WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!? New rule change?

[Madness]

Anyone read buds message about DQ's in the important message section? http://www.ipsc-ont.org/urgent.htm




So I guess 10.5.1 doesn't count anymore?
Handling a firearm at any time except when in a designated safety area or when under the
supervision of, and in response to a direct command issued by, a Range Officer. The
expression "handling a firearm" includes holstering or unholstering a firearm, whether or not
the firearm is visible (e.g. while concealed by a protective cover, etc.) together with adding
or removing a firearm to/from the competitor's person whether or not the firearm is wholly
or partially holstered.

If you have a brain fart and unholster your gun before the RO gives you the command then guess what??? You fuct up and get to pack your gear up for the day, get over it and learn from your stupidity.
What next? I didn't mean to break 90 and the RO didn't stop me from doing it so I don't think I should be DQ'd.

 

[4string]

I'm with you on this one.

What if you are in the process of checking down range for tapers and they do this.

As far as I'm concerned DQ is the call.

 

[arancio]

+1

That way lies madness, so to speak.

 

[Canuck223]

Bud's note is just his opinion, and worth what you paid for it. The rule you quoted is the rule of the land, so don't worry about it.

 

[Madness]

Bud's note is just his opinion, and worth what you paid for it. The rule you quoted is the rule of the land, so don't worry about it.

Only problem is that he's a director and Ontario's head offcial posting an assinine opinion as an "IMPORTANT MESSAGE" on the offcial site.

 

[Canuck223]

Only problem is that he's a director and Ontario's head offcial posting an assinine opinion as an "IMPORTANT MESSAGE" on the offcial site.

Where it will get the scrutiny it deserves and the discussion it's apt to provoke. Karma happens.

 

[colt45gunner]

RO's are superman

WOW ! the Ro is 100% responsible and 100% control...so while the RO turns his head to ask others to please move back or be quiet, the shooter does this and RO should be blamed ????
..
SO while the shooter is running between ports and he decides to go psycho and shoot over berms and birds in the sky.. the RO is in control during this time and the RO is responsible ??? ....

wow, cool I never new RO had supermans speed reaction ? I wanna be an RO now... and I was just watching smallville while on line...

I can understand if the statement was:
"If a shooter jumps the gun and unholsters to put an unloaded gun on a table for a start dry on table stage" as shooter anticipated make gun ready.....in this specific scenerio, I guess we all may have said... o.k. maybe in this way....we can be a bit lenient ... bla..bla...etc..........

but that statement should stop there....and no thread about this....hmmm....
I can understand some forgiveness in a brain fart scenario that was totally not really a danger in anyways....but we are playing with real guns and with real ammo.... this can lead to more brain farts being tolerated and become more serious of a safety issue.......being strict with the handling of such toys.....I'd like to error on the side of caution.

 

[azone]

I know of the incident Bud is talking about as I was the one that handed down the DQ.What he didn't state was that there were still ppl DOWN RANGE and the shooter had not been called to the line, But told that he was next up. I have since been in touch with Bud and corrected him on this small but very vital detail.

 

[4string]

I know of the incident Bud is talking about as I was the one that handed down the DQ.What he didn't state was that there were still ppl DOWN RANGE and the shooter had not been called to the line, But told that he was next up. I have since been in touch with Bud and corrected him on this small but very vital detail.

Exactly the scenario I laid out, without knowing the details of the event.

As stated and as you know, good call.

 

[darkshadow]

I know of the incident Bud is talking about as I was the one that handed down the DQ.What he didn't state was that there were still ppl DOWN RANGE and the shooter had not been called to the line, But told that he was next up. I have since been in touch with Bud and corrected him on this small but very vital detail.

I am guessing this was at Waterford as Buds Message was posted just after the match and the field course had a gun on table starting position.

If true, a Question.

The start position for this course of fire was LOADED on the table under a towel. Did the Competitor LOAD his gun and place it on the table????? If so that is absolutely UNFORGIVABLE.

And a DQ was well deserved.

Can anyone confirm as this is just speculation( Please no one run off with this)

 

[raks]

A few years ago here, a novice RO DQ'ed a new-to-IPSC shooter for the exact same thing.

Neither party was happy about the call but the DQ stood.

I agree that RO's should stop shooters if they can and in the US some RO's to shout 'MUZZLE' if shooters come close to 90 - but I don't think it's a good idea to allow for 'wiggle room' in the safety rules...

 

[relliott]

I agree that RO's should stop shooters if they can and in the US some RO's to shout 'MUZZLE' if shooters come close to 90 - but I don't think it's a good idea to allow for 'wiggle room' in the safety rules...

Agreed; there can't be wiggle room when it comes to a safety issue like this. The range commands exist for a reason, as does the rule. The RO is there to police safety and make sure that everyone adheres to the same set of protocols. But an RO can only REACT to what a person does, not anticipate it, so the one holding the gun is the one who is ultimately responsible. You don't take the gun out of your holster until the command is given, or you go home. Simple to remember and enforce.

Also, yelling "muzzle" at a competitor is just stupid in my view and I hate that some RO's think that is ok to do this. It's a distraction which I see as interference, and may even be dangerous. Either you break the 180 or you don't, and the RO should not be communicating with you during the course of a stage unless his intent is to terminate it for a safety reason. There are plenty of stage designs that put the shooter almost on or even right on the line when transitioning, so are they going to spend an entire match yelling at everyone?

 

[Canuck223]

I know of the incident Bud is talking about as I was the one that handed down the DQ.What he didn't state was that there were still ppl DOWN RANGE and the shooter had not been called to the line, But told that he was next up. I have since been in touch with Bud and corrected him on this small but very vital detail.

FWIW, I believe a competitor was DQ'd at the nationals for the exact same reason, under the same circumstances. Until you spoke up, I had assumed this was a necroposting.

 

[Double Tap Sports]

I happen to know the incident, it happened at GRGC October match, a competitor took upon himself to place unloaded gun on the table before give the commend, mater of fact there were guys still patching down ranger as he did this, he was "getting ready" for the stage which required one to pick up of the table gun empty and mags on the side...I am guessing he meant to put down the mags, instead he placed the gun down...he was DQ'd and left red faced. thank god the RO for that stage was near by to see it and take immediate action. Good job Ron M.

 

[96Brigadier]

What the hell?!

I am absolutely flabbergasted that someone in this position would post something this STUPID to an official IPSC Section website. It is absolutely a DQ!

5.2.1. Carry and Storage – Except when within the boundaries of a safety area, or when under the supervision and direct command of a Range Officer, competitors must carry their handguns unloaded in a gun case, gun bag or in a holster securely attached to a belt on their person (see Rule 10.5.1).

Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to:
10.5.1. Handling a firearm at any time except when in a designated safety area or when under the supervision of, and in response to a direct command issued by, a Range Officer. The expression "handling a firearm" includes holstering or unholstering a firearm, whether or not the firearm is visible (e.g. while concealed by a protective cover, etc.) together with adding or removing a firearm to/from the competitor's person whether or not the firearm is wholly or partially holstered.

The rules in at least two occasions specifically state "AND IN RESPONSE TO A DIRECT COMMAND ISSUED BY, A RANGE OFFICER".

The fact that people were down range just makes it that much worse! Even had people NOT been down range it was a DQ plain and simple.

And then to go on and say that it is partially the RO's fault that it happened? What the hell is with that?! Christ, these exact scenarios are discussed in both the RO course and the CRO course, it's absolutely basic. You do not unholster your firearm until the RO instructs you to do so.

How is it possible that you have someone on the board and running NROI in Ontario who doesn't even know the rules? Sure we all miss one from time to time but not something like this. At least check the rule book ahead of time before you post something in an official capacity!

If I were a shooter in Ontario I would be calling for Bud's dismissal as the head of officiating, if you are that out of touch that you don't even know a rule that basic and fundamental to safety then you shouldn't be the head of officiating.

I.. am.. blown.. away. (no pun intended)

 

[mrclean]

But don't you get so many "Airmiles" for every DQ you make?

 

[Crosswind]

There should be absolutely no argument here for such a vital and basic rule.

Sure, a newbie could accidentally load-and-make-ready before the RO gives the command; however the newbie won't argue the DQ because he/she will remember that that's one of the first rules they were taught in the Black Badge course.

Rules are in writing so that RO's can do their jobs. You think it's easy to disqualify a close friend that spent a load of money on travel, accommodations, and matches fees? They shouldn't have to be 'afraid' to disqualify a shooter, or else RO's everywhere will start to let things slide, then everybody will start to bend the rules or worse cheat.

 

[ckc123]

Ask yourself this simple question.. if the RO is 100% "in control" and "responsible" when the shooter is on the line, then how come the RO is not DQ'd when the competitor screws up.. ????? having your eyes on someone will not prevent most DQ's from happening.. it may prevent some, but its ALWAYS the shooters fault.

 

[40cal]

Ask yourself this simple question.. if the RO is 100% "in control" and "responsible" when the shooter is on the line, then how come the RO is not DQ'd when the competitor screws up.. ????? having your eyes on someone will not prevent most DQ's from happening.. it may prevent some, but its ALWAYS the shooters fault.

The RO is in control and responsible for the actions under his command. He cannot anticipate what a shooter will always do ( I believe Rob covered this already).

He is therefore responsible to assess the situation that has already happened and take corrective actions. This would be to stop the shooter from any more wrong actions and send him on his way to Dairy Queen.

You cannot stop a shooter from something he has not done yet. There are very few cases of shooter's being stopped before they have done wrong.

DQ's have a lasting effect on the shooter and also those that are present. There must have been quite the "pucker-factor" for the RO and the competitors down range. There is not even a possibility of a different decision in this case, but a DQ.

 

[ckc123]

The RO is in control and responsible for the actions under his command.

actually no.. he is not "responsible" in the full definition of the word. if the RO was "responsible" he would be the one being DQ'd. the only actions the RO is "responsible" for are his own.. he is not liable for the actions of the shooter which he is directing/observing.

the RO is responsible to asses and punish if necessary, but that's different from the original actions of the shooter.