Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest diablo slim shootist

live round under hammer

Recommended Posts

AJ and GCK, I agree with you in principle. However, I thought the discussion was about a specific event as stated by Diablo. In this case, to my understanding, no one unloaded the weapon for the shooter. It was taken to the Loading Table, because the shooter had been awarded a Reshoot. In the course of laying the revolver down, IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE, Diablo noticed there was a round under the hammer. It turned out to be a LIVE round( as it HAD to be since the weapon was never fired). I don't believe he stated who unloaded the weapon to check, but maybe he did. If so, I apologize.

 

The point I was trying to make is this: place yourself in the boots of the shooter. You've just been stopped. Weapon handed off. There IS a live round under the hammer. And now you are going to get pissy because someone "checked" your weapon? Come on. You're already facing a SDQ. Do you want to go for a MDQ. I would think a little humility is in order, not arrogance.

 

Oh, I agree there is nothing wrong with an RO or ULT officer NOTING that there is a round under the hammer, doing the math (no rounds been fired), then pointing the situation out IMMEDIATELY to the shooter when he arrives, and of course to the RO. What I would disagree with is anybody else clearing the gun unless the shooter is incapable due to illness, injury, etc.

 

Come on.

 

Steeldust Dan

Oh, I agree there is nothing wrong with an RO or ULT officer NOTING that there is a round under the hammer, doing the math (no rounds been fired), then pointing the situation out IMMEDIATELY to the shooter when he arrives, and of course to the RO. What I would disagree with is anybody else clearing the gun unless the shooter is incapable due to illness, injury, etc.

 

There are two issues, one is They are his guns, and some of us take a dim view of folks messing with their "stuff", the other is, once the discovered "evidence" has been disturbed, there is always the potential for the shooter to doubt the finding. Maybe he really thinks the gun was ok, and somehow you misunderstood what you saw, and when ya turn the cylinder, the evidence is lost. Better to look but don't touch, and let him also see what you see......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest diablo slim shootist
Oh, I agree there is nothing wrong with an RO or ULT officer NOTING that there is a round under the hammer, doing the math (no rounds been fired), then pointing the situation out IMMEDIATELY to the shooter when he arrives, and of course to the RO. What I would disagree with is anybody else clearing the gun unless the shooter is incapable due to illness, injury, etc.

 

There are two issues, one is They are his guns, and some of us take a dim view of folks messing with their "stuff", the other is, once the discovered "evidence" has been disturbed, there is always the potential for the shooter to doubt the finding. Maybe he really thinks the gun was ok, and somehow you misunderstood what you saw, and when ya turn the cylinder, the evidence is lost. Better to look but don't touch, and let him also see what you see......

dully noted ! thanks

oops there i go again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AJ and GCK, I agree with you in principle. However, I thought the discussion was about a specific event as stated by Diablo. In this case, to my understanding, no one unloaded the weapon for the shooter. It was taken to the Loading Table, because the shooter had been awarded a Reshoot. In the course of laying the revolver down, IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE, Diablo noticed there was a round under the hammer. It turned out to be a LIVE round( as it HAD to be since the weapon was never fired). I don't believe he stated who unloaded the weapon to check, but maybe he did. If so, I apologize.

 

The point I was trying to make is this: place yourself in the boots of the shooter. You've just been stopped. Weapon handed off. There IS a live round under the hammer. And now you are going to get pissy because someone "checked" your weapon? Come on. You're already facing a SDQ. Do you want to go for a MDQ. I would think a little humility is in order, not arrogance.

 

Come on.

 

Steeldust Dan

I do not want to get into the details of the event itself, as I think we would need to know more facts before a judgment, as PWB said.

 

Dan, however, I think you make a good point about the tone of the situation....and are right in thinking that the shooter shouldn't make a big deal out of someone checking his firearm, at that point in time. That would only serve to increase the tension of the moment. I think most would agree on that.

 

However, I do agree that the only person who should handle their firearm, beyond carrying it to the unloading table, is the shooter themselves....unless they give permission or request someone's help. I think this is only good manners and respectful of the shooter's property.

 

I know I would be annoyed if someone started handling my firearms without my permission (beyond getting them safely to the unloading table) IMHO :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diablo,

 

Thanks for posting on this situation. It created some good discussion about this for when it happens again somewhere.

 

As the club Range Officer, you got involved in this stage after the shooter had been stopped. You questioned the TO and the shooter and based upon the information you had, you maintained safety and got the shooter off the stage and to a table where you designated the shooter to unload. At the unloading table, you glanced into the cylinder/frame gap and noticed that a round was under the hammer. You discussed that some more with the TO and shooter and made a decision. Later, you came to the Wire to seek advice and to help others when they encounter a similar situation. I say good job, well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diablo,

 

Thanks for posting on this situation. It created some good discussion about this for when it happens again somewhere.

 

As the club Range Officer, you got involved in this stage after the shooter had been stopped. You questioned the TO and the shooter and based upon the information you had, you maintained safety and got the shooter off the stage and to a table where you designated the shooter to unload. At the unloading table, you glanced into the cylinder/frame gap and noticed that a round was under the hammer. You discussed that some more with the TO and shooter and made a decision. Later, you came to the Wire to seek advice and to help others when they encounter a similar situation. I say good job, well done.

 

 

Very true. It helps us all learn more about our sport. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original question with the original parameters. SDQ and a hearty slap on the wrist to the TO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that with the info provided that the shooter was under direct supervision and did what he felt was a correct move. The TO should not be allowed to work any more stages until he is given a refresher course on that position. If that had been in a big match he could have cost this shooter a nice prize. I believe that safety is above all else but one sided rules should be eliminated and the wording should be changed. When I was a police firearms instructor every person on that line was my responsibility. They were told before firing that if you find yourself in a position that you don't know what your next move is; you are to freeze and do nothing. If you follow that rule then you can't be wrong. Perhaps a similar wording would make it easier to understand direct supervision as it is a broad term that is open to different interpretations as we can see from this thread of 3 pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.