Hoss Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Dualist shoots 5 out of pistol. Cocks it again. I tell him pistol is dry. He starts to decock, with gun pointed downrange. I told him he can't decock, has to just pull trigger. He wound up letting hammer go, it free fell probably 1/4 of the way. (Shooter rode it down 3/4 of the way) I knew he had just shot 5 out of the pistol, and was not decocking because he had drawn at the wrong place or something. I made it a no-call, but have been wondering if it should have been a penalty (SDQ) What say the camp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 What says the RULE? 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 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. SHB p.23/RO1 V.21.6 p.16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 You could/should have simply allowed him to de-cock the revolver to safely holster it. NO CALL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I view the "no decocking" rule as avoiding a situation in which the shooter would end up with the hammer at rest on a live round if the shooter had loaded six rounds in the revolver. Requiring the shooter to use the trigger to drop the hammer on the sixth chamber (with the muzzle pointed in a safe direction) solves that problem. If the shooter lowers the hammer part of the way it retards the hammer fall, defeating the prophylactic effect of the rule. I might be inclined to allow the shooter to cock and snap the revolver six more times to ensure that there is not a live round in that sixth chamber but I believe that the shooter bought a SDQ as soon as he released the hammer from the full cock position with his thumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 17 minutes ago, Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667 said: I view the "no decocking" rule as avoiding a situation in which the shooter would end up with the hammer at rest on a live round if the shooter had loaded six rounds in the revolver. Requiring the shooter to use the trigger to drop the hammer on the sixth chamber (with the muzzle pointed in a safe direction) solves that problem. If the shooter lowers the hammer part of the way it retards the hammer fall, defeating the prophylactic effect of the rule. I might be inclined to allow the shooter to cock and snap the revolver six more times to ensure that there is not a live round in that sixth chamber but I believe that the shooter bought a SDQ as soon as he released the hammer from the full cock position with his thumb. then the shooter wud qualify for a reshoot for TO interference if there were indeed only 5 rounds in the pistol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Let's assume that the TO gave the "positive indication" that the shooter may de-cock after five rounds had been fired. Does the TO need to verify that the hammer is down in an empty chamber so that the decocked revolver was safe to leave the shooter's hand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 22 minutes ago, Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667 said: Let's assume that the TO gave the "positive indication" that the shooter may de-cock after five rounds had been fired. Does the TO need to verify that the hammer is down in an empty chamber so that the decocked revolver was safe to leave the shooter's hand? T/O doesn't need to verify that...revolver is safe to holster with the hammer down on either empty chamber or fired round. If a 6th round in the cylinder is suspected, it should be checked before the shooter leaves "the line"...assess DQ if it was overloaded & not checked at the LT. ...OP said that 5 shots had been fired. Only way to be absolutely certain would be to "unload & show clear" before holstering...that ain't gonna happen mid-stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667 said: I view the "no decocking" rule as avoiding a situation in which the shooter would end up with the hammer at rest on a live round if the shooter had loaded six rounds in the revolver. Requiring the shooter to use the trigger to drop the hammer on the sixth chamber (with the muzzle pointed in a safe direction) solves that problem. If the shooter lowers the hammer part of the way it retards the hammer fall, defeating the prophylactic effect of the rule. I might be inclined to allow the shooter to cock and snap the revolver six more times to ensure that there is not a live round in that sixth chamber but I believe that the shooter bought a SDQ as soon as he released the hammer from the full cock position with his thumb. The "decocking rule" allowance to de-cock under the direct supervision of the T/O is to prevent a DQ for "a cocked revolver leaving the shooter's hand". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.