IPSC and the CFO? Holster carry between ranges?

Canuck223

Canuck223

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
80   0   0
Location
GTA
OK, if your club has also had this experience, please chime in. I shot the IPSC match at BGC this Saturday, and they now have an added rule apparently imposed on them by the CFO. It seems the CFO expects all IPSC shooters to bag between ranges.:eek:

I am at a loss for words to understand how the CFO thinks on this topic. I can't see how this is in any way more safe or more secure. It is my hope that this is a one off, and other ranges have not had this added burden placed on them.

If it is a new range regulation from the CFO, I think perhaps we need to make a special group appeal for common sense.
 
JohnC said:
Which experience?
Click to expand...

7.62mm said:
I shot a match at Waterloo a month or so ago, same deal, un-holster, case firearm, move 50 feet, reholster. STUPID STUPID STUPID:bangHead:

In no way am I blaming the Club, this is just ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Ditto. I'm not for a minute blaming the club, but if this new rule is being commonly imposed on the clubs during recertification of the ranges, I think we need to approach the CFO for an re-education session.

I don't see how bagging your gun does anything but increase the risk of theft and accidental discharge. Not that there is any great risk of AD, but it does increase the numbers of times the shooter is handling his gun without the RO present. It also increase the potential number of times his gun is left out of arms reach and eyeshot.
 
7.62mm said:
I shot a match at Waterloo a month or so ago, same deal, un-holster, case firearm, move 50 feet, reholster. STUPID STUPID STUPID:bangHead:

In no way am I blaming the Club, this is just ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I shot the Waterloo match in July as well.

Maybe we should all flood the CFO's office with requests for short term ATT's to transport between ranges at the clubs?

Chasing good guys is easier than chasing bad guys :(
 
hmm, recently at our club there was a concern raised by shotgun members about carry of pistols between ranges and someone claimed it was the law to bag between ranges and that we needed to make it a club policy. The policy change was tabled and the CFO contacted. Their reply was that transport was to a club with an approved range. Once on property, transport rules were not in effect. This is Nova Scotia however, Our CFO has yet to feel the need to impose the same sort of conditions the Ontario CFO happens to like.
 
Nothing the Ontario CFO does is safety related, it is designed to accomplish one thing and that is to harass gun owners to the point they will leave the sport and/or keep new shooters from entering. There is also a side benefit, the more layers of regulations/policies you can impose the greater the possibilty of finding gun owners in violation and of course that leads to charges which make their statistics look good which in turn justifies more regulatiion. Sadly, it looks like other CFO's are following the lead of this idiot
 
Canuck223 said:
Ditto. I'm not for a minute blaming the club, but if this new rule is being commonly imposed on the clubs during recertification of the ranges, I think we need to approach the CFO for an re-education session.

I don't see how bagging your gun does anything but increase the risk of theft and accidental discharge. Not that there is any great risk of AD, but it does increase the numbers of times the shooter is handling his gun without the RO present. It also increase the potential number of times his gun is left out of arms reach and eyeshot.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that if you forget and unholster and case the gun anywhere but at a safety table/area, you draw a match DQ.
 
wow,..your CFO must be related to the NB CFO....He was recently taught a lesson by a former NB IPSC rep....
A matter of refusing an ATT for a number of matches was brought by the IPSC member to court,....the IPSC member won.
 
tripalm said:
Nothing the Ontario CFO does is safety related, it is designed to accomplish one thing and that is to harass gun owners to the point they will leave the sport and/or keep new shooters from entering. There is also a side benefit, the more layers of regulations/policies you can impose the greater the possibilty of finding gun owners in violation and of course that leads to charges which make their statistics look good which in turn justifies more regulatiion. Sadly, it looks like other CFO's are following the lead of this idiot
Click to expand...

Well said.

You guys need to take it personal. Find a lawyer and nip this crap in the bud.
 
Yes it is true

I shot a IDPA match in July in Sarnia and this was the rule that the club had to follow. How it makes sense is beyond me and my pea brain.

However it made me feel sooo much safer that next time I think I will cancel my trip insurance!:rolleyes:

Greg
 
this CFO needs his bell rung and rung hard. IPSC Ontario, the NFA and the CSSA should band together on this and hit them with numerous court appeals (or whatever they are called). This guy is stepping beyond what the law allows and is imposing rules and regulations that aren't even possible to interpret from the law.
 
Slavex said:
this CFO needs his bell rung and rung hard. IPSC Ontario, the NFA and the CSSA should band together on this and hit them with numerous court appeals (or whatever they are called). This guy is stepping beyond what the law allows and is imposing rules and regulations that aren't even possible to interpret from the law.
Click to expand...

The problem as I see it, is it is economic suicide for a club to fight. To actually get it to court, you'd essentially have to either be charged or shut down. The CFO doesn't have any black letter law to enforce, just oppinion, so charges are not possible. That leaves shutting the range down. If that happened, the club could and likely would get a reference hearing. The problem is, the club would be in the position of having to explain to the judge that they refused to comply with the CFO's conditions.

Chances of the judge finding the CFO's conditions to be justifiably unreasonable, not odds I'd take.

Education and discussion would seem to be better short term options.
 
But your MP is not afraid!!! Call him or her right now, if he/she is a lib, call the PMO's office or Stock Day. These people work for them and need to explain their actions. How many calls from the guy who writes your cheques would you get before you didn't want explain it EVER AGAIN??

Scott
 
MPs have zero to do with this

CFOs are appointed by the province.......

We have a LIBtard goverment who hate us.

Where does that leave us?

THe calls should go to the CFO................drive them to drink.
 
Its the interpretation by the Ont CFO of the Firearms act.

They see the range as the shooting line and not the property. They say they want to make some changes, but its funny only Ontario ( lib,mc gimpy) that have the problem amd it was ok for the first 19 years of restrictions. I have a hand out from the CFO that I can post.
 
call your MLA's all of them. send letters, get your clubs to do so, get the NFA and the CSSA to do so. you can still try for a reference hearing even without the charge. just request that the CFO approve your range for carry from bay to bay. if he denies it, bingo, reference hearing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom