Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Possible Squib in SG. How does TO handle?


Null N. Void

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

Absolutely.  But the shooter decided the time to clear the wad would have exceeded the miss penalties by a wide margin.   

 

I'm looking at the item attached to your post.  Can you tell more about it - looks pretty interesting.  

So. Just so I understand this correctly. The SHB makes no exception about a reshoot for shooting through an unobstructed barrel. However, you would allow someone to clear the obstruction in the barrel? I dont remember seeing that as an option in the SHB either. I been wrong before though. Could you let me know where to find that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

 

There is a difference in penalty for dropping an unloaded gun vs a loaded gun. In any case a gun dropped is not a safe gun. It has to be under shooter control or on a prop/holstered to be safe.

One quick and easy way to remedy this conflict is by adding the word "firearm" or "barrel" after the word squib.

 

 

Lots can be said about this but would further hijack the post. I will keep it to some do not feel it is unsafe to load and fire through an unobstructed barrel and some do. Probably depends on the shooter. As far as an even match goes...some would say, it doesn't matter how a stage is set up, it just aint gonna be even for everybody. I agree with Phantom that we all need to go by the same rules.

I agree. Any shooter with an unobstructed shotgun barrel should be allowed to use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I agree. Any shooter with an unobstructed shotgun barrel should be allowed to use it.

And how do you insure that the shooter doesn't accidentally load into the obstructed barrel??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hate to jump back into this, but think about the legal ramifications...???

 

Prosecuting Attorney to you: So you knowingly allowed my client to continue with an obstructed firearm?

 

You (under oath): Yes sir  

 

Prosecuting Attorney to you: My client is now blind in one eye, and is missing two fingers due to your negligence!

 

You and possibly your club will not have two empty pieces of brass to rub together after that lawsuit and judgment.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Thanks -

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm leaning toward Phantom's view (Lord help me ;)). We wouldn't want an inexperienced or unknown shooter to load the unobstructed barrel. What if he or she (inexperienced or unknown) POLITELY said, well, so-and-so  was allowed to continue shooting with an obstructed barrel; I want a reshoot? If that happened, I'd have to, in good  conscience, give the reshoot.

 

I don't shoot a double. If I did, I wouldn't trust myself to continue shooting it with a squib in one barrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2019 at 6:37 PM, Null N. Void said:

 

What do you think?

 

Sure... See what you've started?  :lol:

Least you could do is bring popcorn and soda-pop!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tennessee williams said:

 

There is a difference in penalty for dropping an unloaded gun vs a loaded gun. In any case a gun dropped is not a safe gun. It has to be under shooter control or on a prop/holstered to be safe.

One quick and easy way to remedy this conflict is by adding the word "firearm" or "barrel" after the word squib.

 

 

Lots can be said about this but would further hijack the post. I will keep it to some do not feel it is unsafe to load and fire through an unobstructed barrel and some do. Probably depends on the shooter. As far as an even match goes...some would say, it doesn't matter how a stage is set up, it just aint gonna be even for everybody. I agree with Phantom that we all need to go by the same rules.

You miss the point and got wrapped up in something I didn’t say. 

 

Both rules I quoted clearly said something ‘will’ be done. 

 

But for an an open, unloaded SxS to hurt you, you pretty much have to drop it on your foot. Yes, the rules say the shooter WILL get an SDQ for dropping it. I don’t know of anyone who would challenge it. 

 

But in the case of a SxS squib, ‘will’ becomes a judgement call, even if it is to allow a firearm with a known defect to continued to be used in competition? A situation which is objectively more dangerous than dropping an unloaded and open SxS. Tne safer one gets a ‘Pick up your toys and head to the ULT,’ while the one with ka-boom potential gets a, ‘Y’all be careful now, y’hear?’

 

The decision process in the SHB goes something like:

 

Squib? (yes) -> make safe -> next gun.  

 

Not: Squib? (yes) -> Safe barrel available? (yes) -> Continue shooting

 

Anyway, I’m just here to have fun, not change the world. I’ve Ben dragging break-actions of various flavors around ranges and fields and games for about half a century, so I’m fairly sure I’m not gonna blow a finger off.  Y’all figure it, I’ll just be at the LT waiting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's go for 5!  This is pretty good.  No insults, just people stating their position and backing it up with rule interpretations and logic.  As I see it, we need a PWB ruling.  I don't alway agree with his rulings, but I WILL follow them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Null N. Void said:

Let's go for 5!  This is pretty good.  No insults, just people stating their position and backing it up with rule interpretations and logic.  As I see it, we need a PWB ruling.  I don't alway agree with his rulings, but I WILL follow them!

I agree, we need clarification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, The Rainmaker, SASS #11631 said:

Oh, I think PWB is sittin back and enjoying this debacle

 

Howdy Rainmaker.

"Where's the Debacle"   (remember the lady in the "Where's the Beef" commercials?   :lol:

 

If there is a debacle, it can be from the inconsistencies of how TO's handle these

type situations differently.    Some prefer to ground the SG, although it still has 1 good barrel.

Others think its appropriate to allow the shooter to continue using only the good barrel..... and

HOPE the next live round gets chambered into the Unobstructed barrel.

 

And then there are some who have options on how they would handle the situation

depending upon the experience and/or expertise (proficiency) of the shooter.

Or maybe give favorable options if its a close friend on the stage..... :o

 

And some folks probably feel like the 97 shooters have no business in this conversation

about SxS situations but many of us take our TO responsibilities serious and would like

to handle these type situation with a consistency that other TO's are instructed to do.

 

I agree with you in that PWB is following this thread.   He probably already knows 

the manner in which we should follow.

 

WWPWBD?

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The debacle I see is that we've gone almost 5 pages with this. Who knows? Maybe we needed to.

Funny that a SxS shooter would think a 97 guy should stay out of this, since the OP stated the shotgun in question WAS a 97.

Should it be a consistent in how this is handled? Yes! For all shooters (my opinion). For a suspected squib in a revolver or rifle, I'd call an immediate cease fire for ANY shooter, but we've added one of a double barrel, speed/ability of the shooter (or TO for that matter) and all manner of other what-ifs.

As TO, do the best you know how to keep the shooter, the officials, the gallery and YOU safe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

Howdy Rainmaker.

"Where's the Debacle"   (remember the lady in the "Where's the Beef" commercials?   :lol:

 

If there is a debacle, it can be from the inconsistencies of how TO's handle these

type situations differently.    Some prefer to ground the SG, although it still has 1 good barrel.

Others think its appropriate to allow the shooter to continue using only the good barrel..... and

HOPE the next live round gets chambered into the Unobstructed barrel.

 

And then there are some who have options on how they would handle the situation

depending upon the experience and/or expertise (proficiency) of the shooter.

Or maybe give favorable options if its a close friend on the stage..... :o

 

And some folks probably feel like the 97 shooters have no business in this conversation

about SxS situations but many of us take our TO responsibilities serious and would like

to handle these type situation with a consistency that other TO's are instructed to do.

 

I agree with you in that PWB is following this thread.   He probably already knows 

the manner in which we should follow.

 

WWPWBD?

 

..........Widder

 

Bingo!!!!!

 

Well said Widderborg!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tennessee williams said:

So. Just so I understand this correctly. The SHB makes no exception about a reshoot for shooting through an unobstructed barrel. However, you would allow someone to clear the obstruction in the barrel? I dont remember seeing that as an option in the SHB either. I been wrong before though. Could you let me know where to find that?

I'm not looking for another argument. 

SHB says:  "In the case of a suspected squib, the CRO/TO will instruct the shooter to make the firearm safe and continue with the next firearm.  If the barrel is later determined to be clear, the shooter will receive a reshoot". P-14.

How plain is that? 

In this case, the SG was the last gun in the C. O. F.  So I stopped the shooter.  Would not have done so if he wanted to take time on his clock to make the barrel unobstructed and proceed. 

It's history at this point.  Shooter accepted my call.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

I'm not looking for another argument. 

SHB says:  "In the case of a suspected squib, the CRO/TO will instruct the shooter to make the firearm safe and continue with the next firearm.  If the barrel is later determined to be clear, the shooter will receive a reshoot". P-14.

How plain is that? 

In this case, the SG was the last gun in the C. O. F.  So I stopped the shooter.  Would not have done so if he wanted to take time on his clock to make the barrel unobstructed and proceed. 

It's history at this point.  Shooter accepted my call.  

But, you would allow a shooter to clear a squib? That is also in contradiction to the rule YOU cited. Not being argumentative, just pointing it out to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

I'm not looking for another argument. 

SHB says:  "In the case of a suspected squib, the CRO/TO will instruct the shooter to make the firearm safe and continue with the next firearm.  If the barrel is later determined to be clear, the shooter will receive a reshoot". P-14.

How plain is that? 

In this case, the SG was the last gun in the C. O. F.  So I stopped the shooter.  Would not have done so if he wanted to take time on his clock to make the barrel unobstructed and proceed. 

It's history at this point.  Shooter accepted my call.  

A SxS is a rather unique gun... Two barrels.

 

You take this fact and add to it what many have done through the YEARS, and you have a bit of a topic for discussion and perhaps clarification.

 

Practical experience counts for something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:

You miss the point and got wrapped up in something I didn’t say. 

 

Both rules I quoted clearly said something ‘will’ be done. 

 

But for an an open, unloaded SxS to hurt you, you pretty much have to drop it on your foot. Yes, the rules say the shooter WILL get an SDQ for dropping it. I don’t know of anyone who would challenge it. 

 

But in the case of a SxS squib, ‘will’ becomes a judgement call, even if it is to allow a firearm with a known defect to continued to be used in competition? A situation which is objectively more dangerous than dropping an unloaded and open SxS. Tne safer one gets a ‘Pick up your toys and head to the ULT,’ while the one with ka-boom potential gets a, ‘Y’all be careful now, y’hear?’

 

The decision process in the SHB goes something like:

 

Squib? (yes) -> make safe -> next gun.  

 

Not: Squib? (yes) -> Safe barrel available? (yes) -> Continue shooting

 

Anyway, I’m just here to have fun, not change the world. I’ve Ben dragging break-actions of various flavors around ranges and fields and games for about half a century, so I’m fairly sure I’m not gonna blow a finger off.  Y’all figure it, I’ll just be at the LT waiting. 

This is starting to get fun. Actually, I did not miss your point and I quoted what you said. I was trying to answer your question as nice as I possibly could. The two rules cited are apples and oranges. When you quote 2 rules to try and draw a comparison between the two, you make it harder for the new shooter trying to learn what this SASS stuff is all about. Yeah, both rules have the word will in them. Most all of them have the letter a in it too. Doesn't make them the same. The thing being discussed is some feel you have a good barrel you can use in a double. Some don't. I happen to believe the rule should state "barrel". I see both sides though. 

    Your paragraph about dragging break actions around for 50 years reminds me of an encounter I had with one of my subcontractors. I asked them not to do something a certain way and they said they had been doing it that way for 25 years. It was one of those days so I said all that tells me is you've been doing it wrong for 25 years.

Im not in any way saying youve been carrying a shotgun wrong for 50 years so dont think that. It just reminded me of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Widder,

 

My apologies... I apparently stopped my thinking short of attributing that some responders just want to have a "ruling" upon which to hang their hat.  Myself, as a dedicated double shooter have liked the options using a double has afforded me for years.  One of which has been just this scenario.   I.e.:  having ½ a perfectly good shotgun is better than having none.

 

If a TO told me to ground my "½ obstructed" shotgun, I would comply... and promptly ask for a reshoot... as the gun is NOT obstructed, only partially so.   Unlike the other firearms used in our sport.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Griff said:

Widder,

 

My apologies... I apparently stopped my thinking short of attributing that some responders just want to have a "ruling" upon which to hang their hat.  Myself, as a dedicated double shooter have liked the options using a double has afforded me for years.  One of which has been just this scenario.   I.e.:  having ½ a perfectly good shotgun is better than having none.

 

If a TO told me to ground my "½ obstructed" shotgun, I would comply... and promptly ask for a reshoot... as the gun is NOT obstructed, only partially so.   Unlike the other firearms used in our sport.  

And herein lies the rub.

 

Being a double barrel shotgun, it has an obstruction.

 

For consistency sake, we need to know how to handle this situation.

 

Period.

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

This is starting to get fun. Actually, I did not miss your point and I quoted what you said. I was trying to answer your question as nice as I possibly could. The two rules cited are apples and oranges. When you quote 2 rules to try and draw a comparison between the two, you make it harder for the new shooter trying to learn what this SASS stuff is all about. Yeah, both rules have the word will in them. Most all of them have the letter a in it too. Doesn't make them the same. The thing being discussed is some feel you have a good barrel you can use in a double. Some don't. I happen to believe the rule should state "barrel". I see both sides though. 

    Your paragraph about dragging break actions around for 50 years reminds me of an encounter I had with one of my subcontractors. I asked them not to do something a certain way and they said they had been doing it that way for 25 years. It was one of those days so I said all that tells me is you've been doing it wrong for 25 years.

Im not in any way saying youve been carrying a shotgun wrong for 50 years so dont think that. It just reminded me of it.

 

I agree, this is quite the hoot.

 

So — where did I say anything about dropping a loaded gun? You brought that in. 

 

If you think I was citing the two rules as a comparison between them, you’re still missing the point. 

 

I brought up the dropped unloaded gun rule because it goes to the culture of safety we encourage — even though an unloaded and open SxS is literally no more dangerous than two pipes and a couple of sticks, we impose a stiff penalty for mishandling to enforce that culture of safety, and rightfully so. Would it not make sense to extend that same mindset to how a squib is handled?

 

And the point about ‘will’ is that when it comes up in the SHB, it seems to me it a positive indication of what the the SHB expects to be done. Why should ‘will’ be interpreted as a suggestion only when it deals with squibs?

 

And you interpret the rules based on what you think it should say?  Okay, then . . . when the SHB is changed to what you think it should say, we’ll be in agreement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

You take this fact and add to it what many have done through the YEARS, and you have a bit of a topic for discussion and perhaps clarification.

We certainly do agree on this point.  The rule is explicit re: how the T. O. will handle a suspected (or known) squib. 

If an exception is appropriate for SXS with one clear barrel, then the ROC can and should address that question, if they have not already.  But until that deliberation has taken place and a clear rule exception is published, the explicit rule says not to continue using the affected "firearm".   (with no mention of continuing to use parts of the firearm to continue, under anybody's close supervision.) 

 

I may be dead wrong, but I really doubt that the ROC would make the change being discussed, due to the safety risk and liability risks inherent in allowing continued use of a known safety-compromised firearm.  Nobody can absolutely assure that a hurried, excited shooter will make zero SG reloading mistakes. 

 

I note that the existing language is a SASS Safety Convention, which per page 14, stayes: "All SASS Safety Conventions are non-negotiable and are never overruled by match design or shooting course descriptions".  

To me, that seems pretty direct and absolute.  Basically paraphrasing, Safety of shooter, Timer Operators, Spotters and bystanders Trumps other competition factors.   To practice otherwise would seem to risk the end of our sport after the first mishap injury or or two.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

We certainly do agree on this point.  The rule is explicit re: how the T. O. will handle a suspected (or known) squib. 

If an exception is appropriate for SXS with one clear barrel, then the ROC can and should address that question, if they have not already.  But until that deliberation has taken place and a clear rule exception is published, the explicit rule says not to continue using the affected "firearm".   (with no mention of continuing to use parts of the firearm to continue, under anybody's close supervision.) 

 

I may be dead wrong, but I really doubt that the ROC would make the change being discussed, due to the safety risk and liability risks inherent in allowing continued use of a known safety-compromised firearm.  Nobody can absolutely assure that a hurried, excited shooter will make zero SG reloading mistakes. 

 

I note that the existing language is a SASS Safety Convention, which per page 14, stayes: "All SASS Safety Conventions are non-negotiable and are never overruled by match design or shooting course descriptions".  

To me, that seems pretty direct and absolute.  Basically paraphrasing, Safety of shooter, Timer Operators, Spotters and bystanders Trumps other competition factors.   To practice otherwise would seem to risk the end of our sport after the first mishap injury or or two.  

 

Good luck with implementing your belief...this game has been played a long time with this...issue. Nothing will change until rules are clarified.

 

The Wire is NOT SASS.

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put me in the allow shooter to continue with one barrel camp. 

 

If if not allowed, what would happen if I shoot first barrel, squib, before anybody can react I shoot 2nd Barrel. Would you call that a miss? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was not suggesting that a squib be ignored the fact that the timer RO was looking directly down my barrels gave me the confidence to continue - i would stop if that were not the case , its not worth an injury to anyone for a stage anytime - a 97 is a whole different ball game and i would have stopped immediately and taken my misses , or a stage DQ if that was the call , the health of myself and everyone around me is first and foremost in my mind , had i had a second i would have pulled myself on that one , i had never had a single squib in all my years of shooting this game , i hope to never have another , 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howdy Griff.

Not necessary but thank you.  

 

As a side note,  when I have been TO, I have allowed the shooter to continue using

their 'good' side when they got a squib in their SxS.    But I admit those situations

have been VERY rare during my 15 years in SASS.  

 

And until the local club(s) and/or the ROC clearly define the desired actions of the TO

concerning the SxS with a 1 barrel squib situation, I will continue to allow the shooter

to use their SG as a single barrel firearm.

 

But I have learned thru this thread that other TO's are more restrictive in 

handling these situations and it would be nice if we could all be on the same page.

 

Hope you are doing well.

 

P.S. - years back, some of our top shooters starting switching from a 97 to the SxS.

I was actually told by a couple of them that their reasons were 2 fold:

1.  reliability of the SxS was helping their game.

2.  A squib would still allow them to use their good barrel, should the squib ever occur

at the most untimely manner.

 

..........Widder

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:

 

I agree, this is quite the hoot.

 

So — where did I say anything about dropping a loaded gun? You brought that in. 

This is weird. Do you mean 53 posts ago when I was explaining to you the difference in a dropped unloaded gun vs a dropped loaded gun and the severity of the penalty?

1 hour ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:

 

If you think I was citing the two rules as a comparison between them, you’re still missing the point. 

 

I brought up the dropped unloaded gun rule because it goes to the culture of safety we encourage — even though an unloaded and open SxS is literally no more dangerous than two pipes and a couple of sticks, we impose a stiff penalty for mishandling to enforce that culture of safety, and rightfully so. Would it not make sense to extend that same mindset to how a squib is handled?

No, you are still missing the point about quoting one rule to try and explain another. 

1 hour ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:

 

And the point about ‘will’ is that when it comes up in the SHB, it seems to me it a positive indication of what the the SHB expects to be done. Why should ‘will’ be interpreted as a suggestion only when it deals with squibs?

Will was not the case in point. The point is can "when there is a suspected squib" be interpreted to mean "in the barrel". In which case it would be perfectly legal to use the unobstructed barrel of a sxs. 

 

1 hour ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:

And you interpret the rules based on what you think it should say?  Okay, then . . . when the SHB is changed to what you think it should say, we’ll be in agreement. 

This is the most asinine comment I have read in quite a while. I have no idea how you pulled that out of what I said. You must've combined a couple of sentences in your head or are just sleepy. It's better we are not in agreement. I wouldn't have anybody to debate with if we were both right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s probably high time I step back from this. Throwing around terms such as ‘asinine’ between a couple of people who aren’t already pards isn’t likely to bring about a kumbaya moment. You’re probably a pretty fair TO; never thought otherwise.

 

I'm at the point that I don’t really care which way applying the rule goes, as long as it goes the same way right down the line. My comment about how long I’ve soaked up the kicks from shotguns wasn’t about knowing more than anyone else, or about how I’ve always done it, as much as you might have thought so. It was that I’m comfortable that whichever way it gets enforced, I can deal with it.

 

Regards,

Ozark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a pretty clear split here on what the rule is. I’ve seen some pretty active TO’s and RO Instructors disagreeing.

 

I suspect we’ll get a clarification from the ROC soon. If this was a clear issue PWB would likely have already commented on it. The fact that he hasn’t makes me believe they’re working on it and when they come to an agreement we’ll hear.

 

In the interim we don’t know what the rule is so it’s possible, maybe even probable that it will be enforced differently. I will continue to allow shooters to use the clear barrel, many others won’t.

 

ROC........

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

A_well-weathered_fence_post_-_geograph.org.uk_-_666453.jpg

 

TN,

Is the the picture of the ELECTRIC fence post where you 'relieved'  yeowndangself?

:lol:

Bet that was a shocker!

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

 

TN,

Is the the picture of the ELECTRIC fence post where you 'relieved'  yeowndangself?

:lol:

Bet that was a shocker!

 

..........Widder

 

Sadly, that one was one of the newfangled metal insulated posts. Just so you know, getting mad and pissing on a lawnmower that aint running right is no better.:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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