Rules preference: mandate concealed/duty gear or just skip all of that and let be open carry since it is just a game?
Rules preference: mandate concealed/duty gear or just skip all of that and let be open carry since it is just a game?
Let it be open carry.Originally Posted by jlw
Or have actual standards for concealment. No more 5.11 vests "concealing" a glock 34. I'd love a rule that required you to carry in public with your comp gear prior to the match. Better yet in a NPE. Go for a walk on the downtown strip then compete with what's on your belt. Or wear your work attire.
Personally I find the IDPA concealment rules laughable.
Just go to open carry, based on the NRA convention people actually carry with those stupid vests.
And since people want to win, they are going to use the fastest methods, with those vests being that since they can conceal gamer guns like the Glock 34.
Personally I am of the opinion that you shoot competition to test skills, but you can't test tactics because tactics are situational and require interaction from a role player. Now NTI tried mixing both, but though the competitors tried it, I honestly not sure that everyone believed the FOF portions were truly objective.
It's a game. For fun. It's not an evaluator of how you would shoot at moving targets who are shooting back at you and possibly intelligent and may also use cover or concealment. Gamer guns are perfect, as it is a game. For fun. Sure it might check a few things like speed from concealment, shot placement under stress, etc, but anyone who believes if is "truly like" anything akin to the real world is simply a competitor that is seeking validation for their own skill sets.
An Olympic swimmer, for example might have more comfort in the water than a combat swimmer, for example and may actually be better at swimming, but that doesn't mean that they know how to swim with gear, swim with a team or perform anything combat related. In the exact same sense, a competitive shooter might be a much better "shooter", but that doesn't translate to being better at shooting in combat.
So, either make it realistic, like the targets move and think and shoot back, and if you get hit there is an extreme, possibly life-long penalty (like, if you take a sim round to the head, you're disqualified for life)...or...accept that it is a fun game that tests a few simple skills, and be cool with people playing a game. The vests and 34s exist because the SPORT exists as a sport.
If it is a concealed carry sport I would make it real concealment. I get the IDPA stuff and I also play to their rules, it is pointless not to, it's a game, but I would see how one could mandate "real" clothing and truly eliminate competition gear.
Or make it open and test the shooting aspect because paper targets don't shoot back and to try to introduce tactics just allows poor shooters weasel room to justify poor performance. If you want to show the world how "tactical" you are use the picture threads like everyone else.
Think for yourself. Question authority.
What if it was mandated that the shooter must use what they were wearing at 2 pm last Tuesday? The sound of crickets would be overwhelming. A reasonable level of concealment must be included to have the appearance of being legit. The challenge is defining reasonable.
Taking a break from social media.
Note that the term "defensive shooting sport" was used. I intentionally did not use the other term.
Not all legal carry requires concealment.
Were it me, I would require concealment for most stages, but would specifically allow open and off-body starts on some stages.
I would not allow duty gear to be used in lieu of concealment.
I can't get excited about 'gamer vests.' Partly because I'm a gamer, but also because photographers vests have been used effectively, in some seriously non-permissive environments, for a long time.
-C
My blog: The Way of the Multigun
Not allowing duty gear was not an option in the OP. It is either duty gear/concealed or simply allowing shooters to run as open carry.
If concealment were to be required, duty gear WOULD be allowed as an alternative for those to whom it applied.
Reply With Quote