Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

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

Branchwater Jack SASS #88854

Rule change?

Recommended Posts

 

 

Unfortunately as we've witnessed, this will be virtually impossible to call and enforce. So, it probably makes darn little difference anyway except to the poor bugger who won't appeal a call having done it the other way at their club all year.

just call it as per the official written June2014 rule.

 

Please post your definition of 'discard' and then give some sort of justification for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=223280

 

see post #6

Some of y'all get it...some don't & are operating on false assumptions

 

That's why I posted some time back that the verbiage for the rule changes would NOT be up to a "WAHR" discussion and vote.

http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=222647&page=7

(post #211 on page SEVEN)

 

 

I'm outa here

No one here thought it was up to the WAHR discussion and vote. We all thought rather that Misty's post #129. And yours to wit:

Posted 29 May 2014 - 05:40 PM

Misty Moonshine, on 29 May 2014 - 1:53 PM, said:snapback.png

 

Please see my post above. The rule, as passed by the TG's and clarified by the ROC is the rule. There is nothing to settle at EOT- the final statement has been stated. We have TGs and an RO Committee to serve as intended. Tex's editorial doesn't change that- the Wild Bunch hasn't "decreed" anything.

 

Nothin to see, folks.

 

THANK YOU, MISTY!

 

Thanking her for underscoring the rule as printed was, in fact, the rule. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a confusion, right? And those of us too dense to 'get it' would just shuffle on to more important topics like "The Drivel Goes On".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey!!!! I represent that remark!!! Drivel keeps us sane and helps keep some of us smiling!! least we dunt change the rules over there!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't specify who "got it" and who hasn't (yet)...sorry if you thought that was aimed at you.

 

Just commenting that all of the post-editorial conjecture and "suggestions" aren't going to have any more influence than a month +'s worth of email "discussion" off-Wire and out of 'public' view.

 

'nuff said from this quarter.

(I HATE that phrase)

...apparently NOT.

 

<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey!!!! I represent that remark!!! Drivel keeps us sane and helps keep some of us smiling!! least we dunt change the rules over there!!

well.... shuffle on, Dude.... ;):lol::D nothin' to see here anyway. It was all a mirage....oh listen! I hear a cork in a bottle of single barrel.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:P:P :P :P:P:D:D:D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't specify who "got it" and who hasn't (yet)...sorry if you thought that was aimed at you.

 

Just commenting that all of the post-editorial conjecture and "suggestions" aren't going to have any more influence than a month +'s worth of email "discussion" off-Wire and out of 'public' view.

 

'nuff said from this quarter.

(I HATE that phrase)

 

<_<

I know I don't 'get it'.

 

I followed all the threads you posted here and on almost every associated thread. I read your comments plus those you were responding to.

 

I'm in the same boat as BK. First I thought I knew and understood the new rule, then I thought Tex had changed it, then I thought Misty's comment on the Tex thread was the final word. Now the rule as written directly contradicts that and is back to what Tex said. I don't know what the 'verbiage' comment you made means. I just want to know what to call and have that stay fairly stable for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=223280

 

see post #6

Some of y'all get it...some don't & are operating on false assumptions

 

That's why I posted some time back that the verbiage for the rule changes would NOT be up to a "WAHR" discussion and vote.

http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=222647&page=7

(post #211 on page SEVEN)

 

 

I'm outa here

PWB -

 

While there seems to be a lot of posturing here, I'd like to believe that an issue that raises this much concern would be addressed by the ROC. I'm pretty sure that many of us think we could re-word it better, but if it gets changed, I'd hope the committee would opt for clear language that removes any chance for subjectivity. Civil input should be welcomed and considered. Assurances of a resolution (posted here on the WHAR) might cut the legs out of a thread like this for a while.

 

CR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the new new rule wasn't ROC doing, at least tha's my take on it......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I don't 'get it'.

 

I followed all the threads you posted here and on almost every associated thread. I read your comments plus those you were responding to.

 

I'm in the same boat as BK. First I thought I knew and understood the new rule, then I thought Tex had changed it, then I thought Misty's comment on the Tex thread was the final word. Now the rule as written directly contradicts that and is back to what Tex said. I don't know what the 'verbiage' comment you made means. I just want to know what to call and have that stay fairly stable for a while.

I'm certain PaleWolf and Misty gave us information in good faith. They both would have had this newest change pushed at them too.

This ordeal reminds me of the scene in The wizard of Oz when toto pushes aside the curtain. Seems like the Great and Powerful TGs, ROC, and CEO are controlled by..... You get the picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anything changed since we all were so clear on the "action closed" rule?

http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=215737&page=1

 

Have you READ the latest 19.6 version of the RO1 ???

 

PWB -

 

While there seems to be a lot of posturing here,

I'd like to believe that an issue that raises this much concern would be addressed by the ROC.

I'm pretty sure that many of us think we could re-word it better, but if it gets changed,

'd hope the committee would opt for clear language that removes any chance for subjectivity.

Civil input should be welcomed and considered.

Assurances of a resolution (posted here on the WHAR) might cut the legs out of a thread like this for a while.

...

 

Tried that...thought it was settled...failed in the attempt.

Rule was changed...decisions reversed...

 

Carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure what Misty spoke was what she believed to be the truth at the time.

 

Things change.

 

As Obi-Wan says, it is the truth, from a certain point of view.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if a shooter clears his long gun and it's open when it leaves his hand but closes subsequently, it's a no call. If a shooter clears his long gun and deliberately closes it, say to restage a double vertically, it's an MSV. Correct? Calls about brass and rounds haven't changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all sincerity when is the gun "discarded"?

 

Stan

Once it has left a shooter's hand. Before then, you are in the process of discarding.

 

I have no rule to back this, but just going by the old Dictionary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once it has left a shooter's hand. Before then, you are in the process of discarding.

 

I have no rule to back this, but just going by the old Dictionary.

Well...that's one opinion.

 

Thanks!

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've followed this discussion and am still thoroughly confused. Here is the rule as printed in the version quoted by Pale Wolf.

17. Long guns will be discarded with their actions left open and the magazine/barrels empty at
the conclusion of each shooting string. A 10-second minor safety penalty will be assessed if
the firearm is not discarded “open and empty.” This condition may be corrected prior to the
next round being fired. If the long gun is the last firearm used, it must be cleared prior to it
leaving the shooters hand(s) at the unloading table. This does not apply to guns shot out of
sequence and made “safe” and then restaged. If the action of a long gun closes after being
discarded open and empty, the shooter will, at the conclusion of the stage, show it to be clear
to the TO or a spotter. Appropriate penalties will be applied if it was not clear.
Does this mean a 10 second penalty is awarded no matter what, unless corrected before the next firearm is used and other penalties may apply? That's the way I read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

unless it is clarified, I'll go by, as long as it is not closed intentionally....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a mind reader, ask my wife, she will attest to that fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Have you READ the latest 19.6 version of the RO1 ???

 

 

 

Yes I have.

The question still stands....

What has changed?

1- Are we now going back to determining if, in fact, the action is closed? (Which I thought we got rid of)

2 - Are TO's now expected to insist on "opening" an action if closed? Does the TO have discretion to immediately determine if a prop caused the action to close (ie: scabbard) and make a "no call" if it did or must the shooter return and open the action regardless? (It isn't technically "discarded" until the shooter takes his hand off it or can they just throw it down/in and claim prop failure if it closes?)

3 - If an empty is found in a closed long gun at end of a stage is there a total of 2 minor safeties.... One for the action not being opened at the end of the shooting string and one for the empty case that is ejected upon opening?

 

I'm not trying to make the pond any muddier, just trying to determine the facts before I press the start button on the timer at the next shoot.

I really don't care what the rule is...... I just want to know what the rule is....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admit that I'm usually the slowest shooter on a posse, but at a recent match, at the end of the stage, my rifle was restaged with the lever/action closed, for the first time ever. Oh my! The RO and I checked it, and it was empty, guess that was "prima facia" proof that when I re-staged it, I had levered the last empty out and "discarded" it "open and empty".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...that's one opinion.

 

Thanks!

 

;)

Don't misread me.

 

I didn't say whether or not I liked it. Or whether or not I wished it that way or not.

 

Or even if I thought it was enforcable or not.

 

I have used the previous new ruling on several ocassions in the past six month with great results.

 

Just that is how the change of wording reads to me.

 

Especially when you put the wording, the rule, and everything else, into context.

 

We are all clouded by our own previous conceptions. I try to have an open mind and clear those out when I read it, word for word, that is how I read it.

 

This also shows what is wrong with this.

 

Everyone is going to have an opinion until they are satisfied with an official answer or they get one they personally like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the 'conclusion of the discard' can be taken as anytime up to when the next firearm in the stage shooting sequence is fired. That way, the shooter can go back and open/clear the long gun. Hmmm, we are rather rigtht back where we started before the new/newnew/newnewnnew rule.

 

Or we can go with when it leaves the shooters control/hand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have.

ALL of them??...including the reinstatement of the MSV for a closed action???

 

The question still stands....

What has changed?

1- Are we now going back to determining if, in fact, the action is closed? (Which I thought we got rid of)

Definitions were added to the "Glossary of Terms" in the RO1.

 

2 - Are TO's now expected to insist on "opening" an action if closed? Does the TO have discretion to immediately determine if a prop caused the action to close (ie: scabbard) and make a "no call" if it did or must the shooter return and open the action regardless? (It isn't technically "discarded" until the shooter takes his hand off it or can they just throw it down/in and claim prop failure if it closes?)

3 - If an empty is found in a closed long gun at end of a stage is there a total of 2 minor safeties.... One for the action not being opened at the end of the shooting string and one for the empty case that is ejected upon opening?

MSV's can be "stacked up"... what does the RULE say?

 

 

I'm not trying to make the pond any muddier, just trying to determine the facts before I press the start button on the timer at the next shoot.

I really don't care what the rule is...... I just want to know what the rule is....

Most of it is in the latest edits...no further "interpretation" should be needed...I would advise assuming nothing other than what is actually IN WRITING...for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

3 - If an empty is found in a closed long gun at end of a stage is there a total of 2 minor safeties.... One for the action not being opened at the end of the shooting string and one for the empty case that is ejected upon opening?

MSV's can be "stacked up"... what does the RULE say?

 

 

 

Oh snap.

 

You telling me...

 

MSV for not leaving open and empty and another MSV for empty on the chamber.

 

Whoa...that doesn't sound right at all, does it?

 

Otherwise what if it is discarded open but not empty. That does not meet the definition of open AND empty. But you aren't going to award 2 MSV for that now. Are we now?

 

This just got weired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MSV for not leaving open and empty and another MSV for empty on the chamber.

 

Whoa...that can't be...

 

Otherwise what if it is discarded open but not empty. That does not meet the definition of open AND empty. But you aren't going to award 2 MSV for that.

 

This just got weired.

 

READ the MSV list on page 24 of the RO1 (the as yet uncorrected typo).

 

IF the shooter fails to "discard" the long gun "open AND empty" (i.e. "at the end of the shooting string"), there WILL BE at least one EMPTY round remaining (the brass/hull from the last shot fired)...that certainly looks like TWO MSVs from here...

 

+ any unfired rounds (SDQ if in the chamber) if inadvertently "overloaded" at the LT...

+ MISS(ES) if any unfired round(s) are in the gun because of miscount on the number actually loaded vs those used to engage & hit targets.

 

This just got "WIRED".

 

 

 

FOR SALE: ONE (slightly used) BLACK RO INSTRUCTOR PIN.

 

:ph34r:

 

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the Jedi master lost the blue jeans argument at the Summit, so should we assume the Jedi master will change the dress rules shortly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

READ the MSV list on page 24 of the RO1 (the as yet uncorrected typo).

 

IF the shooter fails to "discard" the long gun "open AND empty" (i.e. "at the end of the shooting string"), there WILL BE at least one EMPTY round remaining (the brass/hull from the last shot fired)...that certainly looks like TWO MSVs from here...

 

+ any unfired rounds (SDQ if in the chamber) if inadvertently "overloaded" at the LT...

+ MISS(ES) if any unfired round(s) are in the gun because of miscount on the number actually loaded vs those used to engage & hit targets.

 

This just got "WIRED".

 

 

 

FOR SALE: ONE (slightly used) BLACK RO INSTRUCTOR PIN.

 

:ph34r:

 

 

:P

. I honestly can't believe I missed that. So hung up on when it was discarded, i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all sincerity when is the gun "discarded"?

 

Stan

Great question...by the book (new new book)it would be when it leaves control as 'discarded' is past tense. Therefore, it seems entirely reasonable to say that a closed action (1MSV) on an empty (1MSV) -both separate awards- are a cumulative 20 which would even be assessed on a re-shoot.

 

Further, the action MUST close on its own after control is final and the act of discarding is complete. So an action closed ON THE WAY to the re-staging is clearly an MSV

 

Guess that little ditty better be part of the 1st safety meeting @ EOT because absolutely no one who may be running a clock knows that now..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh snap.

 

You telling me...

 

MSV for not leaving open and empty and another MSV for empty on the chamber.

 

Whoa...that doesn't sound right at all, does it?

 

Otherwise what if it is discarded open but not empty. That does not meet the definition of open AND empty. But you aren't going to award 2 MSV for that now. Are we now?

 

This just got weired.

If you discard the gun closed you earn a MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation prior to using the next gun)

If you discard the gun open (Read glossary of terms for open action) but an empty still in the gun then you earn a MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation before the next gun is used)

If you discard the gun closed (Read glossary of terms for closed action) and an empty in the gun then you earn TWO (2) MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation prior to using the next gun)

If you discard the gun open with a live round on the carrier you earn a MSV.

If you discard the gun closed with a live round in the chamber then you earn a SDQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you discard the gun closed you earn a MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation prior to using the next gun)

If you discard the gun open (Read glossary of terms for open action) but an empty still in the gun then you earn a MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation before the next gun is used)

If you discard the gun closed (Read glossary of terms for closed action) and an empty in the gun then you earn TWO (2) MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation prior to using the next gun)

If you discard the gun open with a live round on the carrier you earn a MSV.

If you discard the gun closed with a live round in the chamber then you earn a SDQ.

 

Note to self - Examine closed gun closely at end of stage to determine open/closed state as defined in glossary of terms. And make sure no one touched it that might have changed the open/closed state it was in when discarded.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you discard the gun open (Read glossary of terms for open action) but an empty still in the gun then you earn a MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation before the next gun is used)

If you discard the gun closed (Read glossary of terms for closed action) and an empty in the gun then you earn TWO (2) MSV. (assuming you don't correct the situation prior to using the next gun)

If you discard the gun open with a live round on the carrier you earn a MSV.

If you discard the gun closed with a live round in the chamber then you earn a SDQ.

Reads to me like... If a gun is not discarded open AND empty, you get a MSV. It does not read or. So your first and third lines should read 2 MSV.

 

I hope I am wrong, and I have been before. But AND is a big bit different than OR.

 

RO1 pg 24 MSV penalty

 

Failure to discard long guns opena dn empty (and not corrected before using the next firearm

 

Pocket RO card reads the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the "shag carpet rule" protest at the OR State match a few years ago...the shooter lost that one and almost got MDQd for his followup comment to the MD upon being advised that the MSV would stand "as assessed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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