rule regarding muzzle during holster actions

[shootingchef]

At Area 1, a competitor in our squad was warned several times about how he was holstering his weapon. he had a belt slide leather holster behind his right hip, and as he was holstering, he would cant the barrel reward slightly to make the holster opening.

He thought he was safe to holster a unloaded or loaded gun with a belt slide leather holster that was far behind the hip almost to the small of the back. regardless of the 90 degree rule. Granted he was a skinny fellow but he was preturbed in that he felt he did not do anything wrong. I wanted to post the specific rule regarding that action in case he reads the forums as he might earn a DQ someday and wonder why.

Rule

10.5.6 While facing downrange, allowing the muzzle of a loaded handgun to

point uprange beyond a radius of 3 feet from a competitor’s feet while

drawing or re-holstering.

[Joe4d]

he either broke the rule or he didnt,

He either didnt go beyond 3 feet in his slightly and has every right to be perturbed, or he did go beyond and the RO wasnt doing their job.

[Sarge]

Very interesting post. This is part of the reason I am looking forward to RO class this weekend. At one local match last month a guy did the following. After finishing shooting from the prone he reholstered his pistol while still laying down. Everyone behind him was like "OH Shit". There was no DQ. But does this 3ft rule apply since he pointed the gun right at his feet and US! I would probably call that a DQable offense regardless. Would I be right or would I be stripped of my newly earned RO credentials?

Edited June 23, 2009 by sandman

[yoshidaex]

Very interesting post. This is part of the reason I am looking forward to RO class this weekend. At one local match last month a guy did the following. After finishing shooting from the prone he reholstered his pistol while still laying down. Everyone behind him was like "OH Shit". There was no DQ. But does this 3ft rule apply since he pointed the gun right at his feet and US! I would probably call that a DQable offense regardless. Would I be right or would I be stripped of my newly earned RO credentials?

i would call that a DQ. After we're done shooting a course where you have to go prone, we're told (or tell) at the very least to get upright (stand up or on your knees) before holstering.

[mda]

At one local match last month a guy did the following. After finishing shooting from the prone he reholstered his pistol while still laying down. Everyone behind him was like "OH Shit". There was no DQ. But does this 3ft rule apply since he pointed the gun right at his feet and US! I would probably call that a DQable offense regardless. Would I be right or would I be stripped of my newly earned RO credentials?

I would call that a DQ.

A good attentive RO would have noticed (he should be expecting this action due to the nature of the position) what the shooter was about to do and stopped them. One common way RO's try to prevent this action in the first place is during the walk through tell the shooters to stand up or at least return to a kneeling position before holstering.

As an RO you should make the call you as you see it. Let the shooter appeal the call to the CRO, RM and abritration if it goes that far (according the the rules). At local matches it would be most likely the person running the match. We all get it wrong some times even the most experianced RO, CRO, RM and RM/I.

MDA

[Sarge]

I believe if my memory serves me right we were told to come to our knees before holstering. Plus the shooter saw several shooters do exactly that. I for one saw that as a no brainer but I guess the shooter just got caught up in his shooting and spaced it out. Not ragging anyone RO wise just an actual event with an honest question. Thanks for the info.

I think with the "explosion" of popularity with the sport we should all expect to see a lot of new shooters. Hell I am one! Things can come up that seasoned shooters or even experienced gun handlers may not even think of. One thing that comes to mind is starting a stage facing up range. A few matches back on the command make ready a shooter asked the RO, "You do want me to face down range to load and make ready and then turn around and stand by right"? A good question since it was not actually clarified beforehand. That could have been another "OH shit".

[LPatterson]

Ken,

I'm glad you brought this up because I know and shoot regularly with this shooter and while he does have to cant the gun rearward to holster, he is not close to the 3 foot limit. The ROs did a great job especially in the rain but some of them were treating the job like another local match. For a match like an Area match where shooters have more expenses than normal the ROs need to become pure professionals where a situation either is or isn't. It is not a time for I "think" you might be close to breaking a rule.

[Supermoto]

Ken,

I'm glad you brought this up because I know and shoot regularly with this shooter and while he does have to cant the gun rearward to holster, he is not close to the 3 foot limit. The ROs did a great job especially in the rain but some of them were treating the job like another local match. For a match like an Area match where shooters have more expenses than normal the ROs need to become pure professionals where a situation either is or isn't. It is not a time for I "think" you might be close to breaking a rule.

If this is an experienced shooter, why is he still using a holster that may cause a RO to be nervous?

Edited June 24, 2009 by Supermoto

[open17]

If this is an experienced shooter, why is he still using a holster that may cause a RO to be nervous?

Because it's a legal holster and he is doing nothing wrong? If the shooter is within the rules, why should something "that may cause a RO to be nervous" be a consideration? Heck--as an CRO I see stuff all the time that makes me twitch a bit. I've yelled "muzzle" and "finger" plenty of times, been able to see the rifling on a loaded gun more than once. DQ'ed a few--given more than that a little talking to after the stage. All part of the game.

Re: holstering prone----until the gun is holstered and the "range is clear" command is

issued, the course of fire has not been completed. 180 rule applies----DQ.

Rule 10.5.2, subject to the 3 ft exemption during holstering in rule 10.5.6

Edited June 24, 2009 by open17

[Supermoto]

If this is an experienced shooter, why is he still using a holster that may cause a RO to be nervous?

Because it's a legal holster and he is doing nothing wrong? If the shooter is within the rules, why

should something "that may cause a RO to be nervous" be a consideration? Heck--as an CRO

I see stuff all the time that makes me twitch a bit. I've yelled "muzzle" and "finger" plenty

of times, been able to see the rifling on a loaded gun more than once. DQ'ed a few--given

more than that a little talking to after the stage. All part of the game.

I understand that it's legal and therefore the shooter has the right, my question is why keep doing something that you know will cause a RO heartburn. what is his reasoning to keep using that holster? What is the benefit to that shooter? . why dance around the safety rule? If I contiunally ran down range with my gun at the 180, , I'm not breaking the rule, I just making life harder for them. the RO will eventually tell me to stop being a jackass.

[Nik Habicht]

I understand that it's legal and therefore the shooter has the right, my question is why keep doing something that you know will cause a RO heartburn.

You realize you're making an assumption there --- that the shooter is specifically choosing this holster to give ROs heartburn. Ask yourself --- is that really likely? Would you do something like that? If no, why assume that anyone else would either?

what is his reasoning to keep using that holster? What is the benefit to that shooter?

Beats me, but here's some possibilities: The holster's paid for, he likes the holster, he uses the holster daily for concealed carry, it's his duty holster, it was handed down to him by his father, it was a wedding or anniversary or birthday present..... :D

Ask him -- he might tell you....

why dance around the safety rule? If I contiunally ran down range with my gun at the 180, , I'm not breaking the rule, I just making life harder for them. the RO will eventually tell me to stop being a jackass.

I he's a good RO hopefully not before asking you straight out what you hope to accomplish by engaging in that particular behavior --- once he understands your reason it will be much easier for him to offer advice, instruct, or simply tolerate and watch you while you do it.....

[Supermoto]

You realize you're making an assumption there --- that the shooter is specifically choosing this holster to give ROs heartburn. Ask yourself --- is that really likely? Would you do something like that? If no, why assume that anyone else would either? .

I am making assumptions, but not that the shooter picked the holster to cause problems, but continues to use the holster after warnings have been given

Beats me, but here's some possibilities: The holster's paid for, he likes the holster, he uses the holster daily for concealed carry, it's his duty holster, it was handed down to him by his father, it was a wedding or anniversary or birthday present..... :D

Ask him -- he might tell you.... .

OK, why do you use this holster at USPSA matches? Why not use a holster that does not cause anyone to question its legality? I don't believe any of the above reasons justifies the use any more than saying " I use it because I want to"

I he's a good RO hopefully not before asking you straight out what you hope to accomplish by engaging in that particular behavior --- once he understands your reason it will be much easier for him to offer advice, instruct, or simply tolerate and watch you while you do it.....

So what does the shooter accomplish by using this holster that justifies standing so close to the DQ line? Why flirt with disaster after you have been continually warned

Edited June 24, 2009 by Supermoto

[ima45dv8]

So what does the shooter accomplish by using this holster that justifies standing so close to the DQ line? Why flirt with disaster after you have been continually warned

If I understood LPatterson's post on the matter, he isn't standing anywhere near the DQ line.

...he is not close to the 3 foot limit.

He can correct me if I got it wrong, but I think he was trying convey that the RO's who run this guy might need to study up and learn that his gear and technique for reholstering are well within limits. If so, they have no reason to continually warn him.

As for why someone would do it, I occasionally shoot in singlestack division using my IWB daily-carry rig.

Add a couple of extra mag pouches, swap ammo, and it's a great way to practice with my constant companion.

[Joe4d]

Reference the prone shooter, There is more to the story somewhere,

Was ther RO giving the proper commands ? I just dont see how this could happen if so.

"If you are finished unload and show clear," shooter should have done just that,

"If clear hammer down holster" If the guy was still in the prone and you told him to holster with no other instructions what do you expect him to do ? Somewhere you as an RO needed to add stand up to your commands, probably after ULSC and before Holster.

[Nik Habicht]

Beats me, but here's some possibilities: The holster's paid for, he likes the holster, he uses the holster daily for concealed carry, it's his duty holster, it was handed down to him by his father, it was a wedding or anniversary or birthday present..... :D

Ask him -- he might tell you.... .

OK, why do you use this holster at USPSA matches? Why not use a holster that does not cause anyone to question its legality? I don't believe any of the above reasons justifies the use any more than saying " I use it because I want to"

Ah, here we come to the crux of it --- you don't believe....

We don't have a "legal" holster list. Either the shooter is able to holster and draw within the rules, or he should have been dq'd. If he wasn't --- there's no issue other than RO comfort --- and that's not reason enough to request or require a change...

There's an open gun in your avatar. I believe they're too noisy, and too likely to cause hearing damage --- so as a courtesy, to keep ROs from flinching or suffering hearing damage, perhaps you should refrain from shooting it in matches? (That was meant to be totally tongue in cheek --- I'm perfectly fine with open blasters.... :D

[Supermoto]

Ah, here we come to the crux of it --- you don't believe....

We don't have a "legal" holster list. Either the shooter is able to holster and draw within the rules, or he should have been dq'd. If he wasn't --- there's no issue other than RO comfort --- and that's not reason enough to request or require a change...

There's an open gun in your avatar. I believe they're too noisy, and too likely to cause hearing damage --- so as a courtesy, to keep ROs from flinching or suffering hearing damage, perhaps you should refrain from shooting it in matches? (That was meant to be totally tongue in cheek --- I'm perfectly fine with open blasters.... :D

I am fine with "because I want to", it meets the rules. But just as running with your finger just outside the trigger guard is legal, why not put it on the slide, It makes the RO's job easier. There is no reason not to other than "because I want to"

"because I want to" while legal, still makes the job more difficult for other. Why do that for no reason

[ima45dv8]

I'm surprised that you continue to state there's no reason even though several valid ones have been provided.

As has been said, it's a matter of personal preference. If he's not breaking any rules with it then I don't see the problem.

[Flexmoney]

I see his point. Somethings aren't worth the hassle. But, this is the rules forum and not the shooter advice forum. So, the point is lost here.

[Nik Habicht]

Ah, here we come to the crux of it --- you don't believe....

We don't have a "legal" holster list. Either the shooter is able to holster and draw within the rules, or he should have been dq'd. If he wasn't --- there's no issue other than RO comfort --- and that's not reason enough to request or require a change...

There's an open gun in your avatar. I believe they're too noisy, and too likely to cause hearing damage --- so as a courtesy, to keep ROs from flinching or suffering hearing damage, perhaps you should refrain from shooting it in matches? (That was meant to be totally tongue in cheek --- I'm perfectly fine with open blasters.... :D

I am fine with "because I want to", it meets the rules. But just as running with your finger just outside the trigger guard is legal, why not put it on the slide, It makes the RO's job easier. There is no reason not to other than "because I want to"

"because I want to" while legal, still makes the job more difficult for other. Why do that for no reason

I've shot with folks who were using less than optimal gear and guns for years --- for them it came down to either being able to afford newer, better gear or being able to afford bullets, primers, powder and match fees. They had chances at better gear --- and sometimes managed to take them Other times their wife or kids or businesses or even a charity match needed something and they put that need ahead of what they might have ideally wanted......

The point I'm trying to make is that there most likely is a reason other than "because I want to," not that it's necessarily any of your business. I believe you're entitled to ask the question, and I believe the person being queried is entitled to answer that question the way they see fit.... :D

[kevin c]

Very interesting post. This is part of the reason I am looking forward to RO class this weekend. At one local match last month a guy did the following. After finishing shooting from the prone he reholstered his pistol while still laying down. Everyone behind him was like "OH Shit". There was no DQ. But does this 3ft rule apply since he pointed the gun right at his feet and US! I would probably call that a DQable offense regardless. Would I be right or would I be stripped of my newly earned RO credentials?

Was the gun unloaded? Was the ULASC command given?

I think 10.5.6 specifies a DQ for an LOADED gun that points >3 feet uprange on the draw/reholster.

[kgunz11]

Wasn't the 3' rule written to allow folks to use the FBI canted holsters that were once so very popular?

[Nik Habicht]

Very interesting post. This is part of the reason I am looking forward to RO class this weekend. At one local match last month a guy did the following. After finishing shooting from the prone he reholstered his pistol while still laying down. Everyone behind him was like "OH Shit". There was no DQ. But does this 3ft rule apply since he pointed the gun right at his feet and US! I would probably call that a DQable offense regardless. Would I be right or would I be stripped of my newly earned RO credentials?

Was the gun unloaded? Was the ULASC command given?

I think 10.5.6 specifies a DQ for an LOADED gun that points >3 feet uprange on the draw/reholster.

Kevin,

that probably should have been a DQ under 10.5.2 --- if it occurred during the course of fire.....

[kevin c]

I thought that 10.5.6 (with an unloaded gun) was the specific exception to 10.5.2.

[George Jones]

I thought that 10.5.6 (with an unloaded gun) was the specific exception to 10.5.2.

That exemption has a 3-foot limit. Somehow, based upon the description of the event, I doubt you could holster while prone without going beyond the 3-foot allowance of 10.5.6.

So, as described, 10.5.2 still fits the bill for a DQ.

A DQ under 10.5.6 would also apply for violating the 3-foot distance if holstering a loaded gun.

[JayWord]

I thought that 10.5.6 (with an unloaded gun) was the specific exception to 10.5.2.

That exemption has a 3-foot limit. Somehow, based upon the description of the event, I doubt you could holster while prone without going beyond the 3-foot allowance of 10.5.6.

So, as described, 10.5.2 still fits the bill for a DQ.

A DQ under 10.5.6 would also apply for violating the 3-foot distance if holstering a loaded gun.

Hostering a gun prone is a DQ loaded or not. It would be covered under both 10.5.2 and 10.5.6. Hmm, did we screw up and allow a unloaded gun to be past 3 feet in 10.5.6, or did 10.5.2 cover it?

Having seen this DQ enforced more than once, I do not think anyone would find it out of bounds. Remember, 10.5 states , "but not limited to". If you cannot draw or reholster in a tunnel, then I would guess most people would consider reholstering prone is covered under the same concept.

.02

Jay