Just when you thought that IDPA was done with the stupid ideas...

[m91196]

IDPA at S&W is different. It's an invitational and they have always had shenanigans about rules. Heck Caleb posted video during the match when that was illegal. That was the same year they ruled against HQ on the Grip Force Adapter during the match. So you see the match specific flashlight rules and the COC so they can throw out someone the night before the match at sign in for running his mouth about someone's daughter......

[cclaxton]

Hmm lots of us have offered IDPA suggestions on how to improve the game, and we've been told to pound sand. In fact my first post I offered a suggestion to fix this issue by quashing the MD's flashlight rule, and this code of conduct.

At this point I think pointing out the new flaws with IDPA (if you want to call that ridiculing) until it's membership drops is the only way to get IDPA HQ to listen. Now if they had elections and we had an actual say about changes to the game, it might be a different story. I say this as my NRA ballot sits beside my laptop, and there are threads on BE on who will run for USPSA President since Strader has announced that he won't run for reelection.

Just because people have suggestions and provide feedback does not mean the IDPA should "hop to" and go and change those things per your schedule or my schedule. Change is difficult for organizations because they are composed of people. And if change means IDPA staff need to change themselves, well...we all know how hard it is to change ourselves. I have no problem pointing out things that need to be improved...I agree with some of them. But suggesting that IDPA rules were written by a drunken uncle, for instance, is just ridiculing without being constructive.

Speaking of that, maybe part of the answer is to look at your own views and consider changing them.
Cody

[jetfire]

IDPA at S&W is different. It's an invitational and they have always had shenanigans about rules. Heck Caleb posted video during the match when that was illegal.

I had completely forgotten about the stink that raised. Too bad this year I'm shooting on Saturday.

[cclaxton]

He is already shooting USPSA, so the only people that lose when he chooses USPSA over IDPA is IDPA and the IDPA club.

So are you saying that if we don't shoot IDPA we are hurting the industry, even though we are contributing thousands of dollars (my ammo bill alone for the Steel Nationals will be over a grand) when shooting other shooting sports?

No, I am saying that if YOU choose not to shoot IDPA for your own reasons....FINE. But don't go on the internet and try to discourage OTHERS from doing so.
Cody

[PPGMD]

Just because people have suggestions and provide feedback does not mean the IDPA should "hop to" and go and change those things per your schedule or my schedule.

When all but the most strident IDPA defenders says that it is stupid, it probably is stupid. Take a look at this thread, normally the IDPA threads are about evenly divided between IDPA defenders and people that disagree. Take a look around, you are the only one defending this COC. And they were pretty damn quick on banning the humanoid vision barriers.

But suggesting that IDPA rules were written by a drunken uncle, for instance, is just ridiculing without being constructive.

Have you ever considering that they do look that way. I've mentioned this several times before that IDPA talks from both sides of it's mouth. When you point out that a rule isn't tactical, they claim it is a game and they that they don't want an equipment race. When you point out that it makes no sense from a game context, they claim that it is a tactical. IDPA is like the drunken Uncle. I really wish I thought of that first.

Speaking of that, maybe part of the answer is to look at your own views and consider changing them.

No, because I am right.

[trailrunner]

THIS is what I think is wrong....discouraging people from participating. Truth is that participating helps skill development, gun-handling, and provides some basic tactical skills, such as using cover and shooting on the move. How does this help the shooting community or the industry by discouraging people to participate?....HOW?
cody

That was the point I was trying to make. I'm new to a lot of this, and if I keep up my practice, I was thinking of a competition in a year or two for the same benefits that you cite.

But making a competitor sign this kind of agreement -- under penalty of perjury, no less -- sets off all sorts of warning bells.

[PPGMD]

No, I am saying that if YOU choose not to shoot IDPA for your own reasons....FINE. But don't go on the internet and try to discourage OTHERS from doing so.

I didn't create this COC. I didn't create this match specific flashlight rule.

I simply posted them here for all to see.

IDPA is the one discouraging people from shooting it by doing stupid stuff.

[gtmtnbiker98]

Merrian Webster says there are two definitions for Perjury. One is a matter of law. The other is this: "the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath : false swearing"

They probably should have used a better word, but I have no issue because I will not violate the terms.
COdy

Pains and Penalties do not quite imply breaking a promise. Sorry, dude.

[littlejerry]

No, I am saying that if YOU choose not to shoot IDPA for your own reasons....FINE. But don't go on the internet and try to discourage OTHERS from doing so.
Cody

Think of it as trying to encourage new shooters not to give up on the shooting sports.

Had my experience at my local IDPA club been my first and only exposure to shooting sports I may very well have written off the whole idea of competition shooting.

Yeah, it sucked that much. No, it isn't representative of all clubs. Yes, other people have had similar experiences.

[TCinVA]

If I were running an important match I'd rather just assume the competitors will show up and conduct themselves reasonably, staying ready to take action against an exceptional douchenozzle should he rear his ugly head than to insult every participant at the match from the getgo by making them sign such a ridiculous bit of nonsense.

Ranges are typically private property. If someone acts up on private property (like during a match) you can eject them for doing so. The idea that an obstreperous jackass cannot be ejected unless somebody wrote a specific prohibition against the exact form of jackassery he performed is ridiculous. If someone acts up, you give them the boot.

Simple, really.