RO Fatally Shot at NY USPSA Match

[BigT]

This thread does appear to have a lot of people who don't shoot IPSC/USPSA or who if they do , do it very causally opinioning very hard on something they don't understand. You know how you feel when someone who doesn't own guns tells you you don't need a 20 shot magazine, or a dude with a hunting rifle tells you you don't need an AR, thats how I feel reading some of this.

Once again, this was a terrible tragedy, one so rare thats its caused all this discussion. We don't need to change the rules of the game! We don't need to act like the sky is falling! We don't need to put down every Labrador in the world because we heard about one biting a child.

Half cocks are to catch hammers slipping not for carry. A safety notch on a decocker gun is not the same thing.

[Bucky]

1) Selective action pistols, which are not equipped with a decocking system will be required to compete in the 'single action/metallic sights' division. Said pistols will be carried IAW portion of 8.1.2.3 declaring chamber loaded, and hammer cocked with external safety engaged

Hell no, the last thing USPSA needs is another division.

Not sure what the big deal is with letting DA / SA guns start at 15% (even 30%) cocked, when we’re allowing for striker fired guns to start 100% cocked.

[Zincwarrior]

Like this one from the VA State match we shot. This may be one of the worst examples of RO positioning ive ever seen, as competitors had to pick up their gun unloaded off the barrel and load it, which resulted in several right handed shooters aiming directly at the RO on the left.

Attachment 63116

Yea thats crazy. Just putting aside the volunteering to get new holes. In central Texas the chances of a ricochet like that are high.

[olstyn]

I have a question--from a dopey-ass BE shooter and NRA CRSO that would maybe do USPSA if the apocalypse ever ends. Let's say I'm at a match, I step up to the box, and I see something like that. What recourse do I have as a competitor? What do I do if my complaint isn't sustained locally and I refuse to shoot that particular stage?

I've always taught people that if they see something they're not comfortable with, to take it to whoever is in charge of the particular area in question, and if the issue doesn't get resolved, proceed to the match director. If that doesn't work, then it's time to noap on outta there.

I'm not a certified RO, and as such, I've only ever acted as an RO at local matches, but I've personally followed the example of the "real" ROs I've seen during my time competing and not given the "make ready" command until there is nobody but the shooter downrange of me. If I was ROing that stage, the photographer would have been told that he needed to be farther back, and if he bitched about it, my response would be that I'm not running any shooters until he's at least behind the 180 line of *my* body (he's visibly downrange of the RO in that pic). As a shooter, I'm not sure what you can do other than what you and I both already suggested - tell the RO you're not comfortable with the photographer's position and that you want him moved before you shoot for safety reasons. Any vaguely sane RO should work with you on that. If the RO refuses, then I guess you either put up with it or appeal to the rangemaster/match director?

[Clusterfrack]

Yeah, I fucking hate it when people hang out near the edges of the rear fault line on stages like this. When I'm RO-ing I ask people to move. When I'm shooting I ask people to move, and won't start until they do. I've never had anyone argue with me because I ask nicely. So far, I haven't had to ask an RO at major match to move.

There should be a buffer between the edges of the rear fault line and where spectators can stand.

ROs need education about avoiding dangerous positions. Catching a shooter breaking the 180 by 1 degree is less important than keeping out of harm's way.

It wasn't an RO, but this official match cameraman decided to, for some reason, plant himself at about the 178 degree line. I saw where he was out of the corner of my eye when I was shooting an earlier part of the stage and remember thinking "OK before I get over to those targets near him he's going to move, right?"

Nope.

Attachment 63117

[Zincwarrior]

Yeah, I fucking hate it when people hang out near the edges of the rear fault line on stages like this. When I'm RO-ing I ask people to move. When I'm shooting I ask people to move, and won't start until they do. I've never had anyone argue with me because I ask nicely. So far, I haven't had to ask an RO at major match to move.

There should be a buffer between the edges of the rear fault line and where spectators can stand.

ROs need education about avoiding dangerous positions. Catching a shooter breaking the 180 by 1 degree is less important than keeping out of harm's way.

If the stage has an RO at the 179 watching, there's about three levels of bad already on that stage.

[Jim Watson]

CAS uses a 170 deg rule. If you are anywhere close to 180, you have clearly gone too far.
IDPA uses either the 180 or marked muzzle safe points. I won't say never but have hardly ever seen muzzle safe points wider than 180 and usually narrower, often a lot narrower.

[Eyesquared]

Gun safety in USPSA can feel like living in bizarro world.

If I break the 180 by 1 degree (a highly subjective call, at best) and get stopped, I'm too dangerous to be allowed to shoot the rest of the match, but I can come back next week and do the same thing?

IMO the ideal way to handle the 180 is keep everyone spectating at least another 20-30 degrees back from it. And stop worrying about calling it even if people go to 181. Just call egregious violations like if someone clearly goes to 200+. Right now because of stage design and the way officiating is handled, we have stages where you actively have to plan how not to break the 180 while shooting a stage, like if there's an uprange movement to a shooting position and the target is right on the 180. IMO that's dumb as hell.

[Clusterfrack]

Exactly this. At the OR state match I shot last weekend, there was a retreat stage where I sprinted back with gun angled downrange on my strong side to shoot two targets right on the 180. (There were no people anywhere near that side of the bay). I've practiced this quite a bit so I know how not to break the safe angle, but when I arm-pump while running with the gun it freaks some ROs out. After I finished the stage, the RO lectured me about how close to the 180 I was and how he "almost called it". It's annoying and unnecessary, but I understand the position the ROs are in, having to make a subjective call. Your suggestion would solve it.

IMO the ideal way to handle the 180 is keep everyone spectating at least another 20-30 degrees back from it. And stop worrying about calling it even if people go to 181. Just call egregious violations like if someone clearly goes to 200+. Right now because of stage design and the way officiating is handled, we have stages where you actively have to plan how not to break the 180 while shooting a stage, like if there's an uprange movement to a shooting position and the target is right on the 180. IMO that's dumb as hell.

[CleverNickname]

I have a question--from a dopey-ass BE shooter and NRA CRSO that would maybe do USPSA if the apocalypse ever ends. Let's say I'm at a match, I step up to the box, and I see something like that. What recourse do I have as a competitor? What do I do if my complaint isn't sustained locally and I refuse to shoot that particular stage?

If the competitor stopped himself during the course of fire, then he'd have to hope the RO would issue a stop command once the competitor pointed out what he thought was a safety issue. Then the competitor would get a reshoot. However, in my example, no violation technically occurred, since the photographer was in fact behind the 180 line (the back fault line). If the RO didn't think it was a safety issue and failed to issue a stop command, then the timer's still running and the competitor would end up with a really long raw time, or a DNF if they just refused to complete the stage. The ideal thing a competitor would do is to notice where the cameraman was standing prior to the RO asking "Are you ready?" and then answer in the negative, point out the potential problem, and ask the RO to have the cameraman move. However, that wouldn't prevent the cameraman from moving to that point after the timer beeped.

That said, there's something wrong where this is ok:



And this is not:



Both should be considered unsafe, but technically only the bottom one must be, according to the rulebook. The RO could still stop the competitor in the top diagram if the RO thinks it's unsafe (if it were me, I would), but I don't see where he would be required to stop the competitor in that situation, since the Totally Smart Guy is in fact behind the 180.

I'd be in favor of a second fault line which only the shooter and the RO could be in front of after the beep, which was far enough back to where the shooter would have to break the 180 by 20 or 30 degrees in order to point the gun at someone. If someone else went in front of the line, give them a procedural the first violation (or warning if they were not a competitor), then DNF/eject them from the match on the second violation.