Reloading rule?

[wgnoyes]

Oh for -

5.2.4 During the course of fire, after the start signal, unless stipulated otherwise

in the stage procedure, spare ammunition, magazines and speed

loading devices shall be carried in retention devices attached to the

competitor’s belt and specifically designed for that purpose. A competitor

may also carry additional magazines or speed loading devices in

his pockets and retrieve and use them without penalty once having

dropped or exhausted his primary magazines.

Logic it out by what the rule (not "suggestion", but "rule") says, people.

IF you stuff your pockets full of magazines, and

IF you have used up your mag pouch magazines

	THEN you can use said pocket magazines WITHOUT PENALTY

ELSE

	You get a penalty for using a pocket magazine while still having a magazine in your mag pouch

What rule will I quote? The one I quoted at the top: 5.2.4. I will issue one penalty. You will not find anything in the rulebook that says I can only quote rules from 10.2.1 - 10.2.11. 10.2 is a lone header that says "Procedure Penalties - Specific Examples". It tells you that the following are a list of infractions that will get you a penalty, but it does NOT say that it is an all-inclusive list. Otherwise, I couldn't ding you for 4.5.1, or 8.6.2, or 8.7.2, or 9.1.1, etc, etc.

And are you really telling me that because "shall" isn't painfully defined in the glossary, it's meaningless? Do we REALLY have to pick apart every word used in the rulebook and fill the glossary with definitions for them? Definition for "is", anyone? Or do we need to include a pocket dictionary with each and every rulebook? Is that REALLY the hill upon which you want to plant your DRL flag?

If you pull a mag from your pocket while still having one in your mag pouch, you're going to get dinged. If you don't like it, cough up the $100 and let's go try the case. I've seen people try to arbitrate sillier things than this.

[murkish]

From WSB for CM99-11 El Presidente:

PENALTIES:

Per current edition USPSA Practical Shooting Handbook.

Failure to perform mandatory reload will result in one procedural penalty per shot fired.

So I would say any mention of penalties in the Handbook is applicable including 5.2.4, 8.6, 10.2, etc.

Jack

[LPatterson]

If we could get back to the original question instead of the slaps at each other it would be nice.

I didn't keep my old rule books so I don't know if 5.2.4 is newly written or carried over from previous editions. I seem to remember previous discussions about a start that required all magazines be removed from the belt and what had to be done with them after the start signal. My search foo is bad so I didn't try to go looking.

The OP said it was a Level I match and while we all believe a Level I match should be run to the same standard as a Level III this might just be going a little too far. At my club there is a conpetitor that tries to start every stage with the restraining strap of his holster unsnapped on violation of 5.2.5.3 so do I not start him until he completely unsnaps it or let him move it down out of the way. By the way we shoot in the same division so do I harass him until he complies or just let him shoot because he can outshoot me either way.

My point is there are times we need to do a cranial anal outemy and decide on our own which T needs to be crossed and which I needs to be dotted. I believe the LE community out there knows of what I speak.

[ChuckS]

FWIW:

2004:

5.2.4 Spare ammunition, magazines and speed loading devices should

be carried in retention devices specifically designed for that purpose,

to reduce the risk of loss during a course of fire.

2008:

5.2.4 During the course of fire, after the start signal, unless stipulated otherwise

in the stage procedure, spare ammunition, magazines and speed

loading devices shall be carried in retention devices attached to the

competitor’s belt and specifically designed for that purpose. A competitor

may also carry additional magazines or speed loading devices in

his pockets and retrieve and use them without penalty once having

dropped or exhausted his primary magazines.

[Nik Habicht]

What rule will I quote? The one I quoted at the top: 5.2.4. I will issue one penalty. You will not find anything in the rulebook that says I can only quote rules from 10.2.1 - 10.2.11. 10.2 is a lone header that says "Procedure Penalties - Specific Examples". It tells you that the following are a list of infractions that will get you a penalty, but it does NOT say that it is an all-inclusive list. Otherwise, I couldn't ding you for 4.5.1, or 8.6.2, or 8.7.2, or 9.1.1, etc, etc.

That would be a lot easier if 5.2.4 actually told you clearly to apply a penalty --- and you have to admit that there's a bit of difference in the clarity of the wording when comapring 5.2.4 with 4.51, 8.6.2, 8.7.2, and 9.1.1. (Thanks btw, for finding more examples....)

If you pull a mag from your pocket while still having one in your mag pouch, you're going to get dinged. If you don't like it, cough up the $100 and let's go try the case. I've seen people try to arbitrate sillier things than this.

Local match --- should be considerably less than $100.....

11.4.1......

[Singlestack]

Logic it out by what the rule (not "suggestion", but "rule") says, people.

This is the hole Bill. Your logic and Peter/Paul/Mary's logic in Timbuktu may be different. In every instance you listed as an example, the rule book provides guidance as to what the RO is supposed to do without having to apply logic. I agree, somebody meant for it to be a penalty, but they forgot so specify what the penalty is.

[ima45dv8]

I don't see the hole in the rule as not saying what the penalty is, but rather how many. A procedural penalty is defined as twice the value of a single maximum available scoring hit on an USPSA paper target. That part is clear to me.

What is missing is any guidance on whether multiple penalties may be applied from the "significant advantage" aspect.

[sperman]

Logic it out by what the rule (not "suggestion", but "rule") says, people.

This is the hole Bill. Your logic and Peter/Paul/Mary's logic in Timbuktu may be different. In every instance you listed as an example, the rule book provides guidance as to what the RO is supposed to do without having to apply logic. I agree, somebody meant for it to be a penalty, but they forgot so specify what the penalty is.

But I don't think that means we apply no penalty just because the penalty isn't listed. I agree that a penalty should be specified, but until the rulebook is re-written does that mean we ignore 5.2.4?

[Nik Habicht]

Logic it out by what the rule (not "suggestion", but "rule") says, people.

This is the hole Bill. Your logic and Peter/Paul/Mary's logic in Timbuktu may be different. In every instance you listed as an example, the rule book provides guidance as to what the RO is supposed to do without having to apply logic. I agree, somebody meant for it to be a penalty, but they forgot so specify what the penalty is.

But I don't think that means we apply no penalty just because the penalty isn't listed. I agree that a penalty should be specified, but until the rulebook is re-written does that mean we ignore 5.2.4?

I'm not sure I'm there. Out of the four non-Chapter 10 instances of procedural penalties, the number (one) is spelled out in all of them. Additionally one of those four mandates a procedural for the infraction, the other three leave it to RO discretion.

So if we accept that a (one) procedural is indicated for violating 5.2.4, then I'll stipulate that it's at RO discretion, i.e. the RO can decide that it simply wasn't an advantage in any way, and refuse to issue any procedurals.....

Everybody happy now? :P You can do what you want -- at least until we get direction from NROI.....

[Singlestack]

Logic it out by what the rule (not "suggestion", but "rule") says, people.

This is the hole Bill. Your logic and Peter/Paul/Mary's logic in Timbuktu may be different. In every instance you listed as an example, the rule book provides guidance as to what the RO is supposed to do without having to apply logic. I agree, somebody meant for it to be a penalty, but they forgot so specify what the penalty is.

But I don't think that means we apply no penalty just because the penalty isn't listed. I agree that a penalty should be specified, but until the rulebook is re-written does that mean we ignore 5.2.4?

The only way to apply a penality, as it is now, is to make one up.

[ima45dv8]

The only way to apply a penality, as it is now, is to make one up.

[aztecdriver]

The only way to apply a penality, as it is now, is to make one up.

I don't agree, respectfully. My reading of 10.1.1 and the requirement to adhere to the "procedure" defined for reloading in 5.2.4 is a violation of the WSB. I see your point - but I don't see RO's as 10.2 robots. That being said, I don't think that any further discussion is bringing out points. I'd like to see NROI rule.

I've been close to violating 5.2.4 - but not yet, but I know I would not have called it on someone I'm running.

Edited October 30, 2009 by aztecdriver

[ima45dv8]

The only way to apply a penality, as it is now, is to make one up.

I don't agree, respectfully. My reading of 10.1.1 and the requirement to adhere to the "procedure" defined for reloading in 5.2.4 is a violation of the WSB. I see your point - but I don't see as RO's 10.2 robots. That being said, I don't think that any further discussion is bringing out points. I'd like to see NROI rule.

I've been close to violating 5.2.4 - but not yet, but I know I would not have called it on someone I'm running.

Ken, we're having "SingleStack Blaster Day" at South River on Sunday. Come on out and watch Boz draw mags from his pocket 'cause he can't reach his mag pouches!

[drift off]

[Flexmoney]

A procedural penalty is defined as twice the value of a single maximum available scoring hit on an USPSA paper target. That part is clear to me.

Nah, Mak. That is the value of a procedural penalty.

It's definition would be in 10.1, right?

[Flexmoney]

But I don't think that means we apply no penalty just because the penalty isn't listed. I agree that a penalty should be specified, but until the rulebook is re-written does that mean we ignore 5.2.4?

What would you apply? Per shot fired? Match DQ ? 11?

[BigTinVA]

So as a Production shooter I can, without incurring any penalty, get around the division restriction on position of holster and other equipment (mag pouches behind the hip bone) that are spelled out in Appendix E3 by simply putting my magazines in my front pocket and drawing from there? Heck why couldn't I just tuck my spare mags into the front of my belt and act like I am running a limited rig, you can't give me a procedural right?

[ChuckS]

So as a Production shooter I can, without incurring any penalty, get around the division restriction on position of holster and other equipment (mag pouches behind the hip bone) that are spelled out in Appendix E3 by simply putting my magazines in my front pocket and drawing from there? Heck why couldn't I just tuck my spare mags into the front of my belt and act like I am running a limited rig, you can't give me a procedural right?

I believe you are correct that you can not be given a procedural. But, you will be competing in the Open division.

[BigTinVA]

I believe you are correct that you can not be given a procedural. But, you will be competing in the Open division.

Would I be placed in Open division for having magazines in my front pockets (in front of the hip bone) or were you talking about tucking mags into my waistband?

[ChuckS]

I believe you are correct that you can not be given a procedural. But, you will be competing in the Open division.

Would I be placed in Open division for having magazines in my front pockets (in front of the hip bone) or were you talking about tucking mags into my waistband?

either. appendix E3 states "Foremost limit for gun, holster and all equipment behind the hip bone". I guess you could try to argue that magazines are not "equipment" since equipment is not defined in the glossary but "allied equipment" does include magazines. I guess you could put mags in your waistband but they would have to be behind the hip bone.

[wgnoyes]

Logic it out by what the rule (not "suggestion", but "rule") says, people.

This is the hole Bill. Your logic and Peter/Paul/Mary's logic in Timbuktu may be different. In every instance you listed as an example, the rule book provides guidance as to what the RO is supposed to do without having to apply logic. I agree, somebody meant for it to be a penalty, but they forgot so specify what the penalty is.

The penalty is -10.

[BigTinVA]

So does rule 5.2.4 mean that I can have magazines in my pockets only as long as the pocket is behind my hip bone?

[wgnoyes]

What rule will I quote? The one I quoted at the top: 5.2.4. I will issue one penalty. You will not find anything in the rulebook that says I can only quote rules from 10.2.1 - 10.2.11. 10.2 is a lone header that says "Procedure Penalties - Specific Examples". It tells you that the following are a list of infractions that will get you a penalty, but it does NOT say that it is an all-inclusive list. Otherwise, I couldn't ding you for 4.5.1, or 8.6.2, or 8.7.2, or 9.1.1, etc, etc.

That would be a lot easier if 5.2.4 actually told you clearly to apply a penalty --- and you have to admit that there's a bit of difference in the clarity of the wording when comapring 5.2.4 with 4.51, 8.6.2, 8.7.2, and 9.1.1. (Thanks btw, for finding more examples....)

If you pull a mag from your pocket while still having one in your mag pouch, you're going to get dinged. If you don't like it, cough up the $100 and let's go try the case. I've seen people try to arbitrate sillier things than this.

Local match --- should be considerably less than $100.....

11.4.1......

It does clearly tell me to apply a penalty. It specifically uses the word "penalty". And the penalty is -10. And yes, I know about local match arbitration fees being different from major matches, but thanks anyway.

[ChuckS]

So does rule 5.2.4 mean that I can have magazines in my pockets only as long as the pocket is behind my hip bone?

Yup.

[sperman]

So does rule 5.2.4 mean that I can have magazines in my pockets only as long as the pocket is behind my hip bone?

As long as you use up the ones on your belt before taking one out of your pocket.  

[Nik Habicht]

What rule will I quote? The one I quoted at the top: 5.2.4. I will issue one penalty. You will not find anything in the rulebook that says I can only quote rules from 10.2.1 - 10.2.11. 10.2 is a lone header that says "Procedure Penalties - Specific Examples". It tells you that the following are a list of infractions that will get you a penalty, but it does NOT say that it is an all-inclusive list. Otherwise, I couldn't ding you for 4.5.1, or 8.6.2, or 8.7.2, or 9.1.1, etc, etc.

That would be a lot easier if 5.2.4 actually told you clearly to apply a penalty --- and you have to admit that there's a bit of difference in the clarity of the wording when comapring 5.2.4 with 4.51, 8.6.2, 8.7.2, and 9.1.1. (Thanks btw, for finding more examples....)

If you pull a mag from your pocket while still having one in your mag pouch, you're going to get dinged. If you don't like it, cough up the $100 and let's go try the case. I've seen people try to arbitrate sillier things than this.

Local match --- should be considerably less than $100.....

11.4.1......

It does clearly tell me to apply a penalty. It specifically uses the word "penalty". And the penalty is -10. And yes, I know about local match arbitration fees being different from major matches, but thanks anyway.

So your contention is that a penalty exists, that the R.O. must apply it (no discretion), and that it's a single (as opposed to per mag used, per shot fired, per mag remaining on the belt) procedural?