rounds cap, 10-12-15-16-17 what ever, but that is it

Two, mandate a reload after the first shot and prior to engaging the last target.

As side note, I don't think we need this in any other division. Standard has a rule that says the gun with mag must fit the box. Open has a 170 mag length and an accepted mag gauge. Limited and SS are USPSA only as is Limited-10. USPSA Production has a 10 round cap already.

I can understand the resistance to a capacity cap. I have a hard time fathoming the resistance to a mandated reload somewhere in the COF with when and where being totally up to the shooter. It is still freestyle. You get to choose. No different than which path you take through a COF. BTW, if EVERYONE is shooting the COF the same way, I would argue that while you might call it freestyle, in reality you have essentially mandated an order of engagement.

Jim

[Singlestack]

Instead of mandating reloads how about just limiting guns to flush fitting mags...the long mags hanging out of pistols is about as attractive as a dress on a hog...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I would vote no.

[Gary Stevens]

I have been following this with some interest obviously.

While we all have our opinions, this really only is an issue if you are shooting an IPSC match. If you choose to shoot such a match, then you will have to abide by their rules if they actually pass. Sort of a free market issue, choose to play, choose to abide by the prevailing rules.

This has absolutely no impact on USPSA matches, which I suspect are the vast majority of matches that are shot by members of this forum.

I think I can speak with an amount of certainty that these proposals have zero chance of being adopted for the USPSA rulebook.

Gary

[wgnoyes]

...Yet another great idea from the UN, err, IPSC

Been awhile since I've put this up:

But I'm glad we got clarification that it was overheard IOC members who wanted to take gunpowder out of the shooting sports, rather than any actual IPSC official.

[al503]

Don't know if it's because I'm lazy or don't know enough as I'm positive some of you have forgotten more about this sport than I've ever digested. However, on a macro level, I'm content to leave this matter up to our respective Area directors to voice what seems to be a clear majority on our behalf (should the same/similar type of proposal ever come up).

With the same caveat mentioned above, give me clear course descriptions/direction and I'll do my best to follow them. If I don't like the rules/directions enough, I'll simply stop playing.

I don't know if this has been brought up because I haven't read every post but many classifiers have mandated reloads regardless of mag capacity to conceivably test the shooter's ability in that particular regard. This arguably plays a significant role in our overall classification. If it's OK for classifiers, why is it not OK for non classifier courses of fire? (Just posing a question, not a position.) Do all of y'all who have voiced their opposition (in no uncertain terms ) feel the same about mandatory reloads in classifiers?

[JThompson]

...Yet another great idea from the UN, err, IPSC

Been awhile since I've put this up:

But I'm glad we got clarification that it was overheard IOC members who wanted to take gunpowder out of the shooting sports, rather than any actual IPSC official.

I think that is a little out of context, but I understand your point. They are also voting on airsoft... With proposed airsoft and limited mags etc etc... it doesn't take a long to see where this will eventually lead. You know the one about throwing a frog in boiling water and he jumps right out, but if you increase the temp slowly he will just sit there and cook.... I don't want to be the frog that sits and cooks, so I think it's important to resist at every turn. This path will eventually lead us to IPSC becoming an airsoft venture. I think it will eventually do so... mark my words.

[AikiDale]

Don't know if it's because I'm lazy or don't know enough as I'm positive some of you have forgotten more about this sport than I've ever digested. However, on a macro level, I'm content to leave this matter up to our respective Area directors to voice what seems to be a clear majority on our behalf (should the same/similar type of proposal ever come up).

With the same caveat mentioned above, give me clear course descriptions/direction and I'll do my best to follow them. If I don't like the rules/directions enough, I'll simply stop playing.

I don't know if this has been brought up because I haven't read every post but many classifiers have mandated reloads regardless of mag capacity to conceivably test the shooter's ability in that particular regard. This arguably plays a significant role in our overall classification. If it's OK for classifiers, why is it not OK for non classifier courses of fire? (Just posing a question, not a position.) Do all of y'all who have voiced their opposition (in no uncertain terms ) feel the same about mandatory reloads in classifiers?

Classifiers are designed to be a test of gun handling and marksmanship skills. In a competition we test the shooter's ability to solve a problem. The problem presented should, in my opinion, be one of targets and terrain. Problems with the equipment may occur of course, and must be dealt with, but should not be mandated by the rules.

[Ramas]

Classifiers are designed to be a test of gun handling and marksmanship skills. In a competition we test the shooter's ability to solve a problem.

Really?! I can't believe you said that!

In my opinion mandatory reloads should be in Production division only. It might be as a test, don't forget that IPSC PRD div. list have more than 300 guns and nowdays I see people shooting with CZ SP-01 and clones, Glock G17 and maybe SIG X Allaround. This rule will make more guns compettitive and this is main purpose. Why do you sream NO even didn't tried it? Rules are rules they are changing time to time.

[el pres]

...Yet another great idea from the UN, err, IPSC

Been awhile since I've put this up:

But I'm glad we got clarification that it was overheard IOC members who wanted to take gunpowder out of the shooting sports, rather than any actual IPSC official.

This is a non-issue for USPSA, imagine we are back 20 years(or whenever that happened??, too young) and we are argueing

about the proposed IPSC classic target. Some years later now it has had no effect on the USPSA tartgets. That said, this is the way

of Europe, they "will" reduce their mag cap. and they "will" be shooting airsoft exclusively in the future, it is the way of the one

way anti street !! Just like our now unique gun laws in the U.S. we will continue with our unique U.S. gun games untill those

rights are erroded. I agree with the statement of not giving them an inch because the inch is "always" the means. So dont argue with your shooting brothers but give me a break here. There have always been good salesmen in the world that can sell anything without even knowing what it is that they are selling. There have always been buyers that can be convinced that, well, this piece of shit has nothing to do with an ass.. As we say in the car business,"there's an ass for every seat"!!

This idea is so illogical ?? I cant believe someone could even argue for this, it's absurd !! Here we go punishing the achievers

again, reminds of the random drawing thread... WTF ??

Do you know another way to say Open? "UNLIMITED" as in "freedom" to do as you safely wish !!

Edited September 26, 2008 by DIRTY CHAMBER

[G-ManBart]

It certainly would even up the divisions and give the shooters other than Open a chance to win the longer stages...IMO, the magazine capacity thing has gotten out of hand...I would vote Yes.

Divisions don't compete against one another...this is one of the most basic principles of the sport. An Open gun shooter will win the stage for Open, a Limited shooter will win it for Limited and so on and so forth.

HOA and combined results are just an interesting thing to look at, but they mean nothing.

Changing the ruls so that someone shooting a gun other than Open can be at the top of the combined results sheet for a stage is absolutely crazy.

If you think magazine capacity has gotten out of hand, don't shoot Open or Limited...you won't have to deal with it and you won't get beat by somene with an extra round in their mag.

I used my 31 round big stick exactly once at Nationals. The rest of the time I used one of my 30 round mags. It didn't make any difference at all...if I had to reload with a 30rd mag I was going to reload with a 31rd mag too....and I wouldn't have lost anything if I only had 29rd mags and probably even 28rd mags.

[Rob Boudrie]

I can live with Rob's worse fear easier than my own. IPSC also has on its agenda starting airsoft matches thus giving our governments who are afraid of guns reason to tell us we do not need them to perform in our sport since airsoft will do just as well. If it comes to that, will we really need to care what the stage designs resemble or the lack of heads on the targets?

This is a non-issue in the US, since USPSA needs never drive gun laws, issuance of permits necessary to own guns, etc. It is, however, a very real fear for the rest of the world where proving the needs of a particular sport, and getting that sport recognized, are a pre-requisites to handgun ownership. Take for example Australia - recognized sports can have bore diameters > 9mm but - guess what - they are anti IPSC and will not grant said recognition. Ditto for Canada, eh? and magazines > 10 rounds.

I was actually surprised that IPSC is interested in Airsoft, since I always assumed they would see acceptance of simulated guns as proof they didn't have the "need" they must continually prove to various nationals governments.