IDPA - appendix carry?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Getting newbies up to speed depends in part of the maturity of the beginner. I see a lot of one timers who shoot and then never come back. On the other hand, we had a USAF neuro-ophthalmologist who wanted some practice beyond his brief service intro. He learned quickly and became part of our group. Same with a TSA agent.

It's attitudinal and willing to learn. We were very gentle with new shooters and shepherded them through the stages. Blatant disregard got them DQ'ed.

One thing that is a big negative, is a guy who is new and wants to 'win'. Won't tape and yaks with his buddies instead. A newbie who tapes is a good sign.

One newbie, I still recall that particularly annoyed me was a guy who bitched when some of us older shooters did not kneel. We have serious and documented screwed up knees. Want my MRIs? Even with us taking the penalty - bitch, bitch.

[JAD]

@Wendell, I think this question is good to keep discussing. You make some valid points, and I understand why you feel this way. However, how many lethal accidents involving a 9 year old kid shooting IDPA or USPSA do you think it would take for us to lose our sport?

That at least is what the training is good for — a degree of indemnity. I don’t think 4 hours of training is going to be dipshit proof. I’m not even sure it would be measurably effective. But it would help if you got sued.

[Sal Picante]

Here’s a thought: what activities require formal training? Flying airplanes seems like a good example. Would anyone argue that ad hoc coaching should be enough for a person to fly a plane, and carry passengers? How about racing cars?

Would you say that IDPA and USPSA are reasonably safe at this point?

[Zincwarrior]

Would you say that IDPA and USPSA are reasonably safe at this point?

I was racing motorcycles at 8, with just Dad's advice...

[Clusterfrack]

Would you say that IDPA and USPSA are reasonably safe at this point?

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I can see the point. I think having a group of newbie, young stud friends can be dangerous. Single one or two older folks, not so much as a good squad (like ours was) would be more of learning experience. Maybe we were special.

-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter

I dislike that running is part of some games as I don't see it as integral to defensive shooting, if that is the goal (yeah, I know, it's a game, if you can't be athletic, blah, blah). At one match, a new gun starts to run so fast, he falls on his face, gets up and tries to make up time and speed ups and falls again. I would have DQ'ed him but that SO was a wuss.

I would tell someone who fell, not to move and we will get him up slowly and make sure the gun is safe. In a club match, I would let him reshoot. In a 'real' match - tough. Out you go.

[That Guy]

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

In my country, some action shooting sports (not IDPA but some of the other ones) have fairly strict mandatory safety training classes one has to complete before being allowed to take part in any match, or most organized training, for that sport. Typical class is two days, with day 1 being classroom instruction with a test afterwards, and day 2 being a standardized test match where one has to achieve a defined minimum hit factor to pass the course.

When I'm around these "safety certified" competition shooters I still see shitty reholstering, dangerous holsters, iffy firearms modifications, disregard for safety during less formal events, lack of understanding why the safety rules exist in the first place, etc. I've also run into instructors with shitty attitudes where half their students fail to pass the safety course and the instructors attitude is "learn to shoot you fucking noobs" and have seen newcomers have difficulty passing the test match with ratty loaner guns, due to physical limitations etc. There's also quite a lot of Dunning-Kruger syndrome going on with people who've passed the safety class but do not understand how safe firearms handling in another context may differ from a match environment, but think that since they've been "trained" they know all there is to know about firearms safety.

I'm less than 100% sure the safety classes help much when it comes to safety. I haven't visited matches in the US though, so I can't make a direct comparison.

[BigT]

I can see the point. I think having a group of newbie, young stud friends can be dangerous. Single one or two older folks, not so much as a good squad (like ours was) would be more of learning experience. Maybe we were special.



I dislike that running is part of some games as I don't see it as integral to defensive shooting, if that is the goal (yeah, I know, it's a game, if you can't be athletic, blah, blah). At one match, a new gun starts to run so fast, he falls on his face, gets up and tries to make up time and speed ups and falls again. I would have DQ'ed him but that SO was a wuss.

I would tell someone who fell, not to move and we will get him up slowly and make sure the gun is safe. In a club match, I would let him reshoot. In a 'real' match - tough. Out you go.

DQ'd for what exactly?

Falling is not DQ'able

Was there an AD? Was his finger on the trigger? Did he break the 90?Did he drop the gun?

If no then he gets to get right back and keep running.

New or experienced the rules remain the same.

[miller_man]

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

I am not against new people taking training to play our sports but don't know if I'd be for seeing it be mandated. I haven't made up my mind on that, good for discussion though.

Pherhaps playing devils advocate, Clusterfrack did you take a class or instruction before participating in IDPA/USPSA?

I did not, but I sure looked into it and practiced safe gun handling for about two weeks in dry fire before attending my first match.

[Zincwarrior]

Yes. Definitely.

However, a formal training course could make a big difference in reducing the chance of an accident.

In my experience, new shooters—especially kids—don’t understand the reasons behind the safety rules, and I’ve personally witnessed some scary things. For example:
-Speed holstering
-Gun held in such a way while running that a fall would likely put the muzzle toward the shooter
-Out of control movement and shooting by beginners who have no idea of their limits
-DQs where the shooter was more concerned about their lost match than the lives of the people they swept

Of course, people talk to the individuals after it happens. But I’d rather have training involving practice stages that front loads safety and the philosophy behind it.

I’m having a hard time understanding the pushback against this. Can someone help me?

Are you talking about a class over and above the new shooter brief most groups have for new shooters before a match?