Exemptions Gone
- Thread starter baird
- Start date
.....
Slag a dealer who not only helps to fund this place, but also puts in hours of his own person time to help the sport, and you expect him to just "Shrug it off" When you accuse him of something with no proof what so ever.. and then say "I'm outta here".. I'm sorry.. I hope they ban your other account too..
if you can't stand up and say it yourself, then you should have said it at all..
so who do we talk to when the explanation makes no sense? (as I read it 5 times, and still don't understand what they are trying to say.) (in all honesty.. I don't )
I noticed that there is an absence of "modification of magazine during a match" in the rules.
I can't find anything that say's you can swap out the bases to fit in the box, and then swap them back (assuming both are under the 170mm limit but one fits in the box and the other does not). get someone to make some cheap thin plastic bases that you put on for the box test, then swap out after
Last edited:
I noticed that there is an absence of "modification of magazine during a match" in the rules.
I can't find anything that say's you can swap out the bases to fit in the box, and then swap them back (assuming both are under the 170mm limit but one fits in the box and the other does not). get someone to make some cheap thin plastic bases that you put on for the box test, then swap out after
Let's start with the obvious. If you has proper base pads...and 126 mm mags (so they would actually fit in the box) and you still decided to not comply with the box rule...I'd probably check you for banned substances
However...
Appendix D2 Section 16 states that all mags must comply (Handgun ready condistion) or you're in Open. That means all mags...all the time.
If all else fails...10.6 would fit rather nicely (on the offhand chance that anyone thinks Darryl is being serious)
Appendix D2 Section 16 states that all mags must comply (Handgun ready condistion) or you're in Open. That means all mags...all the time.
If all else fails...10.6 would fit rather nicely (on the offhand chance that anyone thinks Darryl is being serious)
who said I was not being serious..
1) if you swap out all the mag bases when the test is done then the "all magazines" condition is met. and if the handgun is in the ready position (hammer back, mag inserted) then you met that condition.
2) 10.6 does not apply for anyone who using a "gray area" in the rules to thier advantage.. they are not breaking any rule, as there is no rule to prohibit the swapping of bases during match.. it's like saying anyone who uses a gray area of ANY rule that you do not personally agree with should get DQ's under 10.6..
Feel free to test the theory...I'm pretty sure I know what's going to happen
hmm.. I don't see the wording "At all times" ..
How about this...
6.2.5.1 However, if a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements of a declared Division during a course of fire, the competitor will be placed in Open Division, if available, otherwise the competitor will shoot the match for no score. Competitors already registered in Open Division who fail to comply with the requirements of Open Division during a course of fire
will shoot the match for no score.
- Location
- Halifax - NS
I know where you're coming from. You can give me a call here at work, I'll discuss all the issues and background with you. . Quigley knows all that I do too, a phone call with him will also help. Brace yourself, there's enough info now that it could take more than an hour.
Sean: I have PM'd with Quigley, and I believe there are two separate issues. The first is obviously the denial of the exception, but the second issue, which I believe is more important, is the level of information which is being given out about this (including the history). This denial is unique, in that this is not just something that would effect (monetary wise) a shooter when he is looking to travel outside Canada. When someone looks to travel, they expect certain expenses if they WANT to change equipment to be competitive. This denial is unique in that it effects existing shooters with existing equipment, which now need to spend a significant amount of money to keep with the status quo. I'm going to guess here, but off the top of my head, Canadian shooters (everyone effected) will now have to fork out collectively over 50K if they don't want to be bumped to open division. (please correct me if you think this is too high) This is not a small issue.. it's one that effects a lot of shooters, and as such, I believe that they are entitled to more then just an quote from the IPSC committee.. I honestly believe that we publicly need to fully understand the history behind this, and the political positioning that seems to be in play by IPSC on this matter. If We (the collective we) are going to be screwed over, then we should have a right to publicly know the history and the basis for the new position. We as IPSC paid members have a right to know this.
I know that you, in your position would hesitate to make public the full story, but if it's not, then I (and I'm sure others are well) may feel that it's trying to be hushed up so that we (the collective we) don't cause waves that we would if we knew everything. This is not an accusation of trying to hide this on your part. it's more of a, don't just tell me the things I want to hear, to make me happy, or feel I have to accept this decision.. a "tell me how you really feel, but do it publicly, not just on a phone call". I hope you get the meaning of what I'm trying to say..
The references to our neighbors to the south in their reasoning, just does not make sense, and seems like IPSC is playing political games. Games that need to be said publicly, not just in private conversations.
Darryl...you can't possably expect Sean to speak on behalf of the IPSC World Body. They gave us their reason...we can all guess what that means but anything else is just speculation...
If you have specific questions for the IPSC WB...forward them to Sean (or to me and I'll consolidate all incoming questions to Sean) and we'll see if it sheds any light.
Speculating on politics (alleged or otherwise) won't add any clarity...
...and my math would indicate the collective $ figure to be much higher than you estimated...
If you have specific questions for the IPSC WB...forward them to Sean (or to me and I'll consolidate all incoming questions to Sean) and we'll see if it sheds any light.
Speculating on politics (alleged or otherwise) won't add any clarity...
...and my math would indicate the collective $ figure to be much higher than you estimated...
Last edited:
Craig,
lest get over that. If we want to shoot IPSC in Canada we don't have a choice, but we need to follow those rules.
My recommendation is to ask RM, CRO (in Ontario) and all those who run matches of Level I and II, to provide us shooters an opportunity to check our gun with magazine inserted against IPSC box.
We still have lots of time, lets start rolling.
lest get over that. If we want to shoot IPSC in Canada we don't have a choice, but we need to follow those rules.
My recommendation is to ask RM, CRO (in Ontario) and all those who run matches of Level I and II, to provide us shooters an opportunity to check our gun with magazine inserted against IPSC box.
We still have lots of time, lets start rolling.
Did you read something in my post that wasn't there
I know what we have to do to move forward. However...if any of our (Ontario) members are requesting further clarifiction...I'm obligated to get it (whether I think it's a goose chase or not)
Q
I know what we have to do to move forward. However...if any of our (Ontario) members are requesting further clarifiction...I'm obligated to get it (whether I think it's a goose chase or not)
Q
