McCandless Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 It hasn't been all that long ago, but then... if it happened before yesterday I can't remember things anyway. The dropped round/ dead round/ rule. I'm NOT arguing it. It's the rule. I just want to know... why? What happened to cause this rule to be put into effect? There were already rules about unsafe gun handling, 170 rules, sweeping rules, and hopefully, a TO right behind you paying attention. Why would somebody want to bend over and pick up a round from the ground to fire it? Just grab another from the belt. If you don't have one in the belt, it would take you more time to get the round off the ground anyway! (why bother?) Plus, if try to do it unsafely, your stage and possibly the match is over for you. If the round fell on the table in front of you, and it's actually within arms length... what's wrong with picking it up and using it? If you keep within the 170, don't sweep anybody, handle the gun safely... you're fine. If you don't, you're DQ'd. Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing the rule, I'm not lobbying for it to be changed... I'm not even mildly complaining about it. I play the way it's written. Just curious, on a cold morning with nothing else to occupy my mind at the moment....(that's right, besides the voices in my head, I haven't got two worthwhile thoughts to rub together), My only question is: wha' happened? How come this rule was needed to be layered in on top of other rules already there? I'll go crawl back under my rock now. Thanks, Duc (do Duc's live under rocks??) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUNICA KID,SASS #68454 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 +1 on what McCandles said . Not arguing and will play the game as meant. But it seems like a stacking of rules.I understand the fear of a shooter sweeping someone (been there) no comfort looking down a 12 ga bore, but we have a rule in place for that. We make many decisions during the course of a stage not to sweep someone (when to draw pistol, how to care guns from Lt to Ult etc., etc.) I think the decision not to pick up shell out of reach or that may put you in a position to sweep a person is not much different. If a person takes the chance an fails penalty. During the course of a stage we make many decisions I just fail to see how deciding to retreve or not needs a seperate rule. After reading McCandles post it just made sense to me because as long as this rule has been in affect an as simple as it is it sure seems hard to understand to alot of people were as SWEEP SOMEONE DQ be stage or match very understandable. Just my view not complaien, l am just makin a observation on a rule I see discussed here often. NK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rance - SASS # 54090 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 It might be.. again... I ain't sure... Fer the ONE time... the gun IS loaded and it goes off... and they'd broke the 170 reachin' fer their dropped ammo.... and the barrel was pointed at ME... Rance Thinkin' I like the safety aspect of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Slim SASS #24733 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Doubling up on safety is never a bad thing. Some guys may THINK they can safely retrieve a dropped round, but be wrong. This way we all are a bit safer as they are not even allowed to try. Just one of those "nip it in the bud" kinda things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Eyed Kid, SASS # 37263 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 This is just my opinion since I've only been "playing" cowboy for 15 years........I believe the "powers to be" made this rule figuring the average shooter could not safely retrieve dropped shells on the ground without sweeping someone else; so the rule was made to protect ourselves from ourselves. Yet, I wish this rule was not in effect at last Octobers Mason-Dixon Stampede NE Regional; true story that happened to ME. Had to pick up our shotgun and move to another position to shoot 4 rounds. Grab my shotgun, take off like a bat outta h*ll, grabbinig 2 rounds from my belt as I was moving. Jam on the brakes at the shooting postion and double load my '97 ( like the old Evil Roy way) fire the first two and reach down to my belt and don't feel anymore rounds. I finally look down and all my other rounds had popped out of my belt when I hit the brakes ( probably helped by lossening them too much in the loops for an easy grab and my newly acquired larger stomach) Well, after 8 stages, there went my clean match, had to take the 2 shotgun misses. I have no doubt that I could have safely taken a knee and picked up 2 shells to still have a clean match with my shotgun pointed downrange but our rules say no. I'll admit I was alittle po'd; they were my only misses for the match......oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fillmore Coffins, SASS #7884 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 As far as I recall, it's always been the rule. Implementing said rule has never caused an unsafe situation. It seems to work. Fillmore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I tend to agree with the rule. No doubt many shooters could safely retrieve a dropped round, and in order to keep a clean match, the time spent would be worth it. But for the average Joe Shootsalot under the timer, trying to hurry, why risk it? Rule we have seems to work, so if it aint broke, dont fix it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 It hasn't been all that long ago, but then... if it happened before yesterday I can't remember things anyway. The dropped round/ dead round/ rule. I'm NOT arguing it. It's the rule. I just want to know... why? What happened to cause this rule to be put into effect? There were already rules about unsafe gun handling, 170 rules, sweeping rules, and hopefully, a TO right behind you paying attention. Why would somebody want to bend over and pick up a round from the ground to fire it? Just grab another from the belt. If you don't have one in the belt, it would take you more time to get the round off the ground anyway! (why bother?) Plus, if try to do it unsafely, your stage and possibly the match is over for you. If the round fell on the table in front of you, and it's actually within arms length... what's wrong with picking it up and using it? If you keep within the 170, don't sweep anybody, handle the gun safely... you're fine. If you don't, you're DQ'd. Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing the rule, I'm not lobbying for it to be changed... I'm not even mildly complaining about it. I play the way it's written. Just curious, on a cold morning with nothing else to occupy my mind at the moment....(that's right, besides the voices in my head, I haven't got two worthwhile thoughts to rub together), My only question is: wha' happened? How come this rule was needed to be layered in on top of other rules already there? I'll go crawl back under my rock now. Thanks, Duc (do Duc's live under rocks??) As far as I recall, it's always been the rule. Implementing said rule has never caused an unsafe situation. It seems to work. Fillmore Why. One situation is the shooter has a clean match going has no ammo on his belt and needs THAT round. One of the arguements at the Summit was that the existing rule works, so why change it. The reason you have rigid and redundant safety rules is not to deal with common sense situations. It is for those that aren't using common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 we have a TO that is supposed to be watching, maybe we better not be allowed to turn perpendicular to the line of fire, might draw a pistol at the wrong time, or we shouldn't let people move sideways with a long gun, they mite break the 170. maybe we oughta stop keeping time too,,,, somebody might feel bad..... we have a 170 rule, why have a rule to make sure you don't break another rule..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCandless Posted January 23, 2014 Author Share Posted January 23, 2014 Why. One situation is the shooter has a clean match going has no ammo on his belt and needs THAT round. One of the arguments at the Summit was that the existing rule works, so why change it. The reason you have rigid and redundant safety rules is not to deal with common sense situations. It is for those that aren't using common sense. Forgot about that one, Larsen. Reminds me of the last stage of a State Match I had going clean, then a percussion cap popped off of my second pistol... I don't know how long it really took... felt like an eternity at the time... to recap that danged thing and then fire. But got it clean! Told you I don't have two worthwhile thoughts to rub together! (still looking for that rock to crawl back under) Duc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 we have a TO that is supposed to be watching, maybe we better not be allowed to turn perpendicular to the line of fire, might draw a pistol at the wrong time, or we shouldn't let people move sideways with a long gun, they mite break the 170. maybe we oughta stop keeping time too,,,, somebody might feel bad..... we have a 170 rule, why have a rule to make sure you don't break another rule..... I guess that is what I try to keep asking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 All of the pro/con arguments were hashed out at the TG Summit (so I hear...I was unable to attend) regarding agenda item #2, which would have DELETED the MSV for retrieving dropped ammo. The PREemptive penalty for retrieving dropped/ejected ammo came out of one of the earliest TG Summits...at that time, it was being argued whether to allow retrieval from anywhere above the height of a "standard hay bale". The matter was settled by the TG's when they voted to consider "dropped is dropped @ 6" or 6')...and the MSV penalty was attached. FWIW - Back in those days, we actually shot from kneeling and prone positions and regularly staged SG ammo in buckets, boxes, spittoons, saddlebags, ... etc. Dropping a round on the ground was often the same distance as from standing position to a table top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCandless Posted January 23, 2014 Author Share Posted January 23, 2014 All of the pro/con arguments were hashed out at the TG Summit (so I hear...I was unable to attend) regarding agenda item #2, which would have DELETED the MSV for retrieving dropped ammo. The PREemptive penalty for retrieving dropped/ejected ammo came out of one of the earliest TG Summits...at that time, it was being argued whether to allow retrieval from anywhere above the height of a "standard hay bale". The matter was settled by the TG's when they voted to consider "dropped is dropped @ 6" or 6')...and the MSV penalty was attached. FWIW - Back in those days, we actually shot from kneeling and prone positions and regularly staged SG ammo in buckets, boxes, spittoons, saddlebags, ... etc. Dropping a round on the ground was often the same distance as from standing position to a table top. Thanks PW, I knew there was someone who could give me a little of the history behind it! Thanks again, get all healed up and be well! McC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Yer welcome & Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace_of_Hearts Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 This is just my opinion since I've only been "playing" cowboy for 15 years........I believe the "powers to be" made this rule figuring the average shooter could not safely retrieve dropped shells on the ground without sweeping someone else; so the rule was made to protect ourselves from ourselves. Yet, I wish this rule was not in effect at last Octobers Mason-Dixon Stampede NE Regional; true story that happened to ME. Had to pick up our shotgun and move to another position to shoot 4 rounds. Grab my shotgun, take off like a bat outta h*ll, grabbinig 2 rounds from my belt as I was moving. Jam on the brakes at the shooting postion and double load my '97 ( like the old Evil Roy way) fire the first two and reach down to my belt and don't feel anymore rounds. I finally look down and all my other rounds had popped out of my belt when I hit the brakes ( probably helped by lossening them too much in the loops for an easy grab and my newly acquired larger stomach) Well, after 8 stages, there went my clean match, had to take the 2 shotgun misses. I have no doubt that I could have safely taken a knee and picked up 2 shells to still have a clean match with my shotgun pointed downrange but our rules say no. I'll admit I was alittle po'd; they were my only misses for the match......oh well. You could have safely staged all your guns....... Returned to your cart....... Retrieved more shells....... and then returned to the firing line to save your clean match..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marauder SASS #13056 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 It was roughly 10 years ago that the rule was implemented. To correct one false statement made, "Doubling up on safety" CAN actually reduce safety. You can make things more complex and end up with a more unsafe situation. To clarify, it is always good to have two to three layers of safety, but if you attempt to add more, you will actually increase risks. Think of how many times folks got confused due to having an empty cartridge essentially stove-piped in their gun. Then realized it later. Jumping back and forth to make a safe situation "safer" then possibly cocking their pistol. Now how safe are you - while you are distracted by something that is essentially safe - an empty gun with an open action with an empty shell - and end up with a distracted shooter with a loaded, cocked single action revolver.... Definitely went from a minor concern to a major risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.