Morphire Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Manufacturers define what they believe to be a safety on their firearms. Their opinions vary based on many different factors; lawyers, marketing, engineering, etc. USPSA deals with the whole spectrum, and I believe it would be impossible to resolve a definition encompassing all of them without getting just silly. I believe as an organization they can identify those mechanisms they see are NOT safeties and document this as they have recently done. I've been trying to come up with an exception, but I can't think of a manufacturer's safety device that doesn't adhere to the definition of "a device that when engaged 1) prevents the trigger sears being disengaged or 2) prevents the firing pin contacting the primer of a loaded round without the trigger sears being disengaged". I'm just one mind though so maybe there is a manufacturer's safety out there that doesn't fit this definition. Can anyone think of one that doesn't fit? Maybe it doesn't change anything but I'm assuming the BOG has some sort of methodology for determining what is and isn't a safety now since they've used it already to exempt one type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Moderator note: The whole thing about revisiting the Production Division rules is about modifications allowed to that specific Division. It has nothing to do with the safety features featured on guns allowed in other Divisions... some people are just trying to make it a safety issue. The above is well said. If you believe that general issues regarding safeties in other divisions warrants discussion, please start a new and dedicated thread for such a discussion. But, no more drift of this thread in that direction. Thank you, Kyle F. Forum Administrator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Manufacturers define what they believe to be a safety on their firearms. Their opinions vary based on many different factors; lawyers, marketing, engineering, etc. USPSA deals with the whole spectrum, and I believe it would be impossible to resolve a definition encompassing all of them without getting just silly. I believe as an organization they can identify those mechanisms they see are NOT safeties and document this as they have recently done. That is on point. Some are getting caught up in what a corporate entity attaches as a label, for their own best interest. Our corporation looked at this...directly, not arbitrarily...and said [paraphrasing], 'hey, we know there will be confusion because some companies call that a safety...we think it's a magazine disconnect and we are allowing it to be removed for this division.' (just like the other divisions, for that matter) I'd liken it to a trigger lock. We wouldn't expect the S&W revolvers to start out in Production with their trigger locks engaged. We wouldn't expect a Para LDA (if it had a MSH with a trigger lock in it, like a Springfield) to start off with that lock engaged. Our guys looked at this. Made a decision. Seems like good sense to me. Some may have issue with it. Just like some have issue with milling the slide for the purpose of changing the sights. But, that doesn't make it arbitrary. It is a specfically allowed modification. Heck, that is the very natural of this rule tweak... To let us know...with greater clarity...what is and isn't specifically allowed. You can lose the magazine disconnect. This is CLEAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Folks, This may seem a bit heavy-handed, but I am going to take the last word (on THIS thread) on the magazine disconnect issue. As it stands, if we keep beating on that one topic, this thread will be effectively dead to all other topics and input. If you would like to further comment on the magazine disconnect, please...feel free...to start a fresh and dedicated thread for that topic. (hopefully with a fresh idea/perspective). Sorry for the heavy hand, but we need to get this thread back on track. - Admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morphire Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 (edited) *self edit Edited March 25, 2009 by Morphire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgnoyes Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Folks, I think this is how it works out in the end.For those who disagree, we have heard you. You disagree, I and I think others understand that. I think there might be some minor changes in some areas, but perhaps not. To put it bluntly, you can either accept the rules as written, or take other actions as you see fit. I have tried to explain, to the best of my ability why and how this all happened. I guess I have failed. Previously we didn't find out about rule changes until they appeared in the rulebook. Nobody really tried to include the membership in the process. One might argue that they were correct. All of this did you do this, and did you consider that, and did you consult whomever, is getting tiresome. I have spoken my last on this issue. Hear, hear! Thanks for all your hard work, Gary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bond Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 It has nothing to do with the other Divisions. We like our other guns just like they are. So did we.... Now, who is in favor of allowing 9mm Major in Limited! Eric Why would we stop there? Why not 380 or 25 or even rimfire. Aside from gunsmiths gaining orders and competitors having cheaper brass we would not accomplish anything. Given the current political climate, we might all be using airsoft soon enough. Instead of beating the drum for this change send the money you would otherwise be using for a new limited gun and send it to hte NRA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Why would we stop there? Why not 380 or 25 or even rimfire. Aside from gunsmiths gaining orders and competitors having cheaper brass we would not accomplish anything. Given the current political climate, we might all be using airsoft soon enough. Instead of beating the drum for this change send the money you would otherwise be using for a new limited gun and send it to the NRA. My point was that the rules are/were fine. Please stop changing them. Stop saying 'I don't care what they do to production, I shoot.....' I really don't like the new rules and I disagree that there is no current intention to vote to finalize the rules after members have had a chance to comment. I'd just ask, with this change, leave the divisions and rules alone for a few years! And, if you feel the need to fine-tune a division, screw with someone else's gear next time. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 But Eric, the other Divisions follow the rules in their specific Division, it the PD crowd that was having an issue. It was the PD crowd that said the words "specifically allowed" and "prohibited" were not very clear commands, so the BoD had to rewrite some things to make it understandable. The rules have not changed, they just got CLEAR and DEFINED. The things you are not allowed now you never were, it just had to get spelled out for some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 But Eric, the other Divisions follow the rules in their specific Division, it the PD crowd that was having an issue. It was the PD crowd that said the words "specifically allowed" and "prohibited" were not very clear commands, so the BoD had to rewrite some things to make it understandable. The rules have not changed, they just got CLEAR and DEFINED. The things you are not allowed now you never were, it just had to get spelled out for some people. OK. Fine, I believe they have changed while others think they are now 'clear and defined'. 'Nuff said. Now leave them alone till the next rule book. I do't think this is a good move, but what do I know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireant Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 I really think production as some people envisioned it is a train that has left the station and can never get back. Accepting that fact and moving on I don't know why we can't really simplify the PD rules. It could be as easy as: * must be DA first shot/striker fired * must be readily available to the public(set a number if you want) * gun with an empty mag must fit in the box and have a weight limit * Only external mods are those listed ie, mill for sights, barrels, grip tape/stipple, extended mag release, but not oversized etc. * gun must be safe and operable as per rule ... then keep the 10 round mag limit and equipment position. All of this can easily be check by any competent RO/MD. Nice and simple and give an inclusive list of the allowed external mods and have at it. I think it is funny that many of us expected a ruling that the dreaded nasty internal set screw was going to be outlawed, but we came out with this interpretation instead. Honestly what else could need to be adressed if you say have at the inside( anything you can not see when the gun is in battery) but the exterior is limited to XYZ ONLY? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wideload Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Not to re-ignite this fire but, are the PD rules locked down for now with no additional changes or modifications to address the concerns voiced here and on the USPSA site? If one is currently shooting a PD gun from brand X that is in question, can we proceed to make a decision to either restore/acquire the necessary parts (whether it be a FP block or correct magazines) to comply with these rulings, or start training with a gun from brand Y that is in compliance, so we can go forward with the game? I for one have a CZ SP01 and I can polish the FP Block and lifter to smooth the action. However, I need to decide how badly I want to buy the additional, pricey factory magazines to stay in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Not to re-ignite this fire but, are the PD rules locked down for now with no additional changes or modifications to address the concerns voiced here and on the USPSA site? If one is currently shooting a PD gun from brand X that is in question, can we proceed to make a decision to either restore/acquire the necessary parts (whether it be a FP block or correct magazines) to comply with these rulings, or start training with a gun from brand Y that is in compliance, so we can go forward with the game? I for one have a CZ SP01 and I can polish the FP Block and lifter to smooth the action. However, I need to decide how badly I want to buy the additional, pricey factory magazines to stay in this game. Has it been established that the MecGar magazines are not production legal? I know most CZ shooters use the MecGar magazines as do a lot of Baretta shooters. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbosik Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I have scanned this topic and done a search and cannot find where it states aftermarket mags are not acceptable,,if anyone has seen this info let me know, i too am concerned that i will need to purchase factory sp01 mags to use my sp01,,this would stink as many other brand shooters use other mags.and help would be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricBudd Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I have scanned this topic and done a search and cannot find where it states aftermarket mags are not acceptable,,if anyone has seen this info let me know, i too am concerned that i will need to purchase factory sp01 mags to use my sp01,,this would stink as many other brand shooters use other mags.and help would be appreciated. 18) What provisions of this interpretation apply to magazines? May I modify my magazines? ANSWER: In general, NO. All existing rules and rulings remain in effect for magazines. While there are no specified limits on magazine length, an existing ruling requires that the gun must fit in the box with a magazine inserted, and that all magazines (whether OEM or aftermarket) must be “dimensionally the same as the original magazine for that model of gun”. Adding aftermarket base pads, adding or removing material from base pads or adding grip-tape would all be considered external modifications and are not allowed. Springs and followers, for purposes of this ruling, would be considered “internal parts” and may be modified or replaced without restrictions. I think there is a question about what “dimensionally the same as the original magazine for that model of gun” means. Also, many shooters replace the sharp metal basepads with the CZ rubber basepads. I don't think anyone knows if a mecgar with a CZ rubber base pad will get you moved into Open or not. Also, the new Mecgar mags have a plastic basepad that is shaped like the CZ rubber basepad. My opinion is load the mags with 10 tounds and if it fits in the box it should be good to go. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 My opinion is load the mags with 10 tounds and if it fits in the box it should be good to go. That's certainly easier from a match administration standpoint... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbosik Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 so, it should be ok for the rubber cz basepads, i hope ,,fpb will be no problem to install and i should be good to go,,thanks for the response Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddjob Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Are the new rules in place now? I didn't see anything yet on the USPSA site or receive a response to my e-mail. I'm supposed to get a slot to the nationals and need to let my club president know if I'm going or not. thanks...........ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Ellis Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Not to stir the pot but here is what the recent rulings have affected me. My XD-40 Production gun is now illegal. I ran a XD-40 and had the slide lightened to 9mm slide weight so that it would run 40minor loads. In my interpetation the slide milling was for reliability which was legal at the time. The rulings clearly state that such internal slide milling is now illegal. So I called my gunsmith and had a new XD-9 that is legal shipped. Am I upset and/or PO'd that these rulings made my old gun illegal? Not in the least. I knew when the XD-40 was built that I was taking the rules as far they could be interpeted. There was a risk that something somewhere down the line would make it illegal. I knew it, I accepted it. The upside is that I now have a kickbutt L-10 gun ready for service. Just got to work up some 40major loads and stick a stiffer recoil spring in. The new legal XD-9 is in the safe ready to be broken in and hopefully a couple days later to go to a match. Personally I'm glad these rulings came out even though it cost me a bit of money. It cleared up some of the gray areas. Thanks for the hard work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clown Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Are the new rules in place now? I didn't see anything yet on the USPSA site or receive a response to my e-mail. I'm supposed to get a slot to the nationals and need to let my club president know if I'm going or not.thanks...........ron John A said the board is supposed to call an online meeting soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 Good thread with many interesting/valid perspectives. Anything new? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 (edited) There is a new rule book ( http://www.uspsa.org/rules/2009MasterRules4-17.pdf ) up. It is marked as revised on 17 Apr 09. later, Chuck Edited April 29, 2009 by ChuckS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eerw Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 interesting.. some language is change.. says only disabling of any external safety or externally operated safety is prohibited magazine length restriction. see#7. gun and empty mag must fit the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireant Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 Yep, I was thinking the same thing. Glad I didn't go putting the FPB back in or putting it up for sale like I almost did a couple of times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eerw Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 Yep, I was thinking the same thing. Glad I didn't go putting the FPB back in or putting it up for sale like I almost did a couple of times. always good to wait. my last gun, I set up with the FPB in..and in came out nice..so I'm probably going to let it be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now