Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

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

BJT

Shooting on the move

Recommended Posts

TG's and the convention. Air fare to San Antonio...$1,000.00, Taxi to and from $60. Hotel 4 nights $600.00. Food $ 300 to $400. Around $2,000 for a very lean attendance. Throw in the significant other and $$$$.

 

Time off from work, if your not retired.

 

Date was changed, to January instead of the Dec. Holidays. Caused some people to not attend.

 

Apathy caused by poor communication from SASS to the membership and TG's on why they changed the lever rule.

 

No real effort to seek out clubs not attending to see if they want to send a proxy vote.

 

How many clubs can afford to help subsidize their TG to attend? Otherwise it's on them. $2,000 will buy you a lot of shoots.

Ike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TG's and the convention. Air fare to San Antonio...$1,000.00, Taxi to and from $60. Hotel 4 nights $600.00. Food $ 300 to $400. Around $2,000 for a very lean attendance. Throw in the significant other and $$$$.

 

Time off from work, if your not retired.

 

Date was changed, to January instead of the Dec. Holidays. Caused some people to not attend.

 

Apathy caused by poor communication from SASS to the membership and TG's on why they changed the lever rule.

 

No real effort to seek out clubs not attending to see if they want to send a proxy vote.

 

How many clubs can afford to help subsidize their TG to attend? Otherwise it's on them. $2,000 will buy you a lot of shoots.

Ike

 

 

DING!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this thread is about...what????

 

Let me check the title...hang on.

 

...

 

...

 

Shooting on the Move.

 

Got it.

 

Phantom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i went outside and tried to shoot on the run with both a sxs and a 97.

Nothing scientific . Can it be done? Sure . Reloads not so much. You have to slow down to a shuffle or fast walk. It's easier with a 97.

Boils down to who is going to enforce the rule. If I'm the to I'm not going to be watching the shooters feet. My first concern will be on the shooters gun and upper body. If I'm in a position to see all that's even better.

I don't care if they keep the rule or go away from it as long as it's evenly enforced and doesn't favor one gun or the other

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, also, don't really care whether shooting "on the move" is allowed or not but firmly believe the way to prevent it if desired is by stage writing as opposed to writing more rules that undoubtedly will not be evenly enforced. I believe this "clarification" will bring about more problems than it will cure, in my humble opinion.

 

What's wrong with just allowing match directors to write stages that state "rifle must be shot with both fee behind box", "shotgun must be shot between two fence posts" or "pistols must be shot inside circle", etc.?

 

Why do "we" continue to feel the necessity to make this game more confusing and complicated that it really needs to be?

 

Big "official" match: write it into stages. Local match: who cares if they write it in or not. Easier and simpler than trying to train 30,000 spotters who only shoot 4 times a year and have never read any of the 3 books full of unnecessary rules that overlay one another.

 

If you don't thing spotters or TOs are qualified to know whether a gunfighter fired 1 shot or 2, what makes you think they can tell you how many feet were moved? :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, also, don't really care whether shooting "on the move" is allowed or not but firmly believe the way to prevent it if desired is by stage writing as opposed to writing more rules that undoubtedly will not be evenly enforced. I believe this "clarification" will bring about more problems than it will cure, in my humble opinion.

 

What's wrong with just allowing match directors to write stages that state "rifle must be shot with both fee behind box", "shotgun must be shot between two fence posts" or "pistols must be shot inside circle", etc.?

 

Why do "we" continue to feel the necessity to make this game more confusing and complicated that it really needs to be?

 

Big "official" match: write it into stages. Local match: who cares if they write it in or not. Easier and simpler than trying to train 30,000 spotters who only shoot 4 times a year and have never read any of the 3 books full of unnecessary rules that overlay one another.

 

If you don't thing spotters or TOs are qualified to know whether a gunfighter fired 1 shot or 2, what makes you think they can tell you how many feet were moved? :angry:

 

This particular portion of your comment is perhaps the most hated type of stage instruction I can think of for myself. More procedurals and miscues have been called over the circles and boxes drawn on the ground and floor than most anything else I can recall. "Through the window" or "from behind the table" with a proper explanation of what is and isn't acceptable before the stage is fine but foot faults and having to look down at a shooters feet is absolutely RIDICULOUS!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, under the new clarification would this be legal? The stage instructions said, "the shooter must use at least two openings.".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This particular portion of your comment is perhaps the most hated type of stage instruction I can think of for myself. More procedurals and miscues have been called over the circles and boxes drawn on the ground and floor than most anything else I can recall. "Through the window" or "from behind the table" with a proper explanation of what is and isn't acceptable before the stage is fine but foot faults and having to look down at a shooters feet is absolutely RIDICULOUS!!!

 

I actually agree with you on this one. It was just a quick example I grabbed. However, there are times when no other props are available or appropriate to the stage and they must be used. When used they should be of generous enough size that it's easy enough to tell if the shooter is in it without a "foot check".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, under the new clarification would this be legal? The stage instructions said, "the shooter must use at least two openings.".

 

Are you referring to the split pistols, foot jiggling, power factor, smoke production, costume requirements, rifle reloading, counting on "golden BBs" or lack of enthusiasm while saying starting line or what? :lol::lol: :lol: :lol::lol:

p.s. couldn't you have found a stage you shot better to use? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you referring to the split pistols, foot jiggling, power factor, smoke production, costume requirements, rifle reloading, counting on "golden BBs" or lack of enthusiasm while saying starting line or what? :lol::lol: :lol: :lol::lol:

p.s. couldn't you have found a stage you shot better to use? :P

:) The splitting of the pistols even though the stage instructions do not require it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) The splitting of the pistols even though the stage instructions do not require it.

That is NOT shooting while moving. It is shooting and moving. That is done all the time. If the shooter had drawn the first pistol and was moving toward the second window while shooting that would violate the "clarification." Is it really that hard for people to understand the prohibition against shooting while moving? (This is not intended as any kind of pejorative statement but is an actual question.) Very nice stage by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes unfortunately it is very hard to understand where the traveling rule ends and the shooting while moving clarification begins. This sits on top of the traveling rule and says "unless you move too much then penalize anyway..." I could make a video showing at least 4 or 5 different degrees of it as you shoot a single pistol on a normal stage, let alone the issues with the shotgun or rifle. If you asked 10 people you would likely get several different answers as to which one was "too much movement" under the new clarification. We have not even begun to see the unintended issues. Not enough imagination has been applied to what this does to any kind of movement not just the specific types of movement it was aimed at curtailing. Regular, ordinary stage designs without "Between A to B" are also going to suffer greatly under this.

 

Movement left or right to a shooting position where you need to adjust to see the targets because you started shooting a little too early to see all the targets in the sweep (like most of the window and door props common to any match), adjusting your stance during a string, or simple downrange movement to a shooting position can cause all manner of now theoretically prohibited "shooting while moving" even though no breaking of the actual traveling rule happens. If you don't "hesitate" someone will accuse you of shooting while moving as you arrive or depart the position. Just the ordinary shifting of feet while standing otherwise still during a string will now bring out the calls even though you didn't move both while the gun was cocked for any one shot. There will be spotters focusing on feet instead of targets and guns.

 

How will the forward movement stages with the shotgun typically done at Coosies or the Fort during WR be handled? What about the approach to the downrange pistol position? How much hesitation is necessary before engagement as targets become visible at a shooting position on any stage? How is the call going to get made?

 

Is specifically defining a shooting position with engagement between A and B even still technically allowable under the rules if the stage writer specifically states it? Because everyone has been enjoying it for years now and stage writers such as myself will be the ones taking the flack for removing it from our available stage design options.

 

These are just some of the things that now need answers before we all put on our matches over the next month because of the added complexity of the clarification. That's why the method we have been using all these years has been keeping everyone more or less happy.

 

This clarification breaks the balance between those who wanted more or less movement. It allowed more than some wanted, and less than others wanted.

 

I'm not asking all these questions just to be difficult, I'm asking because I love SASS and CAS and want to see it succeed. Rules that promote consistent calls are paramount going forward. This clarification as stated makes the call, an SDQ no less, very intent driven and in my opinion is too subject to the opinion of the person making the call.

 

Like the lever debate last time, it's not that we don't understand what is trying to be done, but the method chosen again involves too much determination of intent and is also based on a personal opinion of whether the degree of hesitation by the shooter was enough, or not, to justify a SDQ. This is not a recipe for consistent calls at matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the RO committee is???? Haven't heard from them.

 

As much as I feel we have other rules in place to protect unsafe gun handling. I believe the whole idea of the clarification is not to restrict us further but to prevent the road some of the members are going down. Good or bad is a matter of opinion.

 

EMN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is NOT shooting while moving. It is shooting and moving. That is done all the time. If the shooter had drawn the first pistol and was moving toward the second window while shooting that would violate the "clarification." Is it really that hard for people to understand the prohibition against shooting while moving? (This is not intended as any kind of pejorative statement but is an actual question.) Very nice stage by the way.

 

Yep. That is just drawing the gun out on the move.

Do that all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i went outside and tried to shoot on the run with both a sxs and a 97.

Nothing scientific . Can it be done? Sure . Reloads not so much. You have to slow down to a shuffle or fast walk. It's easier with a 97.

 

Correct, with practice you can get to point B and be finished and then start next gun sequence w/o further movement. Matt Black on recent video demonstrated this. BTW, his movement was left-right, his strong side. Hmmmm, he could probably do 'almost' as well if his movement was right-left. The 'almost' difference gets bigger with the rest of us.

 

Boils down to who is going to enforce the rule.

 

Very subjective to whom the shooter is shooting with. Some posses will allow it, others will band it. Best ask, or pick your TO wisely.

 

If I'm the to I'm not going to be watching the shooters feet. My first concern will be on the shooters gun and upper body. If I'm in a position to see all that's even better.

 

Then you (whomever) would not be doing your job properly in monitoring all aspects of the stage shooting and enforcing all equally. Some would get breaks and others would be??

 

 

I don't care if they keep the rule or go away from it as long as it's evenly enforced and doesn't favor one gun or the other

 

Or favor right hand vs left hand. Try running/walking-shooting to your weak direction and then put the targets more perpendicular to where you have to engage. Straight downrange is about the most neutral direction to both shooters.

 

As others have mentioned, stage writing can control this (and should). You can make it so the shooter has to get to get to Pt A/B/C (window, door, past heel mark in the sand, one foot behind table, etc.) Shooter can still draw pistol, put shells in open action and so forth,,,,, or not.

 

Something to practice (along with reloads, poppers and such) before a big match, if you are privy to knowing the stages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is NOT shooting while moving. It is shooting and moving. That is done all the time. If the shooter had drawn the first pistol and was moving toward the second window while shooting that would violate the "clarification." Is it really that hard for people to understand the prohibition against shooting while moving? (This is not intended as any kind of pejorative statement but is an actual question.) Very nice stage by the way.

+1

Now it seems that the OP is really gone away.

 

Nawlins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shooting on the move, this a western 3 gun video that I found and its hard to tell whether Bud is shooting the pistols and rifle SASS style or cocking as he is moving since that is legal in W3G with the restraint that if your moving with gun cocked not to have your finger on trigger , but at end of video with shotgun what he does is completely legal in SASS as he is walking he's firing on every step so the basket ball rule makes it legal as he is just taking one step and firing, it can be tricky cause if for some reason you dont fire your probably going to take a second step and get yourself a stage dq. I used W3G video because I could find it quickly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cinch, SASS#29433

The clarification didn't say if it was a leap year or not but other than that not too hard to understand. Shooting and moving okay. Hammer back and moving not so much... The corn fusing part is the basketball traveling rule! Those guys can get from the top of the key to the basket without dribbling the ball

 

Not a TG issue either as TG's are to vote their clubs wishes. If a club thinks a rule has worked all of these years and doesn't need to be changed ya can't blame the TG!!

 

Me, I wanted to make it mandatory to retrieve dropped rounds cuz it's safe and apparently a big issue everywhere... and it would be worth it to hear the opposite arguments and complaining on the wire ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anybody that was at the convention or member of the ROC answer this?

Do BOTH feet have to be planted to have a live round under a cocked hammer? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are seeing the crux of the issue Most Wanted. Since having both feet on the ground isn't supposed to be required, what is the crossover point between having a foot up, and moving while shooting?

 

You can't have both a traveling rule which by its definition allows limited movement AND a don't move rule. Which is it?

 

What you are asking is in the zone of what we want to know. As I see it after this clarification any time both feet aren't planted through an entire string you are now in mortal danger of a SDQ even though that goes against the leeway of the traveling rule, because they just rendered the condition of the hammer between steps irrelevant (to try to stop the more extreme movement), it's now a personal opinion call as to whether you were moving while shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I'm spending the morning checking out this and that on the internet....and I decide to see how my old pards are doing on the SASS Wire.

 

Lo and behold! BJT is stirring up a rules ruckus and has a weird avatar.

 

Deja vu is powerful in this one.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in total agreement with Bud and BJT. I thought I understood the old rule, and thought I understood the new rule on long guns, but the new,new long gun rule is going to cause problems IMHO. I an TOTALLY confused by the "clarification" on the basketball rule. What does it mean?? I sympathize with those writing rules as I wrote most of the WBAS rulebook, but this mess is obviously a rule looking for a reason.

DING! DING! DING!.....sheeeshhh.... I just finished this and the other thread just to be sure that I didn't miss anything. I did miss something... about an hour of my life. We (well, many of us) have seen this done safely and blindingly fast at the same time so smooth that the transition was seamless.

 

Further, having just finished a week long 3 gun clinic in that CA desert the whole idea that one can't shoot quickly and safely on the move now is just preposterous.

Let's quit picking nits. FCS, Happy Jack wrote the WBAS rule book and he doesn't get it: Badlands Bud has how many 7? World/Nat'l championships and BJT (Bud's Dad if you don't know) is one of the original's - goes back to like Wyatt Earp's days (miss ya! :) ) Phantom has been running a clock since they ran on shadows and we could go on.

 

If it takes more than a sentence to explain it ( DOWNRANGE IS SAFE) then it's not a rule- it's an argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Touchdown! We have a winner.

 

Why are we dwelling on this movement issue? If a shooter moves both feet and keeps the muzzle safe as he shoots...........................WHO CARES.

 

We have other rules to deal with safety issues and the travel rule is unnecessary. Think about it.........how many shooting disciplines do not allow a shooter to shift his stance or move to better engage targets?

 

 

Maybe we need to shift away from the movement rule................... rather than try and intensify it.

 

JM (who plans to creep up on Phantom in a couple of weeks)

 

Good point, but maybe the rules that exist to attempt to stop safety violations (like shooting on the move and picking up dropped rounds) should be changed to a new category. SASS can strongly suggest you not pick up a dropped round, and strongly suggest you have both feet planted when you shoot and don't move around. I think that should be enough to guide inexperienced shooters along the correct path without hampering the friskier ones.

 

If you must attach a penalty to it, make it just increase the severity of whatever safety violation you commit while doing the things that SASS strongly suggests you don't do. For instance, if you break the 170 without sweeping anyone, it's a SDQ. If you do it while traveling or retrieving a dropped round, up it to a MDQ.

 

If they don't like "Strongly Suggested" as a violation category, someone should be able to come up with a catchier name. Penalty multipliers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is NOT shooting while moving. It is shooting and moving. That is done all the time. If the shooter had drawn the first pistol and was moving toward the second window while shooting that would violate the "clarification." Is it really that hard for people to understand the prohibition against shooting while moving? (This is not intended as any kind of pejorative statement but is an actual question.) Very nice stage by the way.

Tell me what the penalty is for shooting while moving. Book and Page please....

 

Stan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RO1 page 28 (Pocket RO card). About the middle of side 1 it says "Changing location or leaving the designated loading area with a cocked gun/gun w/hammer down on live round" and lists it as a SDQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now look up the definition of movement......cocking and firing before moving both feet is not illegal......my 97 is cocked when I leave the loading table every time.....

 

Stan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is beginning to sound like the "no shooting while moving" is coming from insurance provisions that SASS may have in place with insurers. It is too easy to simply go to the "penalize the unsafe act" instead of trying to prevent (or even define and detect) shooting while moving.

 

If we could just get to where we penalize truly unsafe acts, and dump all the "but we don't like this action" penalties, we might just solve:

* shooting while moving

* picking up dropped or catching ejected rounds

* hammer position on firearm when bringing empty shotgun to firing line

* closed long gun when done firing it

 

and probably several other "we don't like it" penalties.

 

Good luck, GJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell me what the penalty is for shooting while moving. Book and Page please....

 

Stan

Show me the rule that says you can move while shooting. (Not trying to be argumentative, merely a tongue in cheek question.) We (the SASS family) can argue about this until we are blue in the face but if a shooter is shooting while moving it is an SDQ. Having been at the meeting and heard the arguments and having read this and the other thread on this topic it seems there is a common element in the pro-shoot while moving group. They are applying the same arguments that they used to justify getting around the basketball rule and create the shooting while moving theory in the first place. The question at the summit was basically simple. Is shooting while moving allowed in SASS? If not then clarify that it is not allowed. If so, then clarify that it is allowed. (Personally, that is all I was seeking. I didn't care what the answer was I just wanted clarity.) Despite the arguments made the past year or so that it is "clear" that shooting while moving is (was) allowed that is simply not so. I talked to Tex and Tex said no. (People should go back and read his June, 2014 editorial in the Chronicle on shooting while moving to see this is not a new issue.) I talked to Hipshot and he said yes. I talked to one member of the ROC who said yes and another member of the ROC who said no. I also talked to a lot of average shooters at several shoots around the country. The matter was not clear except to those advocating it. FWIW I'll give my opinion of what we had. We had a rule(s) that facially prohibited shooting while moving. (The basketball rule, safe to move rules.) Then several people came up with what were, in essence, defenses to getting penalized for apparent violations of the basketball rule. E.g., "TO, you are getting an SDQ for moving while you were shooting." Shooter, "I wasn't moving while shooting. What I was doing is plant, shoot; plant, shoot; plant, shoot." The concern expressed by many was that if a shooter is doing the plant-shoot (or the 97 shuffle) he is walking, and if he is doing it very quickly he is running. The "clarification" has removed that defense to the application of the basketball rule. People, however, seem to be continuing to assert the same, now invalid, defenses. People also seem to be asking about how is the TO supposed to see a shooter's feet to see if they are violating the basketball rule. The same argument was raised at the summit about shooting while moving. How is the TO supposed to see the shooter's feet, the lever (pump, whatever), the hammer and know when the hammer started to fall, feet moved or planted, etc. So, that argument is no different than what already existed. I am sure the ROC will read these threads and then do some additional clarifications. Some have suggested a video. That might not be a bad idea. The one that Smokestack posted was very good at illustrating what is allowed. Maybe the ROC needs to do a few more and show what is and is not allowed. Sorry for being so long winded but I thought I would just give my perspective of what caused the question to be raised and what was discussed at the summit. I'll sign off now and do not intend to engage in any arguments about this post. The rule is what it is. I will deal with it just like I will continue to deal with the dropped round rule or some other rules that may give me heartburn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larsen , if I am walking up to shoot my 97 with a round on the carrier and when I get to position B I slam fire the gun with one foot planted then fire second shot with both feet planted. End of stage. Did I just get a sdq

 

Basically do both feet have to be planted to shoot? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ill fire my double with one boot planted, and second barrel goes as the other boot is planted, and run like hell as empties are falling out. Guess i'm dqd along with most wanted. There either needs to be a waiting period or, forget the whole thing like before. Back when the rules were clear. Take a step, fine. Lift the other boot, "two steps", your done. I'm fine with a "timed waiting period". I'm fine with shooting like we did. Wish I knew how to practice right now. WR coming up and all......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larsen , if I am walking up to shoot my 97 with a round on the carrier and when I get to position B I slam fire the gun with one foot planted then fire second shot with both feet planted. End of stage. Did I just get a sdq

 

Basically do both feet have to be planted to shoot? Thanks

Just read Pettifoggers reply and the way I read it is no you are not penalized as described, but if you had planted the second foot and lifted the first then fired the second round then yes it would be a penality, the way I read it if the first foot stays planted and you shoot the required rounds at that position without moving said foot you will be fine, but if you do the plant shoot plant shoot plant shoot that would be a violation. Just my opinion take it for what it is worth.

 

K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I thought. You can't show me the appropriate penalty for the indiscretion.

 

Until further clarification is provided all of this is a waste of electrons......

 

By the way PWB stated more than once that shooting and moving was allowed by the traveling rule. Guess you don't remember that.

 

Stan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its really not that hard to tell if someone takes the extra step doing the 97 walk where it would be a penalty, it would be dang near impossible to do the 97 walk running

 

The basketball rule is a good thing in a sport that does not allow shooting while moving, most shooting sports allow shooter to move while shooting some really want you too, part of the sport, I dont understand why folks want to dumb down what were doing even more.It's like the redundant rules like the dropped shells which makes no sense at all. If folks cant be trusted to do things safely maybe they should not be trusted to shoot.

 

Regards AO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I thought. You can't show me the appropriate penalty for the indiscretion.

 

Until further clarification is provided all of this is a waste of electrons......

 

By the way PWB stated more than once that shooting and moving was allowed by the traveling rule. Guess you don't remember that.

 

Stan

Yes I do remember that PWB said that and have had conversations with him about it. PWB is a knowledgeable voice, but he is only one voice and other members of the ROC and WB disagreed with that position. At this point it makes no difference that shooting and moving "was allowed" it isn't anymore. The penalty is located in the same section that authorizes shooting while moving.

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.