Local match safety poll

[Canuck223]

I've often wondered how US and other clubs dealt with new shooters in IPSC matches. Canada requires new shooters to attend a 2 day safety course that involves a 4 hour lecture about the sports history and rules, then 12 specific drills to get the shooter comfortable with shooting from a holster under pressure of a time limit.

Some argue that it's an impediment to new shooters, having to waste a weekend. Others argue that it's a great jumpstart.

[G-ManBart]

I've seen more 180 violations than anything else. I recall one match not long ago where the RO had to DQ someone for a clear 180 violation and the very next shooter had an AD while picking his gun up off the table. This RO had never DQ'd anyone prior to this and was definitely upset over it....both shooters were good sports about it, which helped. I recall the one apologizing to everyone on the squad....classy. R,

[jkrispies]

I've often wondered how US and other clubs dealt with new shooters in IPSC matches. Canada requires new shooters to attend a 2 day safety course that involves a 4 hour lecture about the sports history and rules, then 12 specific drills to get the shooter comfortable with shooting from a holster under pressure of a time limit.

Some argue that it's an impediment to new shooters, having to waste a weekend. Others argue that it's a great jumpstart.

Personally, I'd love my club to do this, and I've tried to organize a program where we would pay to have our club officers NRA certified as pistol and rifle instructors in order to run the class properly. Unfortunately, I'm always outvoted by members who argue that if we as a club offer safety classes, then we're opening ourselves to a lawsuit if we officially clear somebody as "safe" and then they still go out and do something stupid. I'm dumbfounded by this line of thinking. I truly hope that my club is the only one that has this problem. As far as a required class being "an impeditment to new shooteres"... hey, if they're not willing to do this one thing in the interest of safety and learning how to be better at the sport, then I guess they're really not all that interested in shooting IPSC, huh?

[blaster113]

My vote was for unsafe gunhandling

[DonT]

I voted 180. Someone explain to me "Gun Handling", that's a fairly broad term, wouldn't that fall into the 180 or vice versa? Or, is "Gun Handling" just ..... finger in trigger guard and dropped guns?

Yeah it's a broad term...I kinda meant it to include any unsafe gun handling such as, but not limited to, finger in trigger guard, sweeping, not paying attention to the muzzle when holstering, etc.

The poll wouldn't let me vote again but I was going to add a vote for gun handling (specifically, finger in trigger guard)

New shooters, old shooters, and even myself included a few times, usually when clearing a jam. I really get ticked off at myself when I'm going thru a stage and I hear "finger". I thought I had that mastered long ago...but I guess I'm still working on it.

Now before we go starting a discussion on whether the correct call is "finger" or "stop", we all know the rules and I'd be happy to contribute my .02 worth in another thread.

The results at this point are pretty close to what I guessed except I thought gun handling would be 1st and breaking 180 would be 2nd. But I guess when you think about it, they go hand in hand. And so do AD's. All a form of unsafe gun handling. Maybe I could have listed better or more concise choices.

Thanks to all who took the time to vote and post. Keep 'em coming if you like.

[Shawn Knight]

At the local Indoor matches I go to there have been a few issues involving AD's(during reloads and on the draw), Gun handling(too much TV, pointing at the ceiling when moving), I think one equipment incident(clipdraw), but mostly it is new shooters that have never tried this sport or made an effort to learn any techniques.

[Nik Habicht]

We solved that by setting a blanket standard that is briefed at every shooter's meeting. After the 2nd squib, your ammo is deemed unsafe and you are automatically DQ'd.

...and you realize that if the competitor has different ammo --- factory, something loaded to different specs --- in the car, that you need to let him continue with a swapout of ammo, right? 'Cause that's not grounds to DQ the competitor; just to remove the ammo from the match.....

Part of the briefing is that the shooter should switch ammo after the first squib, because after the second he will be DQ'd from the rest of the match on our range.

O.K. --- under what rule? You can't DQ the competitor for a first, second or 17th squib --- you can flag his ammo as unsafe under 5.5.5. Following that declaration, 10.5.15 forbids any further use of that ammo, but 10.5.15.1 specifically prohibits disqualification for a competitor who's ammunition has been declared unsafe by a match official for multiple squibs. (Translation --- you can keep the competitor from shooting any additional stages if he doesn't have/can't get another ammo supply, but his scores to that point stand....)

A strict reading of 5.5.5 probably doesn't allow for a "general warning" during the briefing; it really requires an RO to declare the ammo unsafe....

[irq23]

I would imagine moving and reloading with the finger in the trigger would fall under "Gun Handling" so that gets my vote. Occasional squibs second, then maybe 180.

[redwoods]

New shooter, finger on the trigger. If I had a dollar for every time I yelled finger over the last 3 years, I'd shoot free for 6 months.

I agree! Fingers on the trigger when working the gun slide.

[Jim Norman]

I have to say "Gun Handling" as I feel it includes AD's and 180 breaks as well as all the general things that can turn one's tighty whiteies a chocolate brown color.

As Nik mentioned earlier we started running a short intro/safety lecture at our indoor practice sessions several years ago. The lecture portion covers the basics of the sport, history, rules, safety, scoring, safety, movement, safety (Get the idea). we then take the shooter(s) out to the line, and have them do a simple draw, engage two targets, reload and re-engage followed by ULSC HD and Holster.

IF they handle this well, they are then placed into on of the two squads and they shoot the session, 4 stages. If they are good with this we feel they are OK to join us in shooting a 'real match' Most people themselves know if they area ready after this. Yes we do have some people that we strongly suggest that they become more familiar with their gun before continuing. We have several other disciplines at our club where they can learn under less stressful conditions and many of our USPSA shooters are involved in those other sports so the newbie isn't actual exiled and in fact sees that there is more they can do rather than less.

I would not favor a mandatory 12 hour course. I do think that what we are doing is a good compromise.

Regarding Canada, is your course a requirement of IPSC Canada? or the Canadian Government?

Jim

[gino_aki]

Well, shooting at the same club as DonT, I have to say the ammo problem had been kind of an ongoing thing as various shooters went through a bunch of ammo reloaded by another club member who had to sell everything due to health concerns. The new reloader also has equipment problems/gun problems which compounds his difficulties. I voted for gun handling because in the rush at the start where everybody is trying to set up the stages and rig up and load magazines some of us (old timers too, who should know better) don't make it to the safety zone to holster and this with a bunch of the guys downrange setting the stages. The finger thing is ongoing too, I'm sure it'd stop in a hurry if we started DQ'ing people for it, but I'm also sure I might be one of the guys going to Dairy Queen.

The other safety issue which we will need to address is our range which I guess would be "Other." Due to it being one large bay, and the complexity of our stages of late we've taken to "angling" them towards the downrange corners in our set-ups which would normally be set laterally with both 180's being perpendicular to straight downrange. This sets up unusual situations when you're having shooters engage in different directions and one stage in a match I ran recently actually had the 180 pointed at the safety zone! We prohibited the use of that side's safety zone for convenience reasons, which is no excuse, but I think the further we travel down this path, the more we are going to have to seriously think about "baying off" our range into smaller bays (2, maybe 3) and shooting down at the impact berm end rather than staying up at our covered firing line in our comfort zone.

[Harmon]

We solved that by setting a blanket standard that is briefed at every shooter's meeting. After the 2nd squib, your ammo is deemed unsafe and you are automatically DQ'd.

...and you realize that if the competitor has different ammo --- factory, something loaded to different specs --- in the car, that you need to let him continue with a swapout of ammo, right? 'Cause that's not grounds to DQ the competitor; just to remove the ammo from the match.....

Part of the briefing is that the shooter should switch ammo after the first squib, because after the second he will be DQ'd from the rest of the match on our range.

O.K. --- under what rule? You can't DQ the competitor for a first, second or 17th squib --- you can flag his ammo as unsafe under 5.5.5. Following that declaration, 10.5.15 forbids any further use of that ammo, but 10.5.15.1 specifically prohibits disqualification for a competitor who's ammunition has been declared unsafe by a match official for multiple squibs. (Translation --- you can keep the competitor from shooting any additional stages if he doesn't have/can't get another ammo supply, but his scores to that point stand....)

A strict reading of 5.5.5 probably doesn't allow for a "general warning" during the briefing; it really requires an RO to declare the ammo unsafe....

because you have 2 squibs in a row, they deem all of your ammo unsafe? where does it stop? even the stuff you left in the car or at home??.

Really? to seriously DQ someone for two squibs? pretty gutsy. then what , DQ me because you dont agree with my gun or holster? not because a real safety hazard exists, but just because you think it needs to be DQed.

They may be shooting factory ammo such as cci blazer which i have seen squib 4 times in one box of 50 and not have any control over what is happening and your wanting to DQ them for that.

This looks more like an opportunity to swing your range balls around than to correct a safety hazard.

180 violations and ADs are the majority of the problem. FOCUS ON THEM.

[Shawn Knight]

This looks more like an opportunity to swing your range balls around than to correct a safety hazard.

180 violations and ADs are the majority of the problem. FOCUS ON THEM.

Interesting.

Saying one problem is more important than another is a problem in itself.

The job of an RO is to maintain a safe shooting environment for all competitors. If someone gets a squib once fault on them. If it happens twice then it could be disastrous.

Can a competitor tell you that they switched ammo? Is that enough? At what point do we say that enough is enough? When the gun goes boom? Who else will get hurt in that explosion? The RO? You? Your kids?

I really don't want to have a piece of barrel or slide stuck in my skull!!

[Nik Habicht]

Can a competitor tell you that they switched ammo? Is that enough?

If I can't believe (trust) one of my fellow competitors telling me that they switched/bought/procured/brought a second ammo supply, how can I possibly trust them with a gun in the first place?

[Shawn Knight]

Can a competitor tell you that they switched ammo? Is that enough?

If I can't believe (trust) one of my fellow competitors telling me that they switched/bought/procured/brought a second ammo supply, how can I possibly trust them with a gun in the first place?

Not one of your buddies.

A person you have never met before. Think B-Class from a different state coming to an away match like and Area or the DTC. He may only have one supply of ammo. Also he may believe that the ammo is perfectly safe and choose to ignore you.

[Nik Habicht]

Can a competitor tell you that they switched ammo? Is that enough?

If I can't believe (trust) one of my fellow competitors telling me that they switched/bought/procured/brought a second ammo supply, how can I possibly trust them with a gun in the first place?

Not one of your buddies.

A person you have never met before. Think B-Class from a different state coming to an away match like and Area or the DTC. He may only have one supply of ammo. Also he may believe that the ammo is perfectly safe and choose to ignore you.

The same rule applies --- if I can't trust them to be truthful, they have no business running around my range with a loaded gun.....

....and it's pretty easy to tell --- both at Level 1 matches with embedded ROs --- and at bigger matches with stage/range staff. If it's a big match, I'm pretty confident that the majority of RMs would schedule the shooter to complete missing stages following an ammo run to the local Wal-Mart, or shooters on the squad/in the match who are local would be volunteering to loan someone a blaster and ammo.....

USPSA shooters tend to be interested in their competition actually being able to finish.....

[Scott R]

We solved that by setting a blanket standard that is briefed at every shooter's meeting. After the 2nd squib, your ammo is deemed unsafe and you are automatically DQ'd.

...and you realize that if the competitor has different ammo --- factory, something loaded to different specs --- in the car, that you need to let him continue with a swapout of ammo, right? 'Cause that's not grounds to DQ the competitor; just to remove the ammo from the match.....

Part of the briefing is that the shooter should switch ammo after the first squib, because after the second he will be DQ'd from the rest of the match on our range.

O.K. --- under what rule? You can't DQ the competitor for a first, second or 17th squib --- you can flag his ammo as unsafe under 5.5.5. Following that declaration, 10.5.15 forbids any further use of that ammo, but 10.5.15.1 specifically prohibits disqualification for a competitor who's ammunition has been declared unsafe by a match official for multiple squibs. (Translation --- you can keep the competitor from shooting any additional stages if he doesn't have/can't get another ammo supply, but his scores to that point stand....)

A strict reading of 5.5.5 probably doesn't allow for a "general warning" during the briefing; it really requires an RO to declare the ammo unsafe....

because you have 2 squibs in a row, they deem all of your ammo unsafe? where does it stop? even the stuff you left in the car or at home??.

Really? to seriously DQ someone for two squibs? pretty gutsy. then what , DQ me because you dont agree with my gun or holster? not because a real safety hazard exists, but just because you think it needs to be DQed.

They may be shooting factory ammo such as cci blazer which i have seen squib 4 times in one box of 50 and not have any control over what is happening and your wanting to DQ them for that.

This looks more like an opportunity to swing your range balls around than to correct a safety hazard.

180 violations and ADs are the majority of the problem. FOCUS ON THEM.

Understand that the match Steve is speaking of is not a USPSA match therefore the USPSA rules quoted are irrelevant. In my opinion Steve's rules allowing the shooter an option to switch ammo after the first squib and then be DQed after a second squib seems like a good way to get the repeat offenders to take a little more care about loading their ammo. Do you think he would have done this if there weren't a high number of squibs occurring at his match?

Edited June 7, 2009 by Scott R

[scooterj]

There are 3 videos here, http://s665.photobucket.com/albums/vv14/bh...current=008.flv . Look at the third and give me your opinion on the guy on the right's actions. This was posted on a local forum and when I questioned the sloppy gun handling, I was chastised. This was not a sanctioned event. I have been NROI certified for 15 years and would like to think I know unsafe gun handling when I see it.

BTW, I voted 180 violation.

Edited June 8, 2009 by scooterj

[MoNsTeR]

Voted gun handling. Moving and/or reloading with finger in the trigger guard is what I see most. Probably 10-25% of shooters in ECO do it and literally no one gets called on it.

As far as actual DQs my recollection seems pretty evenly split between ADs and 180s, but these are ultra rare compared to the above.

[ipscron2000]

This is a very intresting thread.

Our area clubs that I attend including my own really doesn't have AD's to speak of. The infractions I see are sloppy gun handling to include moving with the finger in the trigger guard, clearing a jam with you finger on the trigger, bending down after a course of fire to pick up thier mags before holstering their gun. All of these make me CRINGE!

When we get a new shooter, we tell them to shoot slow and hold their gun high and don't worry about speed. Safety is number one and having fun is number two. Still.... New shooters feel the need to go fast and their mind is on going fast not being extra safe with their gun.

In 7 years of USPSA/IDPA, I have seen some gun handling that has scared me to death. Sweeping the crowd with a loaded gun (180), tucking a loaded gun under their arm (pointed at the crowd) to finish loading a mag, hearing someone behind me racking their slide, I guess out of nervousness.

All in all, most people are and want to be safe shooters, but some just don't get it.

[lugnut]

There are 3 videos here, http://s665.photobucket.com/albums/vv14/bh...current=008.flv . Look at the third and give me your opinion on the guy on the right's actions. This was posted on a local forum and when I questioned the sloppy gun handling, I was chastised. This was not a sanctioned event. I have been NROI certified for 15 years and would like to think I know unsafe gun handling when I see it.

BTW, I voted 180 violation.

That was pretty damn stupid. I understand it might not have been sanctioned but he'd hear something from me.

[XD Niner]

One local shooter I know was DQ'ed from 5 matches in a couple of months, he is still shooting and has not been sent home in some time. Its a learning process some learn faster than others.

Different state but we must have your shooters two remaining triplets with all three separated at birth. When I RO our two I am very vigilant and unforgiving. Several other RO's have a similar approach with these two. They both scare the heck out of me. I even keep my eye on these guys if I'm just standing there waiting to shoot or paste. One is improving but I'm not sure there is hope for the other one.

I voted for the 180 and poor gun handling. Those two areas seem to be the most prevalent in the matches I attend.

Edited June 22, 2009 by XD Niner

[Skizeks]

For me it's a toss-up between the 180 & unsafe gun handling.

The last match I ROed at (Drazy steel match) I DQed a shooter for unsafe gun handling (10.5.5)

The shooter had a squib and before any of the 3 RO's on the stage could

say anything the shooter had his finger in the breech and was looking down his barrel.

After what seemed like a very long pause I was the first RO to yell STOP

All three RO's just looked at each other wondering if we really just saw that.

The shooter didn't see any problem with it there was a squib in the barrel.

But what really sucked for the shooter waasn't the fact that he just got DQed.

He was shooting 2 guns and was DQ for both guns.

Not a happy shooter (or X shooter)

Duane

[ac4wordplay]

Unsafe gun handling.

Some people seem to think along the lines of:

"Hey, nobody got shot, so we must be safe - that's good enough, right?"

or

"It's not like I was pointing a loaded gun at him..."

Some days the pucker factor is higher than others and I just want to (safely) go home.

Edited July 8, 2009 by ac4wordplay

[mildot1]

Definately gun handling.

And it's in every discipline from trap to high power rifle.

You have to be aware of that barrel every second.