Tennessee williams

I gave and asked for opinions on the wording of the proposed rule, not the validity of the rule. That was voted on. If you're at "half cock", pull the trigger and bump the hammer backwards just a tiny bit off the notch THE HAMMER WILL FALL. I have had some, the hammer did not need to be bumped backwards off the notch, it would fall regardless. An AD can ruin not only your life but someone else's too. We don't use rank points anymore A revolver returned to holster with the hammer back, when cleared at the Unloading Table would dictate which penalty is warranted.

Perzactly

I sure wish I could find that horse I'm having to beat on. No. Right now those are both sdq penalties for a stationary shooter on the line of fire. Let me try this again. Doesn't matter where the live round is as long as there is atleast one in the cylinder under the proposed rule change. The current rule is a SDQ for the hammer to be back on an empty revolver as well as a revolver with a live round in it in the holster out of hand whether it has been unholstered and reholstered or has not been out of the holster yet. We agree they SHOULD be a mdq. The proposed rule change will only change the call on the one where the revolver has been unholstered and then REholstered to a MDQ. The revolver that has not been unholstered and reholstered will remain a SDQ. I don't want to try to understand any of this^, lol. Yes. There are very real concerns by various people who believe this should be a Match DQ instead of the SDQ that it currently is. I just happen to believe it should be a Match DQ on ANY holstered revolver with live rounds in the cylinder and the hammer back. Not just a re-holstered one.

The difference is the proposed rule that this entire thread is about. The proposed rule would change a revolver that is cocked with any live rounds in the cylinder which has been REholstered to a MDQ while leaving a revolver with the hammer back with live rounds in the cylinder that is initially holstered still a SDQ. I agree. But. To me, it should be a MDQ whether initially holstered or REholstered. You don't smell what I'm cooking. The above is about an empty revolver. Yes, a SDQ was earned as soon as the revolver left that shooters hand. What you don't realize, is it was said that if that same shooter, after releasing that revolver takes a step before the TO can stop them and have them correct the hammer being back then they have then changed locations with a cocked revolver earning a 2nd stage DQ for the one stage. 2 stage DQ on the same stage equals a Match Disqualification. When you were caught with your hammer back, had you moved locations? If so, then it is said you should have gotten a MATCH DISQUALIFICATION instead of the sdq you received. That is with an EMPTY REVOLVER. I understand and a lot of confusion of the rules comes from people equating rules from other shooting sports to SASS. The reason we can put our booger picker on the boom button is because we use single actions that will not fire unless cocked first. Hence no moving with a cocked firearm.

Does anybody else have any thoughts on a revolver being in the holster with the hammer back with live rounds being a sdq vs a revolver being reholstered with a hammer back with live rounds being a MDQ? THE REVOLVER IS IN THE EXACT SAME POSITION. If the potential change just said revolver with hammer back with live rounds holstered then they would both be MDQ and no confusion. Does anybody have any thoughts on someone holstering their empty revolver with the hammer not fully down(SDQ and taking a step(SDQ) to earn a MDQ? This will make a lot of sdq into mdqs.

I think BB, is comparing the scenario of a hammer being back on a loaded revolver while standing at the loading table (SDQ)being the same condition as one reholstered with hammer back standing at the line of fire(proposed MDQ). You have to speak BB to know sometimes he asks a question he already knows the answer to. Lol

Yes. Speaking only of loaded revolvers(and the 2 sdq=MDQ changhing locations with a cocked revolver+either of the other sdq calls). To me the most dangerous scenario is where there is a loaded revolver accidentally cocked. *We have a rule, you cant cock a revolver until it reaches 45° angle downrange. *We have no rule against putting your finger in the trigger guard at any time. Reason being is we use single actions and they can't fire unless they're cocked. **Where this gets all horror movie on us is when a revolver is accidentally cocked and a finger finds its way into the trigger guard. That is more dangerous than about any scenario. People get a grip on their revolver while moving to the next location, often while facing 90° down the line of fire.

Hey PWB! I have always assumed "changing location with a cocked revolver" actually meant "changing location with a cocked revolver in hand". If thats not the case, just about every time I have called a SDQ for a cocked revolver leaving the shooters' hand should have been a MDQ. How quick can you stop a shooter from taking a step while they're reholstering the revolver? Say you don't notice the hammer back until you see the shooter moving to the unloading table? I'd say 95% of those SDQ calls will now be MDQ calls. I actually had 2 scenarios where a hammer may be back while loaded without being reholstered. How about the one where the loaded revolver was accidentally cocked? It is just as, if not more dangerous than the reholstered one.

The current wording of item 2 we are voting on says "changing the penalty for a cocked revolver re-holstered with unfired round(s) remaining leaving the shooters hand will be changed to a MATCH DQ". If you click on my photo above, it states the reason for the proposed change is the fact that a cocked and released revolver with rounds in it is incredibly dangerous. I don't disagree with it being dangerous. BUT. It is no more dangerous than the loaded revolver that has its hammer hook on a coat, table, or arm and cocks. Or the revolver a shooter never lowered the hammer on at the loading table before coming to run the stage. All of these scenarios have the same situation. A loaded revolver with the hammer back on what is potentially a loaded chamber. With the current wording and absent a clarification the one who gets a MDQ is the one who has reholstered, not the one who came to the line with an initially holstered cocked loaded revolver or the accidental cocking, which could potentially be more dangerous. With the current wording, I'd have to be a "no" vote even though I believe ANY holstered cocked, loaded revolver warrants an MDQ call. I don't believe it should be limited to a reholstered revolver. I think we could avoid a whole heap of confusion and clarifications by not saying "re-holstered". Holstered should suffice.

Mister Badly was a large character, and not just stature. He usually shot on mine and widders posse at TN State. He'd always have a nanner split photo to share to me. He also like to post the Pic of that 2 door hotrod blazer(?) he had. He was fun to watch shoot Outlaw category and just to hang out with. He'll be missed around Wartrace too. Till next time pard!

More Widderstuff

@Blackwater 53393 I tell Widder all the time Im gonna go buy or build an old country store and we'll sit in the corner and play checkers and lie all day unless its purty and we'll go outside and plink. He asked me how we'd ever make any money. I told him about the hot girl I was gonna hire to cut the bologna! We'll make a fortune. Then I told him this one: Old storekeep figured out how to make big money. He hired this hot young lady to stock the shelves. Now she always wore a skirt and was shorenuff hot, but kind of ditzy. Well that shopkeeper figured out real quick to put one of the best selling breads on the top shelf with a step ladder next to it for that stock girl to get people's bread. One day this old codger made his way through the crowd of fellas buying bread so he could get his weekly loaf to make his sammiches. He didn't know what the big deal was until he got to the bread. That girl would climb up that ladder and fetch someone's bread, then bring it back down to them. Soon as she got back down another guy would tell her their brand was up there too. That stock girl was getting tired of climbing that ladder so while she was at the top of it she looked back down and noticed the old codger and asked him if his was up too. He looked at her and said no, but its twitching a mite.

Here's more..

Here's some of Widder's vintage 22 ammo. Ill let him tell you about it.

A couple days before my sister passed, she stepped in a hole and broke her foot and a few toes. She was scheduled for surgery early this week. Saturday around 10:45 pm she passed. The paramedics said it looked like either a blood clot developed from the broken foot or she already had a blood clot and the broken foot dislodged it. Thank yall for the calls, well wishes,and prayers. Means a lot to me.