Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Recommended Posts

The recent "Ruling" from the ROC regarding the legality of certain footwear got me to thinking.

 

The post from PWB states the ROC finds the footwear illegal - Due to "Not Period" features.

I'm curious to these features that differentiate these shoes from a myriad of other legal footwear in our game.

What EXACTLY makes these shoes illegal?

What was the process to determining these are illegal; while others are ok?

Yes; I want to see how the sausage is made.

 

While I respect each member of the ROC individually - I'm personally not a big fan of the ROC as an entity.

If we are going to have an un-elected group making decisions about the legality of items or the meaning of a rule

- they should at minimum justify their reasons and explain their thought process when they make a "ruling".  

 

I actually don't have a dog in the footwear debate - but I am disturbed to see rulings continually come from the ROC without any justification.

And disturbed more to see the rugged individualists that we claim we are; blindly agreeing and following.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

The recent "Ruling" from the ROC regarding the legality of certain footwear got me to thinking.

 

The post from PWB states the ROC finds the footwear illegal - Due to "Not Period" features.

I'm curious to these features that differentiate these shoes from a myriad of other legal footwear in our game.

What EXACTLY makes these shoes illegal?

What was the process to determining these are illegal; while others are ok?

Yes; I want to see how the sausage is made.

 

While I respect each member of the ROC individually - I'm personally not a big fan of the ROC as an entity.

If we are going to have an un-elected group making decisions about the legality of items or the meaning of a rule

- they should at minimum justify their reasons and explain their thought process when they make a "ruling".  

 

I actually don't have a dog in the footwear debate - but I am disturbed to see rulings continually come from the ROC without any justification.

And disturbed more to see the rugged individualists that we claim we are; blindly agreeing and following.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll be right back.  I've got to go fix up some popcorn.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 In 1964, Justice Potter Stewart tried to explain "hard-core" pornography, or what is obscene, by saying, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced... ut I know it when I see it ..."

 

I suspect this is more or less the ROC standard.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I'll be right back.  I've got to go fix up some popcorn.

 

I like extra butter and some Tabasco on mine. :lol:

Bring a large bowl...... ^_^

OLG 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ain't even seen the ruling yet. Where is it? Yeah, I'm gonna need popcorn too. If this post is still here when I get back...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

I ain't even seen the ruling yet. Where is it? Yeah, I'm gonna need popcorn too. If this post is still here when I get back...

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's right. By knowing what those features are, we can make decisions on other pieces of footwear without having to post here each time.

 

Like, we know that speed laces are illegal...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Butter the popcorn.

Ring the alarm bells.

Yes, I dare to question the ROC.

Doesn't seem out of line to ask for reasons or explanation from the arbitrators of our rules.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Butter the popcorn.

Ring the alarm bells.

Yes, I dare to question the ROC.

Doesn't seem out of line to ask for reasons or explanation from the arbitrators of our rules.

I don't think it's out of line.  I think it will interesting and lively, provided it's allowed to continue.  Hence the popcorn.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:

 

I like extra butter and some Tabasco on mine. :lol:

Bring a large bowl...... ^_^

OLG 

Seriously?  Is Tobasco good on popcorn?  Sounds like a recipe for some late nite heartburn.  

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Butter the popcorn.

Ring the alarm bells.

Yes, I dare to question the ROC.

Doesn't seem out of line to ask for reasons or explanation from the arbitrators of our rules.

I agree, but I also expect this to be shut down and closed pretty quickly. I have asked this very question a time or two and it never lasts long. Apparently it's even against the forum rules to question the ROC, or so I have been told

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I don't think it's out of line.  I think it will interesting and lively, provided it's allowed to continue.  Hence the popcorn.

It's a legitimate question.  The rules on attire leave room for some fairly capricious interpretation.  They infer slightly different things in the several areas where footwear comes up.  Some clarification would be a good thing.  It happens I agree with the ROC in this instance, but that hasn't always been the case.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have learned one really important thing from the thread that inspired this one and the one that BWJ posted a link to.

 

Had these shooters put the pictured foot wear on with a pair of jeans and just worn them to a match I seriously doubt anyone would have given their footwear a second thought. When all you can see is the bottom 1 inch or so the footwear in question looks entirely different than when you can see the entire shoe in a catalog photo.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure will be glad when we can go to a match again, but until we can......raisinets, soda and a hot dog for me please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An informed, educated shooter is provided with the tools and resources to look at a product and determine for theirself it's legality or appropriateness. 

Based on a written, agreed upon and justifiable standard.

 

There should be no secrets or arbitrary decisions - No "just because".

 

Obviously, the ROC is empowered to issue a ruling - just tell us why you feel that way and under which standards you provide that guidance.

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

An informed, educated shooter is provided with the tools and resources to look at a product and determine for theirself it's legality or appropriateness. 

Based on a written, agreed upon and justifiable standard.

 

There should be no secrets or arbitrary decisions - No "just because".

 

Obviously, the ROC is empowered to issue a ruling - just tell us why you feel that way and under which standards you provide that guidance.

 

 

Agree.   If they are rules, they need to be clear and easy to find.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To start, I appreciate the work that PWB and the ROC do.  I just don't agree sometimes.

 

I let this drop a couple of months ago, but I now have some time to fire it up now that some others have started.  I asked about a pair of boots, yes boots, leather boots, that did not kill my feet.  I have a medical problem on my left foot.   The ROC said the boot was not acceptable.  The ROC did not reply with a list of acceptable boots for people with foot problems.  Just suck it up and figure it out is basically what was said. If you guess wrong, you're out the hundred $ or more that you paid.  It's months to get a decision from the ROC.

 

When you have pants on, you can't tell what the laces are.  Note that Ariat Lacers have PLASTIC speed lacing lugs at the top.  They are clearly visible on the boots.  They are probably glass reinforced nylon. That didn't exist in the old west.  The stitching on our boots is probably Nylon thread.  Nylon did not exist in the old west.  The threads and the fabric that we routinely in our clothes use did not exist in the old west.  The "Cooler Cowboy Shirt" is polyester with a fancy coating and did not exist in the old west.  Roy Rogers did not exist anywhere else except in entertainment.

 

As far as I'm concerned the boots shown were fine. I'm just as fine with any costuming that people enjoy.  In my view, we're here to shoot fast and enjoy the match.

 

I'd like to see minimal clothing requirements and us, as a organization, not worry about it.  If you want to compete in the clothing centered categories, have at it and upgrade to your hearts content.  If you just like to shoot the guns, have at it so long as you meet the existing minimums.  

 

Every time we get into this level about what's OK, we end up driving potential shooters away.  I've heard it again and again, from shooters that are interested in the guns and the way we do things, that they give up over costuming because they don't want to be hassled and can tell you about people they know that have been hassled.  Is it true? Maybe or maybe not.  However, perception is reality.   You can argue all you want, but that is what potential customers say.  

 

If you forced me to wear pointed cowboy boots, I'd probably have to quit.  If you took away my Lacers, I'd have to quit.  ROC, is this what you want?

 

Null N. Void

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

 

Well I can't give the Roc reasoning, but they look like suped up tenner shoes to me. Of course my moccasins ain't legal for classic cowboy neither. Maybe classic injun!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

Well I can't give the Roc reasoning, but they look like suped up tenner shoes to me. Of course my moccasins ain't legal for classic cowboy neither. Maybe classic injun!

 

Yea but they look cool :ph34r:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Tequila Shooter said:

 

Yea but they look cool :ph34r:

I'd definitely buy them to wear after a match, sitting around a campfire visiting, but almost all of the men I see on CAS stages, including me, are wearing what we normally identify as cowboy boots.  Those who wear other footwear have medical reasons for doing so, and that is as it should be, IMHO. 

 

The other reason I wouldn't wear them or other moccasins  in a match is practicality.   At the beginning or end of a shoot, setting out or gathering in the steel, they don't provide much protection for a dropped target plate. (having done that a couple times). Black toes aren't my idea of a good time.  

Edited by Dusty Devil Dale
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tennessee williams said:

Well I can't give the Roc reasoning, but they look like suped up tenner shoes to me. Of course my moccasins ain't legal for classic cowboy neither. Maybe classic injun!

Yeah TW....and you hang accoutrements off the laces like your chicken feet and voodoo dolls and such! :lol:

 

Kajun

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

I'd definitely wear them sitting around a campfire visiting, but almost all of the men I see on CAS stages, including me, are wearing what we normally identify as cowboy boots.  Those who wear other footwear have medical reasons for doing so, and that is as it should be, IMHO. 

There is zero requirement to wear "cowboy" boots.

So, IF the specific shoes are illegal - under what standard?

The laces? 

Probably not - leather braided laces are legal.

The logo?

Manufacturer logos are allowed.

The sole?

Lots and lots of shoes in our game have rubber soles.

The leather toeguard?

I don't see anything that would make that illegal.

 

So maybe I'm missing something;  "perhaps" they are illegal - I'm simply asking why.

And asking that moving forward every "ruling" handed down is subject to the same scrutiny and justification.

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well ... don't tell Half-a-Hand Henri she has to wear shoes ... I have never seen her shoot with any footwear at all ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA_0JO7n5hk

 

... AND ...

If you got the "new" version of the shoes mentioned .. they don't have the logo ...

419543161_newshoe.jpg.06aa4cf472f3ed9c404083a495c034c6.jpg

https://marketglad.com/products/pin-up-casual-comfortable-loafers?variant=20183294705764

... AND ...

I assumed they flagged them because of the lug soles ... but ... I agree .. why not state the reason for acceptance or denial.

At least you aren't stirring stuff back up like the 7 shot revolver ... (one place says 6 holes max but in another the Nagant 7 shot revolver is allowed?!??) ...:mellow:

Edited by Patagonia Pete
edit: it's "wear" not "where" ... corrected ... sigh ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patagonia Pete said:

Well ... don't tell Half-a-Hand Henri she has to wear shoes ... I have never seen her shoot with any footwear at all ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA_0JO7n5hk

 

... AND ...

If you got the "new" version of the shoes mentioned .. they don't have the logo ...

419543161_newshoe.jpg.06aa4cf472f3ed9c404083a495c034c6.jpg

... AND ...

I assumed they flagged them because of the lug soles ... but ... I agree .. why not state the reason for acceptance or denial.

At least you aren't stirring stuff back up like the 7 shot revolver ... (one place says 6 holes max but in another the Nagant 7 shot revolver is allowed?!??) ...:mellow:

I can see it now, the next subject will be: 

Is this toe nail polish color legal?:lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Patagonia Pete said:

Well ... don't tell Half-a-Hand Henri she has to wear shoes ... I have never seen her shoot with any footwear at all ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA_0JO7n5hk

 

When she won  Ladies B-Western at EOT she wore boots.  (I think she's too wise to post on this thread.)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Edward R S Canby, SASS#59971 said:

When she won  Ladies B-Western at EOT she wore boots.  (I think she's too wise to post on this thread.)

OK ... well .. my bad ... You HAVE to wear boots in B-Western ... but she didn't in Gunfighter! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it ok to bring up "Steampunk" now or do I have to wait till page 4?:D

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Patagonia Pete said:

Well ... don't tell Half-a-Hand Henri she has to wear shoes ... I have never seen her shoot with any footwear at all ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA_0JO7n5hk

 

... AND ...

If you got the "new" version of the shoes mentioned .. they don't have the logo ...

419543161_newshoe.jpg.06aa4cf472f3ed9c404083a495c034c6.jpg

https://marketglad.com/products/pin-up-casual-comfortable-loafers?variant=20183294705764

... AND ...

I assumed they flagged them because of the lug soles ... but ... I agree .. why not state the reason for acceptance or denial.

At least you aren't stirring stuff back up like the 7 shot revolver ... (one place says 6 holes max but in another the Nagant 7 shot revolver is allowed?!??) ...:mellow:

Lugged soles are only prohibited in Classic Cowboy and B-Western.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this will help close the thread.

These are the shoes I bought to wear in the Georgia BP Frontiersmen Gunfighter category !

 

 

shoes.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ace_of_Hearts said:

Lugged soles are only prohibited in Classic Cowboy and B-Western.

 

Stop it!! Stop it!! I'm getting dizzy ... let me sit down before we roll into page 2!! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, T-Square said:

this will help close the thread.

These are the shoes I bought to wear in the Georgia BP Frontiersmen Gunfighter category !

 

 

shoes.jpg

I bet you look fabulous in them!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, T-Square said:

this will help close the thread.

These are the shoes I bought to wear in the Georgia BP Frontiersmen Gunfighter category !

 

 

shoes.jpg

Gunzilla has a shoe like that he wears around his neck on a chain. When I asked him why he stated that in his research he had found that many of the old west gunslingers liked to adorn themselves with lucky charms. He figured a whoreshoe was as good as any.......

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, T-Square said:

this will help close the thread.

These are the shoes I bought to wear in the Georgia BP Frontiersmen Gunfighter category !

 

 

shoes.jpg

I don't think we're in Kansas any more, Toto. 

Edited by Dusty Devil Dale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

I'd definitely buy them to wear after a match, sitting around a campfire visiting, but almost all of the men I see on CAS stages, including me, are wearing what we normally identify as cowboy boots.  Those who wear other footwear have medical reasons for doing so, and that is as it should be, IMHO. 

 

The other reason I wouldn't wear them or other moccasins  in a match is practicality.   At the beginning or end of a shoot, setting out or gathering in the steel, they don't provide much protection for a dropped target plate. (having done that a couple times). Black toes aren't my idea of a good time.  

Don’t wear them then.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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