PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L

In some cases it is easier to "hide" an entire thread rather than to nuke a a single "inappropriate" post, followed by purging all of the subsequent comments that quote the initial offensive text. Some here might consider re-reading the Forum Guidelines regarding verboten subject matter and commentary. NOTE: Repeat offenders are subject to loss of posting privileges.

That was the plan a long time past. AFAIK...there are currently only three that have been regularly monitoring the Wires for quite some time (not counting HQ staff).

If you "click" on the individual listings, you can see when each one "last visited". Many of them have been inactive for quite some time. HQ staff and Advisory Board members are also listed.

Shooters Handbook RO1 RO2 Pocket RO Card

Except from the 2015 Territorial Governors Summit ADDITIONAL (Non-Voting) DISCUSSION ITEMS: These items may become agenda items at future TG Meetings. 1) Shall we consider a change to the maximum number of "P"s per stage to two…or one per gun/type of firearm. Also, should we reclassify "P"s for "stage/target engagement" issues vs "out of category" progressive penalties? Discussion points: This might alleviate the problem of some shooters committing multiple "P" violations, knowing they can only receive one. Many times this would be an SOG situation, but proving intent can be problematic; besides the reluctance on the part of most T/Os in assessing the additional 30-second penalty. TG Discussion: Views on both sides for and against multiple procedurals. It was felt if we enforced the Spirit of the Game penalty, when a shooter knows they have a P, dumps or shoots an easier target sequence because they will not get another procedural. Some felt this would over penalize a shooter that just got confused. Straw poll showed most felt that one P was adequate. It was also felt that an additional P could be received if shooting out of category.

Sent PM

Another example: Targets are four small poppers on each side of a large (3'x2') "marshal" target: p p p p M p p p p Revolver sequence was two 5-round sweeps...engaging 2 poppers>Marshal>2 poppers; then repeat. Frontier Cartridge DUELIST shooter engaged: p p >> p p (incurring a "P") and reholstered 1st revolver. TO & spotters said "One more!"...shooter redrew and shot M. Shooter then drew 2nd revolver and quickly dumped 5 rounds on M shooting "traditional/two-handed". (two additional procedural violations which, under the "One "P" per stage" rule, could not be assessed) At the ULT, the shooter was asked why he shot it that way. Response was "To make up for the procedural." Shooter was informed that he would be assessed a "Spirit of the Game" penalty in addition to the initial Procedural. Without going into the details of the subsequent conversation with the PM/RM, the shooter protested the SOG all the way up to one of the Match Directors. When he told the MD what he had done and WHY, the MD's response was, "That's a classic example of a Spirit of the Game violation".

I would suggest anything other than dumping the remaining rounds on a single target.

Another option in event that the shooter's excuse is "questionable" would be to assess the SOG penalty and advise the shooter of the protest and appeal procedures (SHB pp.23-24).

Not hardly! click the link

I read "canned heat" and immediately started having flashbacks.

IMO...the ONLY way to determine INTENT is to ASK the shooter WHY s/he shot it that way.

Either try an internet search or post a WTB in the Classifieds (include size ).

Is OK! (I edited my emoji comment)

A short perusal of my past medical records indicates that all intravenous medications (experimental or otherwise) have been administered via infusion. Treatments for parvovirus included infusions, blood transfusions, and injections.

The one in question has a loading gate with a "swing out" ejector rod...not a swing out cylinder. It is chambered in 7.65mm (.32 caliber).

Why wouldn't it be a legal pocket pistol? A pocket pistol is a: small frame, fixed sight, pre-1900 design revolver having a barrel length of four inches or less. Pocket pistols must be .31 caliber or larger.

Belgian "Velo Dog"

"I'll take it" PM sent

That sight has been specifically ruled as ILLEGAL. The only "peep" sights allowed for main match use are: SHB p.34 REF also: SECTION 6 – FIREARM COVENANTS - SHB p.32

If you can obtain a letter from a medical professional stating that a padded glove is necessary to safely participate in SASS/WBAS events, any Match Director will grant an exception to allow you to wear one.

Bending that lever has been a SASS-legal modification for many years. SHB p.39 The manufacturer of the one in question submitted his design for ROC approval just to make certain that it was legal for SASS use.

NO.

@runs with scissors The ROC has ruled that the grips in question are NOT LEGAL for the following reasons: It is considered a “target” grip..." due to the sole purpose of the "bump" being to position the trigger finger on one side. "it helps me keep my trigger finger from extending too far through the triggerguard" It differs significantly from Eagle "Gunfighter" grips in that, rather than adding material to the basic grip, Eagle grips thin the lower part. Also...the rear view looks nothing like the same basic shape as grips or stocks found on original firearms. The "bump" extends significantly beyond the upper portion of the grip frame.