You can still make them a damn good idea through stage design with disappearing targets.Originally Posted by rsa-otc
All in all, I'm pretty underwhelmed. It took them 18 months to make some minor clarifications, delete the round dumping rule, and copy popper calibration and arbitration from USPSA. I'm pretty amused that they added that calling for a calibration subjects you to immediate chrono.
The new rulebook has a pretty exhaustive procedure in place for testing to make sure that your gun is not offset more than 3/4ths of an inch from your body. What this means (and it even says this in the rules) is that a holster that's legal on someone who enjoys a more sedentary lifestyle than I do may not be legal on me. The de facto IDPA holster, a Blade-Tech OWB belt holster that attaches using either belt loops or a tek-lock is illegal for me to use because it holds the gun about 1.25 inches away from my lack of love handles. Same with my Comp-Tac holsters.
Well, I guess I could always eat more donuts.
So eating poorly for you now becomes IDPA training.
Think for yourself. Question authority.
It appears that duty gear is now not allowed in a sanctioned match. Very unhappy with this development.
I can honestly say that having shot a considerable number of sanctioned matches over the past 5 years, I have never once seen an officer use their duty gear to shoot.
I have never shot a sanctioned match using anything other than duty gear. In fact, the number of club matches I have shot as a tactical fisherman can be counted on one hand.
I am not the only shooter in my area that does similar.
Or you could look at it the opposite way: your holster actually has to be a good concealment holster for you regardless of whether it would work on someone else. Dictating location/offset rather than just a blanket allowance for certain holsters definitely lives up to the principles of the game. In Caleb's example, the holster he mentioned allows him almost twice as much offset from the body as the rules allow... so why would it be legal for him?
I have, though rarely. There was at least one guy at the '07 Nats who shot in full uniform. But I've also seen the (old) rule abused, including by a top name competitor at a club match who just wanted to shoot without concealment so he claimed "LE status" because he was teaching law enforcement folks and used his "official LE gear" which was basically an open top competition holster. The requirement now for a Level 2 holster is good, though it would be nice to see how they define that since it's not an official NIJ standard or anything. Blackhawk considers the SERPA a level 2 retention holster.
In looking at the new classifier score breakdowns, I am at a loss as to why SSP and ESP are separate divisions...
In another portion of the rules it states one retention device for duty holsters.
Duty gear for LE was supposed to be for those with arrest powers. I have seen that stretched as well. There is a guy in GA that claimed to be shooting using duty gear, but he is a correctional officer for a private prison and thus doesn't meet the IDPA interpretation. Funny thing is that he still wore a tactical fisherman vest; so, I don't exactly know what his point was.
At any rate, anyone thinking that duty gear is an advantage has no practical knowledge of duty gear.
I cannot agree with that. An ALS holster on a solid Sam Browne-type belt with open mag pouches (which are certainly not unusual these days) is definitely as fast on the draw as an open top concealed holster and gives an obvious speed benefit during the reload.
Reply With Quote