Interference?

[Shooting Bull]

Shooter is done with rifle, stages it safety on table and begins to move to the next shooting position. One of the spotters yells multiple times, “One more! One more!” Shooter moves back and checks rifle but finds it is in fact empty. Is this interference and grounds for a reshoot?

[Runamuck, SASS #49216L]

Yes

 

[Goody, SASS #26190]

See the thread about "Coaching". Snakebite pretty well sums it up. 

 

"Hi Doc...As far as I can see, this issue has been straightened out. The confusion from earlier documents has been corrected. The current SHB states: "Chief Range Officer/Timer Operator (CRO/TO) – is the Chief Range Officer (CRO) for the stage and is in charge of the firing line as long as he/she is running the timer and has the primary objective to safely assist the shooter through the course of fire." #6 under he/her duties is Coaching. No other person is charged with that duty. In the ROI, it further clarifies that as far as the shooter is concerned, the T.O. is the R.O. IMO, the only issue is that so many folks are locked in on how they think it is rather than how it is. Coaching belongs to the T.O.. No other person is assigned that duty. "

 

With that in mind I don't feel the shooter has an argument if he/she listens to someone other than the RO/TO. The shooter has to take ownership of their actions. So for me it would be no re-shoot. Hard line? Maybe, but as long as each shooter is treated the same there is to me no problem,

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

If "They" have changed the definitions, then no reshoot is allowed. If "They" haven't, then yes, a reshoot would be warranted.

 

Goody, it took a while at WR for "Them" to find the rule book ambiguity... It still may be there.

 

Phantom

[Null N. Void]

If anyone interferes with the shooter, I will give a reshoot.   A shooter may not be familiar with me or my voice.   If he or she hears an incorrect command regardless where it comes from, and responds to it, I think that a valid reason for a reshoot.   We also want the shooter to respond to safety commands regardless of where they come from.  Unless, we go to "no coaching allowed", we are in a grey zone.  I'm ok with it as it is.

[Shooting Bull]

33 minutes ago, Goody, SASS #26190 said:

With that in mind I don't feel the shooter has an argument if he/she listens to someone other than the RO/TO. The shooter has to take ownership of their actions. So for me it would be no re-shoot. Hard line? Maybe, but as long as each shooter is treated the same there is to me no problem,

 

I have two problems with this. #1 We emphasize that everyone is responsible for safety. Therefore, by our own rules, the shooter has to listen to everyone. The example above would have been a minor safety penalty if a round was left on the carrier so the shooter was correct to listen. #2 When I’m in the middle of a stage there’s no way on God’s green Earth I can differentiate between the TO and anyone else hollering at me. Even if I could, anyone yelling that my rifle still has a round in it is going to cause me to pause. That’s unfair. 

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

21 minutes ago, Null N. Void said:

If anyone interferes with the shooter, I will give a reshoot.   A shooter may not be familiar with me or my voice.   If he or she hears an incorrect command regardless where it comes from, and responds to it, I think that a valid reason for a reshoot.   We also want the shooter to respond to safety commands regardless of where they come from.  Unless, we go to "no coaching allowed", we are in a grey zone.  I'm ok with it as it is.

So are there any other SASS rules that you disregard?

 

Phantom

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

Just now, Shooting Bull said:

 

I have two problems with this. #1 We emphasize that everyone is responsible for safety. Therefore, by our own rules, the shooter has to listen to everyone. The example above would have been a minor safety penalty if a round was left on the carrier so the shooter was correct to listen. #2 When I’m in the middle of a stage there’s no way on God’s green Earth I can differentiate between the TO and anyone else hollering at me. Even if I could, anyone yelling that my rifle still has a round in it is going to cause me to pause. That’s unfair. 

Go view the other Topic posted by Creeker...I think it may get interesting...

[Shooting Bull]

Dang! I didn’t realize Creeker had already asked. Thanks Phantom. 

[Singin' Sue 71615]

3 hours ago, Goody, SASS #26190 said:

See the thread about "Coaching". Snakebite pretty well sums it up. 

 

"Hi Doc...As far as I can see, this issue has been straightened out. The confusion from earlier documents has been corrected. The current SHB states: "Chief Range Officer/Timer Operator (CRO/TO) – is the Chief Range Officer (CRO) for the stage and is in charge of the firing line as long as he/she is running the timer and has the primary objective to safely assist the shooter through the course of fire." #6 under he/her duties is Coaching. No other person is charged with that duty. In the ROI, it further clarifies that as far as the shooter is concerned, the T.O. is the R.O. IMO, the only issue is that so many folks are locked in on how they think it is rather than how it is. Coaching belongs to the T.O.. No other person is assigned that duty. "

 

With that in mind I don't feel the shooter has an argument if he/she listens to someone other than the RO/TO. The shooter has to take ownership of their actions. So for me it would be no re-shoot. Hard line? Maybe, but as long as each shooter is treated the same there is to me no problem,

I feel as you do, Bull.

You MUST be ready to follow instructions from TO...as far as saftey...

But the stage and procedure are up to US , the shooter.

I guess I have never understood the whole RESHOOT thing.

[Singin' Sue 71615]

I bet you and the coaching are the same instance. Was yours a new shooter?

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

2 minutes ago, Singin' Sue 71615 said:

I feel as you do, Bull.

You MUST be ready to follow instructions from TO...as far as saftey...

But the stage and procedure are up to US , the shooter.

I guess I have never understood the whole RESHOOT thing.

Let's take an example:

 

Shooter has a very light sounding round. T.O. thinks there could be a stuck bullet. Commands the shooter to ground the gun and continue.

 

At unloading table it is found that there was no stuck bullet.

 

Wouldn't it be reasonable to give the shooter another run at the stage?

 

Now "restarts" is a whole different question.

 

Phantom

[Widder, SASS #59054]

Sooooooo, should a member of the P'nut Gallery yells out 'Cease Fire' and its unwarranted,

and the shooter stops..... wouldn't the TO be correct to approve a reshoot?

 

Looks like we might be splitting frog hairs depending upon what the shooter may or may not actually

hear while in the course of their stage run.

 

..........Widder

 

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

43 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Sooooooo, should a member of the P'nut Gallery yells out 'Cease Fire' and its unwarranted,

and the shooter stops..... wouldn't the TO be correct to approve a reshoot?

 

Looks like we might be splitting frog hairs depending upon what the shooter may or may not actually

hear while in the course of their stage run.

 

..........Widder

 

Yes, but only because someone did something that is unethical.

 

Like yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Now if there was a reason that was safety related...like an alien spacecraft landing down range and the T.O. didn't notice it, the MD can deal with something odd like this.

 

Phantom

[John Kloehr]

35 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Sooooooo, should a member of the P'nut Gallery yells out 'Cease Fire' and its unwarranted,

and the shooter stops..... wouldn't the TO be correct to approve a reshoot?

Well, what if this happens and it is warranted? But is not due to the shooter's actions (perhaps a participant, not an officer, sees a kid run out onto the range). I would agree with you for a reshoot in either case.

 

Took a look at the rules (page 18):

Quote

“Cease Fire” or “STOP!” – The command called out by the CRO/TO or any witnessing Range Officer/Match Official at any time...

 

So what is a member of the "P'nut Gallery?" (page 11):

 

Quote

Every participant in a SASS match is expected to be a safety officer. Each shooter’s first responsibility is for his or her own safe conduct. All shooters are expected to remain alert for actions by others that are unsafe. Any Range Officer or shooter may confront any participant about an observed, unsafe situation.

 

Hmm... "safety officer." Not capitalized, not a "Safety Officer." Not a witnessing Match Official (capitalized). By the rules, no provision for a reshoot. Sure, one can respectfully escalate to the MD if the CRO/TO does not offer a reshoot. It seems the CRO has the authority (page 18):

 

Quote

It is expected the Chief Range Officer will be the responsible party for resolving all safety related matters occurring in the loading, unloading, and firing line areas.

 

However, also on page 18:

 

Quote

However, as all shooters are considered Safety Officers, any shooter who observes a safety infraction not witnessed by the CRO should call the infraction to a CRO’s attention

 

Capitalized! This looks like an inconsistency in the rule book. I could resolve this internally in favor of the capitalization on page 18 and also set aside the preceding word ("considered" meaning "not really but close enough"). But I don't... I resolve this internally in the favor of safety.

 

I don't care who calls a Cease Fire; I cease firing. I'll let the CRO/TO sort it out.

 

And I'm sure any CRO/TO who hears a Cease Fire from the P'nut Gallery is going to immediately repeat the call and enforce it which makes the question moot. Reshoot should be offered unless the shooter was the reason for the call.

 

But the OP question was about a mistaken call by a spotter, not the P'nut Gallery. I'll post about that next so PWB can slap me again.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

5 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

Well, what if this happens and it is warranted? But is not due to the shooter's actions (perhaps a participant, not an officer, sees a kid run out onto the range). I would agree with you for a reshoot in either case.

 

Took a look at the rules (page 18):

 

So what is a member of the "P'nut Gallery?" (page 11):

 

 

Hmm... "safety officer." Not capitalized, not a "Safety Officer." Not a witnessing Match Official (capitalized). By the rules, no provision for a reshoot. Sure, one can respectfully escalate to the MD if the CRO/TO does not offer a reshoot. It seems the CRO has the authority (page 18):

 

 

However, also on page 18:

 

 

Capitalized! This looks like an inconsistency in the rule book. I could resolve this internally in favor of the capitalization on page 18 and also set aside the preceding word ("considered" meaning "not really but close enough"). But I don't... I resolve this internally in the favor of safety.

 

I don't care who calls a Cease Fire; I cease firing. I'll let the CRO/TO sort it out.

 

And I'm sure any CRO/TO who hears a Cease Fire from the P'nut Gallery is going to immediately repeat the call and enforce it which makes the question moot. Reshoot should be offered unless the shooter was the reason for the call.

 

But the OP question was about a mistaken call by a spotter, not the P'nut Gallery. I'll post about that next so PWB can slap me again.

I'm sorry...are you specifically addressing a "Cease Fire" command???

 

I don't think that's much of an issue. As I'm sure your experience in our game as exposed you to a Cease Fire command...which can come from any direction...from any Stage...that's a no-brainer...Capitols or not.

 

Phantom

[John Kloehr]

Getting back to the OP now, a Spotter calls out "one more." That would be an MSV if not corrected. Safety. Fixable on the clock prior to employing another firearm.

 

While I found ambiguity in the case of the P'nut Gallery (which I set aside), here I see no ambiguity. The Spotters have a clearly defined role on the range (page 21):

 

• Quote

  Spotters/Counters – have the responsibility to count shots ...

Combined with page 11 (from the cease fire question):

Quote

Any Range Officer or shooter may confront any participant about an observed, unsafe situation.

 

Interference. Should be a reshoot. But not due to bad coaching, it was a mistaken safety call.

 

I did try looking at it as bad coaching, and since coaching comes from the CRO/TO, the spotter's input would not be cause for a reshoot.

 

This is also documented on page 18:

 

Quote

The role of the Chief Range Officer/Timer Operator (CRO/TO) is to safely assist the shooter through the course of fire. Coaching and constraining the shooter from unsafe acts are expected when appropriate, minimizing procedural and safety penalties whenever possible. Proper coaching or no coaching at all is NOT considered RO interference and will never be grounds for a reshoot.

 

A previous thread discussed bad coaching as a basis for a reshoot, but the "one more" callout did not come from the CRO/TO authorized to coach, it came from a Spotter responsible for counting rounds. While safety is part of coaching, safety is also a higher priority than coaching.

 

Summarizing...

 

Shooter shoots 10 rounds out of rifle, lays it down safely. Spotter counted nine shots and confronts the shooter directly and simultaneously informs the CRO/TO (within the rules).

 

Shooter (on the clock) takes prudent and permitted corrective action to resolve the safety violation (live round in rifle chamber or on carrier). Shooter does not wait for CRO/TO to process the information and provide coaching to take the action (CRO/TO is not obligated to provide the hint). Shooter is not obligated to wait. CRO/TO needs to balance safety and consider the spotter may be correct, so should favor providing the equivalent information as coaching. And it would turn out to be bad coaching.

 

But the shooter took the initiative before that could happen. There is no coaching claim. Shooter finds the rifle is safe. Shooter continues the course of fire, down some number of seconds. Due to a safety call from a Spotter.

 

 

 

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

Oh my god...you're going to make this game un-playable!

 

Phantom

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

13 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

Getting back to the OP now, a Spotter calls out "one more." That would be an MSV if not corrected. Safety. Fixable on the clock prior to employing another firearm.

 

While I found ambiguity in the case of the P'nut Gallery (which I set aside), here I see no ambiguity. The Spotters have a clearly defined role on the range (page 21):

 

•  

Combined with page 11 (from the cease fire question):

 

Interference. Should be a reshoot. But not due to bad coaching, it was a mistaken safety call.

 

I did try looking at it as bad coaching, and since coaching comes from the CRO/TO, the spotter's input would not be cause for a reshoot.

 

This is also documented on page 18:

 

 

A previous thread discussed bad coaching as a basis for a reshoot, but the "one more" callout did not come from the CRO/TO authorized to coach, it came from a Spotter responsible for counting rounds. While safety is part of coaching, safety is also a higher priority than coaching.

 

Summarizing...

 

Shooter shoots 10 rounds out of rifle, lays it down safely. Spotter counted nine shots and confronts the shooter directly and simultaneously informs the CRO/TO (within the rules).

 

Shooter (on the clock) takes prudent and permitted corrective action to resolve the safety violation (live round in rifle chamber or on carrier). Shooter does not wait for CRO/TO to process the information and provide coaching to take the action (CRO/TO is not obligated to provide the hint). Shooter is not obligated to wait. CRO/TO needs to balance safety and consider the spotter may be correct, so should favor providing the equivalent information as coaching. And it would turn out to be bad coaching.

 

But the shooter took the initiative before that could happen. There is no coaching claim. Shooter finds the rifle is safe. Shooter continues the course of fire, down some number of seconds. Due to a safety call from a Spotter.

 

 

 

Mr. Kloehr,

 

I'm curious...have you had much SASS shooting experience? You're responses seem to be lacking practical experience...granted, all info you shared is right outta the "Book"...but it just seems...convoluted...

 

Phantom

[John Kloehr]

1 minute ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Mr. Kloehr,

 

I'm curious...have you had much SASS shooting experience? You're responses seem to be lacking practical experience...granted, all info you shared is right outta the "Book"...but it just seems...convoluted...

 

Phantom

More in other sports than SASS, and the rules are different here. I don't see them as wrong, just different.

 

Convoluted? Attribute it to me being an engineer.

[Goody, SASS #26190]

3 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Yes, but only because someone did something that is unethical.

 

Like yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Now if there was a reason that was safety related...like an alien spacecraft landing down range and the T.O. didn't notice it, the MD can deal with something odd like this.

 

Phantom

I can still feel the cringe that went up my spine when a yellow flag would go up, and some nimrod would yell "CEASE FIRE, DOWN RANGE!" Then you would have 5 re-shoots, potentially.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

2 minutes ago, Goody, SASS #26190 said:

I can still feel the cringe that went up my spine when a yellow flag would go up, and some nimrod would yell "CEASE FIRE, DOWN RANGE!" Then you would have 5 re-shoots, potentially.

And that kinda crap happens all the time...just ask Whiskey Kid

 

[Tequila Shooter]

Getting back to what was originally asked.  If the rifle was placed down (with the action open) there is no immediate safety issue, so other than a spotter, however well meaning it might be, got out of their swim lane and shouldn’t have said anything.  Spotters watch for hits/misses/procedurals - TO watch for safety/round counts/coaching if asked for by the shooter.  Anyone can make hypotheticals all day long that would be an immediate safety concern, but that wasn’t what was posted.  So, if the shooter listened to a spotter - no reshoot, if the TO said it then give the shooter a reshoot, they listened to who they should’ve.  Just my dos centavos. 

[John Kloehr]

19 minutes ago, Tequila Shooter said:

Getting back to what was originally asked.  If the rifle was placed down (with the action open) there is no immediate safety issue, so other than a spotter, however well meaning it might be, got out of their swim lane and shouldn’t have said anything.  Spotters watch for hits/misses/procedurals - TO watch for safety/round counts/coaching if asked for by the shooter.  Anyone can make hypotheticals all day long that would be an immediate safety concern, but that wasn’t what was posted.  So, if the shooter listened to a spotter - no reshoot, if the TO said it then give the shooter a reshoot, they listened to who they should’ve.  Just my dos centavos. 

Spotter is tasked with counting shots. Spotter counted 9.

[Chantry]

40 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

Spotter is tasked with counting shots. Spotter counted 9.

Then the spotter brings this to the attention of the RO/TO when the shooter is done with the stage, but before they move the gun that MAY have live round on the carrier or in the chamber.

[Chantry]

5 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Sooooooo, should a member of the P'nut Gallery yells out 'Cease Fire' and its unwarranted,

and the shooter stops..... wouldn't the TO be correct to approve a reshoot?

 

Looks like we might be splitting frog hairs depending upon what the shooter may or may not actually

hear while in the course of their stage run.

 

..........Widder

 

Shooter gets a re-shoot.  The RO/TO is primarily focused on the shooter and may not see something that others might.   In the end this is just a game and I would much rather see an unnecessarily called cease fire versus someone getting hurt.

[Dirty Dog Doug]

my home range is on a real ranch 200 head of cows or more 

First person to see cows walking on the hill above our berm Yell cows  cease fire 

shooter get reshoot 

[Null N. Void]

9 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

So are there any other SASS rules that you disregard?

 

Phantom

I know the rules.  There are interpretations.  I respect those.  Do you?

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

19 minutes ago, Null N. Void said:

I know the rules.  There are interpretations.  I respect those.  Do you?

Well educate me then. You said "Anyone" and you'll give a reshoot. That to me means...well...anyone. So where is the grey area in the rules that would allow this?

 

What is your interpretation of Stage Official? 

 

Seriously, I want to know.

 

Phantom

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

 

PEANUTS ! ! !   POPCORN ! ! !   CRACKERJACKS !!!  Get yer Cold Beer !!!!

 

And, by the way.  There ARE NO interpretations of the RULES.  The RULES are read and applied EXACTLY as written.   Example:  "Make Rifle Safe" does not mean you have to put it back where you got it.  

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

55 minutes ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

 

PEANUTS ! ! !   POPCORN ! ! !   CRACKERJACKS !!!  Get yer Cold Beer !!!!

 

And, by the way.  There ARE NO interpretations of the RULES.  The RULES are read and applied EXACTLY as written.   Example:  "Make Rifle Safe" does not mean you have to put it back where you got it.  

Going off on a little personal tangent...but it's one of my pet peeves.

 

Stage writers putting in the stage descriptions things like "Make rifle safe"..."Make shotgun safe"...like...duuuhhhhh. So if they didn't put that in the Stage description I suppose we can "Make rifle unsafe"????

 

Phantom

 

 

[Anvil Al #59168]

22 hours ago, Shooting Bull said:

Shooter is done with rifle, stages it safety on table and begins to move to the next shooting position. One of the spotters yells multiple times, “One more! One more!” Shooter moves back and checks rifle but finds it is in fact empty. Is this interference and grounds for a reshoot?

 

 

Happened to me at a Regional.

NO reshoot.

My bad for going back. They all felt bad. 

But that's the way it goes.

You can't have someone on one posse giving out reshoots when they

should not. 

Then others go by the rule and don't.

[Shooting Bull]

14 hours ago, Tequila Shooter said:

Getting back to what was originally asked.  If the rifle was placed down (with the action open) there is no immediate safety issue, so other than a spotter, however well meaning it might be, got out of their swim lane and shouldn’t have said anything.  Spotters watch for hits/misses/procedurals - TO watch for safety/round counts/coaching if asked for by the shooter.  Anyone can make hypotheticals all day long that would be an immediate safety concern, but that wasn’t what was posted.  So, if the shooter listened to a spotter - no reshoot, if the TO said it then give the shooter a reshoot, they listened to who they should’ve.  Just my dos centavos. 

 

If there's a round on the carrier, which it what was being called, the shooter eats a 10 safety penalty.  So apparently it is a safety issue.  Not my opinion, just going by the rules.

[Tequila Shooter]

7 minutes ago, Shooting Bull said:

 

If there's a round on the carrier, which it what was being called, the shooter eats a 10 safety penalty.  So apparently it is a safety issue.  Not my opinion, just going by the rules.

 

No argument that it’s a MSV, what I meant by immediate was IRT the example given about someone seeing someone walking down range where a cease fire should be called by anyone/everyone. 

[Ranger Dan]

No one addressed the situation where the shooter fired 9 rounds and jacked one out. The usual "one more" is called out by RO/TO and anyone else who is counting rounds. Shooter goes back and there is no round in the rifle, so no safety issue, just that only 9 rounds were fired. Would this be grounds for a reshoot. I think not. Telling the shooter "one more" is not implying there is an unsafe condition, only that they only fired 9 rounds. If they choose to correct it by reloading, all is good, if they decide to move on and take the 5 seconds for unfired round, still good. If they lever the rifle and dry fire it, confirming that it is empty, still good and its time to make that decision to reload or not cuz you were not counting your rounds. So unless the shooter actually shot 10 and it was a mistake to call "one more" I say no reshoot. Seen this where the posse spent 5 minutes till they found the jacked out round to confirm to the shooter that they did in fact earn the 5 second penalty.