lucky #7 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) I'm curious... What do you think would qualify as a GOOD reason to change the rules chuck? Not being smart a$$ either. I'm trying to understand why the rules exist as they are. Your earlier posts were very informative, and helped a lot so don't blast me for asking you to explain further. Edited October 10, 2009 by lucky #7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 I really can't think of one, which is kind of why I'm stuck. I guess if I was looking to change a division I would look at how it would affect the shooters currently involved with it as well as any potential increase in participation it might bring. With the 10 round limit we have status quo, which is a pretty good reason to stick with it. Changing to 12 rounds on the con side would cause some folks who only have 10 round magazines to be at a disadvantage, same with guns that only have a 10 round capacity or even a bit lower (i.e. Sig 220). On the Pro side of 12 rounds I really only see having two extra rounds and being able to miss more. Stage design is such that most arrays are no more than 8 rounds, so you'd be dumping 4 rounds on the ground at most posititions instead of 2. The only time you'd get to stretch your legs with the extra two rounds is if someone designed the course for revolvers which is not that common. Yes the 10 round limit was instituted as a result of the AWB. But there are a lot of people that bought gear around the magazine capacity we've had for 10+ years. For me it's less about finding a good reason to keep the current rule than it is about needing a very good one to change it. So again, what good would come of a 12 round limit? BTW, IPSC is proposing a 15 round limit in Production. From their perspective things are a bit different. They've always been 9mm primarily and reducing the round count is unlikely to cause any particular gun to be substantially less competetive. All the equipment currenly in use could be used with 15 rounds plus it could open the division to some other guns that aren't currently competetive. This is the type of rule change I would be in favor of. Something that makes the Divison more inclusive, rather than exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfie Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 so you'd be dumping 4 rounds on the ground at most posititions instead of 2. exactly! If you're a stage designer what are you designing for? The limited 21 or 22 round mags or the Open 32 round mags? In either case I'll be dumping mags long before they are empty so that I'm not splitting an array. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bond Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 Let us dream that in their next second amendment decision, the US Suprieme Court struck down each and every magazine restriction in our country. How would production division be "improved" if USPSA allowed magazines to be loaded to capacity? And even if USPSA were to revise the restriction under those circumstances, would it not make sense as Chuck Anderson states to have some limit on magazine capacity to make more firearms competitive in the division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucky #7 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Charles, thanks for your feedback... I'm in area 6. I agree with both you and Chuck in this instance. In my previous posts I have proposed the idea of increasing the 10 round limit to 15, as an alternative to allowing loading to capacity. I would be in full support of a 15 round rule. 15+1 would allow every production shooter to carry 2 mags on the belt, and 1 in the gun which would be much improved. It will keep equipment requirements down, decrease the amount of weight on the belt, but yet still allow more frequent reloads for those that enjoy that challenge. It would also better allign the production rules for both USPSA and IPSC. I fully expect a change of this type to draw a significant amount of resistance to change, but I think the class needs to evolve in order to achieve its full potential. Machiavelli probably said it best so I won't restate it, but nothing is more difficult than initiating change. Charles, it would be a very impressive feat of leadership if you could make a change like this take place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g34 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Charles, thanks for your feedback... I'm in area 6. I agree with both you and Chuck in this instance. In my previous posts I have proposed the idea of increasing the 10 round limit to 15, as an alternative to allowing loading to capacity. I would be in full support of a 15 round rule. 15+1 would allow every production shooter to carry 2 mags on the belt, and 1 in the gun which would be much improved. It will keep equipment requirements down, decrease the amount of weight on the belt, but yet still allow more frequent reloads for those that enjoy that challenge. It would also better allign the production rules for both USPSA and IPSC. I fully expect a change of this type to draw a significant amount of resistance to change, but I think the class needs to evolve in order to achieve its full potential. Machiavelli probably said it best so I won't restate it, but nothing is more difficult than initiating change. Charles, it would be a very impressive feat of leadership if you could make a change like this take place. Allowing 15 rounds in a magazine would not allow production to achieve its "full potential." It is still putting people that are shooting guns that can't hold 15 rounds or only have ten round magazines at a disadvantage. Also, if someone can't stand the weight of having more than two magazines on their belt, they can just leave their magazines off of their belt until they are shooting. While we're at it, let's get rid of the 170mm limit on mags in open. That way open shooters won't be hindered by having to carry more than one magazine to the line. Also, why is it beneficial to align the production rules for USPSA and IPSC? I am all for change, as long as its benefits outweigh the costs. Changing the limit of rounds in the magazine in production would have more of a negative impact on the division than a positive one. -Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucky #7 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 yeah, everyone always says they're all for change just after they get done showing how resistant they are to new ideas and change. You missed the forest for the trees. I was just restating for agreement's sake what Mr. Anderson and Mr. Bond already posted. Even though they didn't say they agreed fundamentally with my thoughts they seem receptive to ideas involving change. Carrying 4+ mags behind the hip is a challenge to many. I'm not necessarily in favor of aligning with IPSC, but if by chance some rules do align then that could be seen as a positive because of the competitive value of having similar rules. I don't have it all figured out yet either. I'm just trying to understand the 10 round rule, why it exists 5+ years after the AWB sunset, and why people are opposed to changing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 I think we're done for the moment..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts