Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Spittoon O Tool  SASS #62053

What is the correct call

Recommended Posts

The shooter comes to the line to stage their rifle on a horse prop. The loaded rifle slips and falls muzzle to the ground with the butt still on the horse with shooters hand touching. The 170 is not broken and no one is sweep. What is the call?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That depends on several things we do not know.

Possibly a “No Call” - Stage prop defect.

Need to know/see more to call it.

However, the shooter must unload the weapon and clear the bore.

 

Cat Brules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the call is ... Awe Crap 

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I usually don't wade into these things, but I'll say MDQ.  The fact that he still had his hand on it doesn't help, because he didn't have control of it.  Unless it would be a prop failure as Cat mentioned, but we can't know that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Dropped firearm – a firearm that has left the shooter’s control and comes to rest at a location or position other than where it was intended.

SHB p.45

 

Quote

As long as the shooter has contact with the firearm, it is considered in their control.

SHB p.17

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Sounds like a prop design issue.  But the muzzle does need to be verified clear before it is fired.  As a TO I would no-call the "drop", (as still in control, per PWB) but I would instruct shooter to make the rifle safe (without firing it) and cease using it.  Even though it is not technically a squib, if the muzzle is verified unobstructed they'd get a reshoot (TO interference).  If the muzzle is obstructed, they would incur any unfired rounds as misses.   They could continue with other firearms.  I would also take a good look at the prop for defects before the next shooter.  

Edited by Dusty Devil Dale
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Dusty Devil Dale said:

 Even though it is not technically a squib, if the muzzle is verified unobstructed they'd get a reshoot (TO interference).  If the muzzle is obstructed, they would incur any unfired rounds as misses.   They could continue with other firearms.  

 

How do you come up with that seeing as how a round has not gone downrange yet and the shooter is not committed to the stage?

Edited by Branchwater Jack SASS #88854
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No call.

Stage hadn't even started yet (incident occurred while staging the rifle).

Send the shooter to the ULT to clear the rifle and verify that there is no obstruction in the barrel.

Move to LT to reload rifle for a RESTART.

Quote

Restart – no recorded score, shooter is given a clean restart. 

SHB p.46

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"As long as the shooter has contact with the firearm, it is considered in their control."

 

Obviously I was wrong due to this rule.  But it looks to me like it has the possibility of covering all sorts of maladies as long as a finger stays in contact. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Abilene, SASS # 27489 said:

 

 

But it looks to me like it has the possibility of covering all sorts of maladies as long as a finger stays in contact. :wacko:

 

aahhh but if he had of broken 170 or swept someone (interesting if he hadnt broken 170:blink:) then he would have been penalised under those rules.

 

The finger on the gun only saves him from the uncontrolled gun caveat.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


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

Sounds like a prop design issue. ...

 

Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Matthew Duncan said:

 

Why?

 

Because they put down the mat and "Jumped to a Conclusion."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to see a horse or cow prop that is fool proof.  If there was, it would be a table.  And I've seen enough guns fall off tables to know that they are not fool proof either.

 

You pays yer nickle and ya takes yer chances.  If'n yer careless, things tend to bite cha in the arse sometimes.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Grizzly Dave said.

But some of the horse/cow designs were based on longer barrels and to our surprise when a shorter carbine was tried, they were much less stable or even possible to use safely.  I discovered this with my first night shoot when I put my carbine onto the horse and the barrel just kept going down.  It caused us to reexamine the "horse" and saw it was entirely too easy to have a problem with a short barrel.

 

On some, we had to add thickness (2X4) to the forward part so they could safely handle both carbines and longer barrels.

 

But such props are fine and fun but shooters cannot be as casual with them as they would a table.  So we finally just cut off the cop and mounted tables on ours. 

But others still use them so it is good to know folks need to be careful around horses - some can be skittish :D  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Spittoon O Tool SASS #62053 said:

The shooter comes to the line to stage their rifle on a horse prop. The loaded rifle slips and falls muzzle to the ground with the butt still on the horse with shooters hand touching. The 170 is not broken and no one is sweep. What is the call?

Did it slip and fall with the shooter's hand not touching and the shooter managed to reach it as it came to rest? Or was the hand in contact with the firearm throughout the fall?

 

I think if the 170 was broken or someone was swept, it would (should) be a DQ. I am trying to see how a prop failure could set aside the penalty, but the only way I can envision that is if the incident showed the staging instruction created an inherently unsafe condition which this particular shooter accidentally discovered. Thus the equitable and proper remedy would be to remove the stage from competition.

 

Did the shooter control of the firearm? The rule quoted above calls out continuous contact establishes control. I compare this to the rule in Steel Challenge, paraphrased rather than quoted. A firearm is "dropped" the moment control is lost, even if the shooter still has contact with the firearm. This means grabbing for it to get it before it hits the ground does not invalidate the drop; the drop occurs before it hits the ground. The purpose of this rule is to prevent an unsafe lunge to regain control (of an already lost) firearm.

 

Under the SASS rule quoted above, if the shooter was in continuous contact with the firearm, the shooter had control. Under Steel Challenge rules, control was clearly lost.

 

If not under continuous contact, it presents an attempt to regain control of a firearm. In Steel Challenge, the firearm was already dropped before it reached the ground.

 

Steel Challenge does not have the concept of staging firearms like CAS, I'm just comparing the differences in the definitions of control and what constitutes a drop.

 

From the SASS rules above, I do agree with no call. But, I do see the potential for a lunge towards the rifle, and either as a result of the fall or and attempt to recover the firearm, chambering a round and discharging it.

 

Steell Challenge has the rules as they are to prevent inadvertent discharges (it's gone, don't attempt to grab it or trap it against your leg, let it take its own path to the ground), but a lot of our guns are not drop-safe. Separate from the question of the call, is it safer in CAS to require a dropped/falling firearm take it's own path to rest or is it safer to attempt control/recovery?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the hell does Steel Challenge have to do with anything????

 

Oy...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

What the hell does Steel Challenge have to do with anything????

 

Oy...

It has to do with safety.

 

It has to do with a difference in how a dropped firearm and control of a firearm are defined in different shooting sports.

 

I read this question regarding WTC as a safety question. I agree the rules say "no call."

 

I also see what Abilene notes above as:

 

Quote

 

"As long as the shooter has contact with the firearm, it is considered in their control."

 

Obviously I was wrong due to this rule.  But it looks to me like it has the possibility of covering all sorts of maladies as long as a finger stays in contact:wacko:

 

I'll go read the rules again just to be sure I understand the definitions of control and how this app;lies to safety. Given this question, one thing I will look at is if there would (or should) be a different call had the firearm broken the 170 or swept someone as a result of the fall, both independent of and considering the definition of control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah...Steel Challenge is a heavy transition shooting game...whatever.

 

Thank god we can draw safety tips from folks that have experience from other games for we would be lost without them.

 

Phantom

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

It has to do with safety.

 

It has to do with a difference in how a dropped firearm and control of a firearm are defined in different shooting sports.

 

I read this question regarding WTC as a safety question. I agree the rules say "no call."

 

I also see what Abilene notes above as:

 

I'll go read the rules again just to be sure I understand the definitions of control and how this app;lies to safety. Given this question, one thing I will look at is if there would (or should) be a different call had the firearm broken the 170 or swept someone as a result of the fall, both independent of and considering the definition of control.

You will find that there would be.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Yeah...Steel Challenge is a heavy transition shooting game...whatever.

 

Thank god we can draw safety tips from folks that have experience from other games for we would be lost without them.

 

Phantom

Or maybe thank god new people in this sport make an effort to understand the differences between the sports with an eye to comprehensive safety... whatever.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It always amazes me how long these go on after PWB has given an answer with references.  The "what ifs" should go ahead and start a new post.  Let the ones that have been answered die.

 

BS

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Branchwater Jack SASS #88854 said:

 

How do you come up with that seeing as how a round has not gone downrange yet and the shooter is not committed to the stage?

I missed that the stage hadn't started as yet.  Agree.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

Or maybe thank god new people in this sport make an effort to understand the differences between the sports with an eye to comprehensive safety... whatever.

So are you saying that our little cowboy game's safety measures are not comprehensive?

 

Perhaps the all knowing Wyatt will chime in with his insightful thoughts.

 

Phantom

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


 

 


 

 

 

The only thing I know is people say phantom is a pussycat in person 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.. :huh: I reckon I would agree with PaleWolfs call..:D

 

Rance ;)

Thinkin' he got it right!! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

I think if the 170 was broken or someone was swept, it would (should) be a DQ.

 

The rule quoted above calls out continuous contact establishes control....

 

is it safer in CAS to require a dropped/falling firearm take it's own path to rest or is it safer to attempt control/recovery?

A couple of things.

 

If the 170 had been broken or someone had been swept it would have been a DQ, as Branchwater pointed out.
 

The quoted rule says nothing about continuous contact. There are two conditions that have to be met to pick up the penalty, loss of control AND the gun coming to rest somewhere other than where intended.

 

Which leads to your final question. Under our current rules if a shooter loses control of a gun, but reestablishes control before it comes to rest, then it’s a no call so long as some other violation didn’t occur in the process. 

Speaking only for myself, if I drop a gun, or someone I’m TOing for drops one I’m probably going to try to catch it.

 

I don’t think Steel Challenge rules are a good fit for comparison purposes. Most shooters are using semiautos and there aren’t transitions.  IIRC you start gun in hand at the low ready position.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.

 

There is a transition in Outer Limits, .22lr pistols and all PCCs start at low ready, but centerfire pistols are drawn from holster.

 

It is true most competitors shoot modern semi-autos, a few shoot revolvers. Interestingly, CAS guns (revolvers or rifles) are expressly permitted and those competitors are encouraged to dress the part. And if shooting CAS guns, participation is subject to Steel Challenge rules.

 

I picked Steel Challenge rules as the basis for my question (and comparison) as it is the "simplest" comparable shooting sport IDPA has more transitions, and 3 Gun adds more firearms. Both of those sports have more rules in many areas. 

 

Quote

Which leads to your final question. Under our current rules if a shooter loses control of a gun, but reestablishes control before it comes to rest, then it’s a no call so long as some other violation didn’t occur in the process. 

As compared to loss of control in Steel Challenge being the violation, independent of whether another violation occurs in the process.

 

Please don't take my making note of this difference as a criticism of the CAS rules; all the rules in each sport need to be considered together. And I do need to read the SASS handbook again as I don't have all of it in my head yet.

  • Like 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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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