DQ or ?

[JThompson]

Okay, so DQ the RO and MD.

All kidding aside, how could you blame this guy for dropping a gun when it's the RO that caused it to fall? We could discuss holsters and dropped guns from now until hell froze over, but I refuse to DQ a guy for something like this. It's beyond his control and there was no equipment failure. He didn't bounce it out hauling ass around a cof.

I know where this comes from... it's the mindset of the loaded gun hit the ground, someone is going to go home. Since we can't DQ the RO we move on.

Edited May 26, 2009 by JThompson

[-JQ-]

So I can get a guy DQ'd if I walk up and unholster his gun...I would expect the DQ to be on me...and maybe an a$$ kicking...

I take this all seriously, but I don't see the shooter being at fault...but I like the Serpa with the button too...I'd be using that with my prod gun too if they made one for it...

Makes me go hmmmm...

[IronEqualizer]

So if I am outside the Safe Area with a loaded mag and yell to a guy in the Safe Area "think fast" and toss him the mag and he catches it.....does he get DQd for that?

AL

[UW Mitch]

Slightly tangent, but if the RO came in contact with you during the course of fire and caused you to lite one off, or spun you around past the 180, would that be a match DQ also? The ruling sounds wrong all around (which seems to be the general consensus).

~Mitch

[Xfactor]

I am in the camp that thinks the responsibility for the gun needs to always be on the shooter. I think I'd change "causes it to fall" to ..."allows it to fall.

This definitely should not have been a DQ.

For starters, even if it were agreed that the rules should say "...allows it to fall...", they currently say "...causes it to fall...", so we can only enforce the rules as they are currently published.

But also, hk's point above is a very good one: "allowing" a gun to fall can be interpreted to varying extents... up to and including someone bumping into your holster with the intention of knocking the gun loose. Any safe shooter is always cognizant of their gun in the holster at a match, but being on constant guard for someone out of sight behind you knocking it out of the holster is a bit much to ask. Especially when a shooter is on the line and given the "Are you Ready?" command...

As it pertains to this situation, I'd sooner advocate a DQ for a fellow competitor/RO that knocks a shooter's gun to the ground than re-interpreting the rules to fault the shooter.

Edited May 26, 2009 by Xfactor

[scirocco38s]

I'll take a dissenting view --- until George or Troy smack me.....

Who's responsible for controlling the gun? The shooter, right? That's the underlying principle of the safety rules, right? Who chose the holster? Who chose to apply/not apply/not apply tightly enough whatever locking device the holster may or may not have had?

Now, I realize that the situation sucks for all concerned --- but a loaded gun ended up on the ground. Clearly we care about that. But accident, carelessness, or interference aside, that's a match DQ for the shooter......

Wrong again.

[Flexmoney]

I can't disagree with anything that has been posted on this thread...even by people that might be disagreeing.

One of the most scariest things we can have happen is to have a loaded gun tumbling around...with a pinned grip safety and an 1.5lb trigger that has had the treatment... "I'll bet I can improve on that Master Gunsmiths trigger work if I get in here with my dremel"

[mactiger]

Slightly tangent, but if the RO came in contact with you during the course of fire and caused you to lite one off, or spun you around past the 180, would that be a match DQ also? The ruling sounds wrong all around (which seems to be the general consensus).

~Mitch

Actually, according to:

8.6.4 In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another

external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of

fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course

of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing

either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the

event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such

interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

You may still be DQ'd. Notice that it says "may" which IMO allows a little leeway in the application of this rule. This is basically an extension of the idea that if the gun is in your hand, you are responsible for it. There are probably thousands of possible scenarios for this, and I don't want to drift the thread with them. The point is that this rule doesn't apply in this instance, because the competitor did not commit a safety infraction (because he was not holding the gun), and the word "may" allows for some leeway in the actions taken by the RO/MD/RM.

In this case, though, definitely not a DQ, since the RO is the one that caused the problem, not the shooter.

Troy

[mactiger]

I can't disagree with anything that has been posted on this thread...even by people that might be disagreeing.

One of the most scariest things we can have happen is to have a loaded gun tumbling around...with a pinned grip safety and an 1.5lb trigger that has had the treatment... "I'll bet I can improve on that Master Gunsmiths trigger work if I get in here with my dremel"

Yeah, buddy. Nothing like a little home-cooking to increase the possibilities. Hopefully the primary safety is on and working.

Troy

[uscbigdawg]

Looks like leaving the match yesterday when I did was a good idea and not having gone at all would have been the better idea. Sheesh.

Rich

[norbs007]

I can understand about making the right equipment choice and all, but that's out in this situation. I can't even believe that holster choice was brought up, it's a human error and not by the shooter. Wrong call, no DQ.

[oddjob]

"The RO is close enough to accidentally bump the shooter's holstered gun AND the MD is within 4 or 5 feet of the shooter?...Man y'all sure do stand close together in CA."

It was a Nor. California shooter in Nevada. Kinda like inter-state bonding I guess!!

[Carlos]

Taking this on face value:

Overall: the RO is the one who caused the problem. If the competitor was using a legal holster (gun retention device ), and did not touch the gun either prior to it's falling or while trying to catch it, then it's the range officer's fault, and there are no grounds under the rules to DQ the competitor.

While it's true that the competitor is responsible for the safe handling of his gun, in this case he wasn't handling it at all.

Troy

This portion makes perfect sense, Troy. Well put.

Ed Deegan asked me about a similar possibility (theoretical) - and I did not have an answer for him: what if the loaded gun is placed on a prop (like in our national classifier "Minimart") and the RO knocks it off/tips over the table?

That scenario removes the issue of "holster safety." Who, if anyone, is DQ'd then? I agree with Troy that it could not possibly be the shooter, since he/she is not handling the gun at all. In fact, the stage description requires the shooter to remove his/her hand from the gun, thus preventing control over it.

Edited May 26, 2009 by Carlos

[Flexmoney]

Some of these "what if" are specifically covered in past thread.

And, fwiw...our original rule guru (Vince P.) was one that mentioned holster choice on some of those threads.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...=%2Bdropped+gun

[zhunter]

Without getting ALL of the Open shooters upset with me, YES, holster choice is a factor for safety issues.

How can it not be an issue

[jasmap]

Without getting ALL of the Open shooters upset with me, YES, holster choice is a factor for safety issues.

How can it not be an issue

I myself, as well as all of my squadmates, witnessed a Limited gun fall out of a Bladetech DOH at the Nationals. Not a knock on Bladetech as I think they have a great product but very few holsters, if any, in this sport are 100% safe.

[Lee King]

Because the rules allow the CR Speeds and the Ghosts etc.

What if the RO turned, somehow hooked the velcro on the outer belt (WITH a bladetech), and the whole rig crashed? BTW, while I haven't seen an RO do it, I know of a few competitors who have done it to themselves. Small chance but then again what are the odds of a RO knocking the gun out of any holster in the first place.

[zhunter]

Without getting ALL of the Open shooters upset with me, YES, holster choice is a factor for safety issues.

How can it not be an issue

I myself, as well as all of my squadmates, witnessed a Limited gun fall out of a Bladetech DOH at the Nationals. Not a knock on Bladetech as I think they have a great product but very few holsters, if any, in this sport are 100% safe.

Because the rules allow the CR Speeds and the Ghosts etc.

What if the RO turned, somehow hooked the velcro on the outer belt (WITH a bladetech), and the whole rig crashed? BTW, while I haven't seen an RO do it, I know of a few competitors who have done it to themselves. Small chance but then again what are the odds of a RO knocking the gun out of any holster in the first place.

I think jasmap is correct, nothing is 100% safe, but hard to argue that a blade-tech style holster is NOT safer than a race holster, especially when the lock is NOT engaged.

As for the entire rig falling off, come on, let's be reasonable in our arguments!!!!

[mactiger]

Without getting ALL of the Open shooters upset with me, YES, holster choice is a factor for safety issues.

How can it not be an issue

Ah, but holster safety isn't the question here. If the holster was legal, and it was, because I haven't seen any of them outlawed on the basis of non-retention, then it was the RO's fault and no DQ.

We can discuss holster safety issues in another thread, but currently USPSA doesn't do holster tests, nor do we attempt to regulate gun retention. Perhaps we should, but we don't at present.

Troy

[smokshwn]

"As for the entire rig falling off, come on, let's be reasonable in our arguments!!!! " by Z

As for reasonable.....we passed that a long ways back when we decided we could run, trip and fall, and continue shooting as a very common occurence in our sport. In comparison dropping a gun doesn't even get in that ballpark...

Edited May 26, 2009 by smokshwn

[Lee King]

I think the original question is valid and fascinating at a hypothetical level regardless of equipment. Improbable does not equal impossible. Anyone in this sport long enough has seen some really improbable things happen. Have props ever collapsed? What if the "shelf" in "Mini-mart" CM 99-21 collapsed? What if the prop itself caused the gun to come out of the holster (valid example given at the level 1 RO class that happened during nationals)?

Arguing the type of holster isn't really the issue.

[SA Friday]

OK, the cop in me is raising it's ugly head. I can see some seriously ugly issues arising if this situation was rules as a DQ. What if an RO did this intentionally while making it look like an accident? It wouldn't be that hard to do, and it would be impossible to DQ the RO for unsportsman like conduct unless you could prove they bumped the guys gun on purpose. Palms on X's start with a race holster unlocked and, oops, I'm so sorry-bu bye.

Before you start spewing "it would never happen", stop and think about some of the social dynamics of shooters in your area. I believe it would be a hugely far fetched event, but I could see it happening with the wrong two people in that situation. Hell, there's been fist fights at matches before (idiots).

Ultimately, holding someone responsible for another's physical actions is a really bad road to go down, regardless of their equipment choice. If I'm stopped at a light in one of those super mini electric buggie-car thingees and get t-boned by a Ford F550 and mangled in the process, who's at fault for my injuries? Me for chosing the buggie-car thingee or the guy that t-boned me?

[uscbigdawg]

And when did only Open shooters use race holsters?

Rich

[Graham Smith]

This actually brings to mind something I saw last year. In one match, I saw an RO's gun come flying out during a COF where he was running the timer. It wasn't loaded, of course, but I still half expected the RO to DQ himself. The shooter said afterward that he was so startled when the RO yelled stop that he almost let a shot fly out of control. Surely the shooter would not have been at fault there.

[Lee King]

Ok.. so I went back and reread the previous threads as far back as 2002. This thread 2002 Thread on Dropped Guns seems to cover all the hypothetical what if's.

If I'm reading it correctly, 1) the competitor holstered his gun initiating any subsequent action INCLUDING the RO knocking the gun out of his holster by virtue of NOT locking it and thereby causing it to fall. Not locking the holster was the shooter's choice. 2) If the gun were placed on a prop and something extrodinary happened such as a collapse then according to 10.5.3 (I think the rule number was misquoted as 10.3.5.. but then again we were talking about 2002) the "competitor" did not cause the action (in this case by virtue of using a match prop.. as opposed to HIS holster) and no DQ.

Am I reading the subtleties correctly?