Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Decocking an empty gun


Buckhorn Bud

Recommended Posts

Shooter has just finished shooting 5 rounds from the revolver and inadvertantly cocks it one more time. Shooter de-cocks the revolver and starts to put it away. Timing operator stops the shooter and gives instruction to pull the hammer back again, point the gun down range, and pull the trigger as if to fire a round.

 

RO 1 Handbook Pg. 16

 

"7. De-cocking may not be done to avoid a penalty if cocked at the wrong time, position or location once a round has gone down range. NO gun may be de-cocked on the firing line except by pointing it down range and pulling the trigger or while under the direct supervision of the Timer Operator. (This requires a positive indication/ acknowledgement from the TO to the shooter). The penalty for de-cocking is a Stage Disqualification."

 

From what I can see there is no reference to whether the gun is loaded or not. The TO just saved the shooter from a stage DQ.

 

Shooter claims TO interferance and requests a reshoot. Should a reshoot be granted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shooter has just finished shooting 5 rounds from the revolver and inadvertantly cocks it one more time. Shooter de-cocks the revolver and starts to put it away. Timing operator stops the shooter and gives instruction to pull the hammer back again, point the gun down range, and pull the trigger as if to fire a round.

 

RO 1 Handbook Pg. 16

 

"7. De-cocking may not be done to avoid a penalty if cocked at the wrong time, position or location once a round has gone down range. NO gun may be de-cocked on the firing line except by pointing it down range and pulling the trigger or while under the direct supervision of the Timer Operator. (This requires a positive indication/ acknowledgement from the TO to the shooter). The penalty for de-cocking is a Stage Disqualification."

 

From what I can see there is no reference to whether the gun is loaded or not. The TO just saved the shooter from a stage DQ.

 

Shooter claims TO interferance and requests a reshoot. Should a reshoot be granted?

 

Actually, the T/O COULD SHOULD HAVE SDQ'd the shooter as soon as s/he de-cocked the revolver without "...a positive indication/ acknowledgement from the TO to the shooter."

(edited)

 

Shooter ought to consider himself fortunate under the circumstances.

 

NO RESHOOT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shooter has just finished shooting 5 rounds from the revolver and inadvertantly cocks it one more time. Shooter de-cocks the revolver and starts to put it away. Timing operator stops the shooter and gives instruction to pull the hammer back again, point the gun down range, and pull the trigger as if to fire a round.

 

RO 1 Handbook Pg. 16

 

"7. De-cocking may not be done to avoid a penalty if cocked at the wrong time, position or location once a round has gone down range. NO gun may be de-cocked on the firing line except by pointing it down range and pulling the trigger or while under the direct supervision of the Timer Operator. (This requires a positive indication/ acknowledgement from the TO to the shooter). The penalty for de-cocking is a Stage Disqualification."

From what I can see there is no reference to whether the gun is loaded or not. The TO just saved the shooter from a stage DQ.

 

Shooter claims TO interferance and requests a reshoot. Should a reshoot be granted?

Why would he get a re-shoot when the actual penalty is a SDQ? Seems like the RO did the shooter a huge favor.

 

 

 

DANG PWB! You're responding in some kind of warped- time-speed parallel universerve reality lately! New brand of coffee?;)/>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would he get a re-shoot when the actual penalty is a SDQ? Seems like the RO did the shooter a huge favor.

 

 

 

DANG PWB! You're responding in some kind of warped- time-speed parallel universerve reality lately! New brand of coffee?;)

 

same ol' Folgers...full strength (2x) of course!

 

Today's "Donut Wednesday" @ w**k since we'll be close on Friday...I'm posting Duelist-style, which is slowing me down a bit.

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm posting Duelist-style, which is slowing me down a bit.

 

Well, of course the solution to getting even faster is to pull out another keyboard and yell "Gunfighter" or toss both keyboards in your lap and yell "Outlaw". When you're good, you're good!

 

Good luck, GJ

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, of course the solution to getting even faster is to pull out another keyboard and yell "Gunfighter" or toss both keyboards in your lap and yell "Outlaw". When you're good, you're good!

 

Good luck, GJ

 

I tried that once...staff & customers in the office all DUCKED!

(SOP in event of an attempted holdup is "hit the floor to give PW a clear shot")

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if I lose count about how many rounds I fired and drop the hammer on the 6th empty chamber it is a SDQ?

 

Or if I want to decock while in the of the firing string I have to stop, hold up my hand and wait on the T.O. to acknowledge me, ask my question, confer with the R. O. and finally give me permission?

 

Or maybe if he had been watching the shooter the way he is supposed to he would not stopped the shooter since he was aware of what the shooter was doing.

 

The issue of the T.O. stopping the shooter for a non-safety violation has been discussed at length before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if I lose count about how many rounds I fired and drop the hammer on the 6th empty chamber it is a SDQ?

 

 

Difference between dropping the hammer by pulling the trigger (firing), and lowering the hammer in order to decock without firing (decocking) seems critical here.

I'd just pull the trigger until it clicks enough times to satisfy my curiosity and then move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if I lose count about how many rounds I fired and drop the hammer on the 6th empty chamber it is a SDQ?

 

Or if I want to decock while in the of the firing string I have to stop, hold up my hand and wait on the T.O. to acknowledge me, ask my question, confer with the R. O. and finally give me permission?

 

Or maybe if he had been watching the shooter the way he is supposed to he would not stopped the shooter since he was aware of what the shooter was doing.

 

The issue of the T.O. stopping the shooter for a non-safety violation has been discussed at length before.

 

The answers to those questions are addressed in the rule "as written".

 

<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if I lose count about how many rounds I fired and drop the hammer on the 6th empty chamber it is a SDQ?

 

Or if I want to decock while in the of the firing string I have to stop, hold up my hand and wait on the T.O. to acknowledge me, ask my question, confer with the R. O. and finally give me permission?

 

Or maybe if he had been watching the shooter the way he is supposed to he would not stopped the shooter since he was aware of what the shooter was doing.

 

The issue of the T.O. stopping the shooter for a non-safety violation has been discussed at length before.

 

As much as you have said you run the timer. You should know the answer to that.

 

No probblem with the TO stopping the shooter. As he should have stopped him and as stated. Gave him a SDQ.

Being stopped and adding a little more time to do as TO did was better for the shooter than the SDQ.

 

Pulling the trigger in attempt to fire the gun is not the same thing as de-cocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the T/O COULD HAVE SDQ'd the shooter as soon as s/he de-cocked the revolver without "...a positive indication/ acknowledgement from the TO to the shooter."

 

Shooter ought to consider himself fortunate under the circumstances.

 

NO RESHOOT.

 

 

 

Can't say that I necessarily agree with the rule as written, but with the rule being what it is;

 

why is this a COULD HAVE and not a SHOULD HAVE?

 

Where does the discretion come in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't say that I necessarily agree with the rule as written, but with the rule being what it is;

 

why is this a COULD HAVE and not a SHOULD HAVE?

 

Where does the discretion come in?

 

"Could have" if one or both parties were aware of the rule as it applies in this instance.

Obviously that was not the case.

 

"Should have" would be better stated, I suppose...depending on the level of competition (everyone KNOWS that the rules don't apply at monthly/club matches). :rolleyes:

 

With a ½-dozen threads on all four Wires, two PM's and an email discussion with the ROC going re: the DE-COCKING regs, I was bound to mess up on at least ONE of them.

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Could have" if one or both parties were aware of the rule as it applies in this instance.

Obviously that was not the case.

 

"Should have" would be better stated, I suppose...depending on the level of competition (everyone KNOWS that the rules don't apply at monthly/club matches). :rolleyes:/>

 

With a ½-dozen threads on all four Wires, two PM's and an email discussion with the ROC going re: the DE-COCKING regs, I was bound to mess up on at least ONE of them.

 

:P/>

 

 

Well, I guess you are entitled to one every once in a while, or about as often as I am right. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Often when running the timer and I have a shooter start to reholster a cocked firearm I (the TO ) will yell "hammer". Now, for me this is enough to say that the "TO" gave the shooter permission to de-cock or get the hammer any other way that doesn't create a hazard.

12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Pulling the trigger in attempt to fire the gun is not the same thing as de-cocking.

 

 

What is the difference per SASS definition? Both require pulling the trigger and both lower the hammer onto a empty chamber. To me decocking is controlling the speed the hammer is lowered with use of the thumb. There has to be something I am missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the difference per SASS definition? Both require pulling the trigger and both lower the hammer onto a empty chamber. To me decocking is controlling the speed the hammer is lowered with use of the thumb. There has to be something I am missing.

 

The difference is if there happens to be a live round under the hammer pulling the trigger and letting the hammer fall with the spring force will discharge it. Lowering it softly will leave a live round under the hammer. Granted with a transfer bar safety it's still safe but with the original style guns it's a big safety issue. Although the RO counted 5 rounds from the gun the first rule of gun safety is to assume all guns are loaded until checked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the difference per SASS definition? Both require pulling the trigger and both lower the hammer onto a empty chamber. To me decocking is controlling the speed the hammer is lowered with use of the thumb. There has to be something I am missing.

 

YUP......There sure is........ :lol::rolleyes:

LG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, decocking lends to letting the hammer down on a live round...yes I know he shot 5 but there are 6 holes in the cylinder...pulling the trigger ensures the hammer is down on an empty cylinder or spent round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the difference per SASS definition? Both require pulling the trigger and both lower the hammer onto a empty chamber. To me decocking is controlling the speed the hammer is lowered with use of the thumb. There has to be something I am missing.

 

 

Well by pulling the trigger and letting the hammer fall you know that it isn't down on a live round (or at least it cuts the odds that it is by a whole lot). No one is perfect and everyone can miscount so it's just plain safer to do so. Also it's the way the rules are written and take less time to do than letting the hammer down slowly...

 

Bottom line is it isn't allowed under the rules so just don't do it unless you ask permission (and that is a lot of time if you do).

 

It's not a bad rule as it's the fastest way to do it anyways and does add safety for things without a transfer bar.

 

 

just my few cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO!

If the shooter still 'crys' about it. Inform the shooter about a SOG call.

LG

+1 :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course a live round under the hammer is SDQ but the O.P. stated it was a empty chamber. Decocking is probably the mark of a inexperienced shooter as it is much faster just to dryfire the gun and remove all doubt. I suppose if the reason for the rule is a hammer down on a live round in a Colt SAA and clones is dangerous shouldn't the shooter be stopped from shooting, D.Q. and required to either fire or remove the offending round from the gun or show empty chamber rather than continuing to run the risk of the gun falling out of the holster or the hammer being bumped causing the gun to discharge?

 

Just a thought of how practical some safety rules really are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO!

If the shooter still 'crys' about it. Inform the shooter about a SOG call.

LG

 

+1 :huh:

 

What exactly would be the basis under the rules for a "Spirit of the Game" violation??

 

REF: RO1 p.25.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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