AIWB now legal in all divisions?

[JCN]

What's IDPA?

I think it’s a social fisherman’s competition from what I’ve seen of the competitors...

[cheby]

Locally all matches are sold out in 10 min maximum. Considering the ammo situation this is very remarkable
We obviously don't have enough ranges. This problem needs to be addressed immediately if we really want to grow a sport because it's going to get much worse.

A quick quote from a friend: the intent is to give the people what they want in hopes of growing the sport. That's where you are failing. Sometimes you have to tell little Johnny "No" because its for his best interest

[JCN]

A quick quote from a friend: the intent is to give the people what they want in hopes of growing the sport. That's where you are failing. Sometimes you have to tell little Johnny "No" because its for his best interest

Have you ever seen a parent tell little Johnny “no” because the parent wants what they want and thinks that supersedes the kid’s input? I have.

With paternalism you have to be VERY careful that it actually IS in their best interest and not selfish self-interest...

Or call a spade a spade.

[GJM]

It's interesting to follow the discussion on my Facebook where 99.99% of my friends are USPSA shooters. I don't think I have seen anyone who approves the direction the sport is heading these days. Some people are just quiet because of the sponsors, and other political issues. Kudos to Mason Lane, Ben Berry, Cody Axon, and others for having balls to openly speak out about it.

Probably because the ones that like it are busy practicing with their new pouch positions and flashlights and don’t have time to internet. I was quite disappointed when I registered for a USPSA match on Sunday, and flashlight wasn’t offered as a category along with the others like lady, senior, etc.

I am still trying to figure out if the objections are around the process or the actual changes? Hard to see why Open shooters who can do practically anything and Limited shooters with their heavy $5,000 pistols and no holster/mag pouch limits would care about my 30 ounce hunk of plastic with a light.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Is it a business or not? The interplay of what the customers want and the purity issue is for some MBA to decide, I would think.

It's like Asian restaurants - they have authentic dishes for the cognoscenti and there is always sesame chicken and sweet and sour pork for for the unwashed masses.

As I've said, I play and shoot different games and get what I want out of it. Shooting production guns or SSP or some mundane 22lr works for me. If they offer PPC, so I can shoot that - that's fine as my goal is to shoot that gun to keep up skill levels with that.

As far as AIWB, if it makes folks happy let them shoot it. If they shoot off their reproductive parts, it is a positive for the evolution of humanity. If they shoot someone else, put them in jail or sue them. Should the organization and range be responsible, let the lawyers figure that out. My old body isn't going AIWB.

I argue that the 'games' have to have a path for inclusiveness of even those who don't meet the game purity test as it is good for those shooters to get some trigger time beyond the square range and it helps support the RKBA.

Yeah, I've trained with many of the best for my EDC issues. I wish more folks would. We know they don't. Can the games get them at least more experience - that would be a good thing.

[Eyesquared]

Being constructive: what improvements to the current ruleset would people suggest?

Some ideas (some overlap here):
1. List of legal lights
2. More clarity on what constitutes a light (what happens if I show up with a laser and beam diffuser, sort of like the IR flood on a PEQ15 but visible? Is it still a light if the beam is insanely narrow?)
3. Limitation on using lights outside of level 1 matches

And from a rules making procedure perspective, what changes would people suggest?
1. Rules changes voted on by board, proposed to membership, and then comment period before implementation.
2. Clearer communication between board and members re: reasoning behind changes. With a big rules change like this you should be able to see why the board wanted to do it on the USPSA website rather than just speculate or have to go off what the instagram account posted.

[Sal Picante]

At the end of the day this is a rule change that upends a lot of existing competitors' gear setups, all in hopes of attracting timmies (who I think are not going to flock to USPSA in droves over this change). It's pretty annoying to be a USPSA member and have stuff like this rammed down your throat supposedly for the benefit of potential timmie USPSA shooters, who have historically never been particularly active or interested in the sport anyways. Just look at who is posting in this thread, almost all people who already shoot USPSA, not timmie converts drawn in by this rules change. I am not anti-timmie but it's unfair to the membership to pull shit like this IMO.

Were they not interested because they were turned away because of restrictive gear rules? We've seen more and more folks come out to USPSA over the years, They added PCC & CO, and those are growing faster and faster - a lot of the "timmies" are showing up at my local matches.

I was speaking with a friend about the new rule changes. He shoots carry optics, limited and single stack. He said he had no heartburn with the new rules except for appendix carry. When I asked him why, he said “those guys will shove all that crap up front and then they won’t wanna bend over and pick up steel on stages.”

... and that's how you know that dude is retarded, in the literal sense of the word.

This exact topic came up on Stoeger's podcast, with Matt Pranka on the side of the stock glock being usable to win Nationals, and Stoeger being surprisingly adamant that stock Glocks are not competitive anymore. IIRC he also hinted that back when rules were more restrictive, some supposedly "stock" glocks were not quite stock. Now obviously winning Nationals is different from winning a local match but if you get a consistent 3-5% performance increase that is actually a big deal to me.

Ben and drama? No... He'd never do that...

These changes don't seem likely to cause a technology race BUT I have 0 faith in the board to have the level of foresight to prevent one from occurring with future rules changes. It just so happens that these recent changes don't offer an absolute advantage because gun weight has diminishing returns. However it's also pretty obvious from past rule changes that the board doesn't always think these things through. I suspect they did not expect non-timmie USPSA competitors to want to put on lights and I also don't think they considered the effect of being able to use a light with irons in different lighting, or the possibility that someone ends up making a "flashlight" that is basically an aiming device. If I recall the old X200 had a version that put out a beam that was like 8" wide at 25 yards.

... and we're arguing Cody Axon's point, which only really applies to a dark house stage. IDK. You're free to add/remove the light as you want... Do it or don't do it...

What's important to me is that we grow the sport in today's political climate.

^^^ I wish I could like that more than once... ^^^

I have to disagree with you on this. I am pretty sure that an average gamer would beat an average timmy with any duty gun. Opposite is not true. Average timmy has no chance against an average gamer with the gamer gun. This is just a fact of life. You are a good shooter not because of your timmy baggage, quite opposite.
Of course, this is the rabbit hole we went to before and never got back

Well, at least now they can go to a USPSA match and see the reality?

I don't even know what we're talking bout anymore...

[JCN]

I am still trying to figure out if the objections are around the process or the actual changes? Hard to see why Open shooters who can do practically anything and Limited shooters with their heavy $5,000 pistols and no holster/mag pouch limits would care about my 30 ounce hunk of plastic with a light.

Because when your wife smokes them through hard work and training, they will feel badly about themselves!

[Sal Picante]

Wait... Fleshlights are legal now in USPSA!?

http://instagram.com/p/CMDWAianf7p/


Do they have to be functional?

[Eyesquared]

I argue that the 'games' have to have a path for inclusiveness of even those who don't meet the game purity test as it is good for those shooters to get some trigger time beyond the square range and it helps support the RKBA.

To be clear, it was legal to shoot AIWB and use a light before, but you would get bumped to open. IMO not a big deal as new shooters are not going to be super competitive from the get go and it doesn't matter if they shoot production or open, they're not likely to be in the running. I even knew a guy who stubbornly shot a 9mm ironsighted Glock with a light on it in open despite barely carrying it, primarily just for the ego protection excuses when he got crushed at every match.

I will also add, is it really true that gun games must be inclusive to all gun owners? If so I think we should take some of the guns out of 3gun, to make it more financially accessible to new gun owners who can't afford to buy a rifle, pistol, and shotgun. I also think we should move the targets closer in bullseye because the current distances are too discouraging for new shooters who aren't shooting accurate 22s or accurized pistols. And of course PRS needs some new divisions to allow people to shoot it with their home defense glocks.