Proposed Rule Changes

[McCandless]

3 hours ago, July Smith said:

As the rules stand right now is the lever wrap shown in this picture legal or illegal?  

 

Legal or illegal?  Yes    So either there needs to be strict wording of the rule to go by or remove the wording that makes it a puzzle.

  

So,  levers may be wrapped or padded with leather, suede, imitation leather, or whatever that looks like leather.  I'm sure rawhide is good too.  So, as long as your padding material is covered, under the proposed #3,  we'll be good to go.   T.O.s won't have to police that mess.

[Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728]

This is too much fun.  So I wrap my lever using 1/8" wide strips of soft elk skin or deer skin or cow skin or sheep skin or buffalo skin,  3 or 4 or 5 or 6 times without any filler, am I currently within SASS rules?

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

20 minutes ago, Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728 said:

This is too much fun.  So I wrap my lever using 1/8" wide strips of soft elk skin or deer skin or cow skin or sheep skin or buffalo skin,  3 or 4 or 5 or 6 times without any filler, am I currently within SASS rules?

That's a definite maybe.

 

Phantom

[Yul Lose]

1 hour ago, Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728 said:

This is too much fun.  So I wrap my lever using 1/8" wide strips of soft elk skin or deer skin or cow skin or sheep skin or buffalo skin,  3 or 4 or 5 or 6 times without any filler, am I currently within SASS rules?

Prolly depends on which side of the bed the MD or TO got out of that morning.

[Hells Comin]

9 minutes ago, Yul Lose said:

Prolly depends on which side of the bed the MD or TO got out of that morning.

Do they announce that in the shooters meeting?

[Griff]

Language that's been in the shooter's handbook since 2006 is suddenly deemed inadequate?  What I see is a clear case of public cowardice.  An unwillingness to enforce rules suddenly transforms itself into a need to remove said rule.  I'm somewhat dismayed at the what future holds.  But, after this, not really surprised.  Obviously a lot of other rules need to be changed... 

 

Flame away.

[Captain Bill Burt]

7 hours ago, Griff said:

Language that's been in the shooter's handbook since 2006 is suddenly deemed inadequate?  What I see is a clear case of public cowardice.  An unwillingness to enforce rules suddenly transforms itself into a need to remove said rule.  I'm somewhat dismayed at the what future holds.  But, after this, not really surprised.  Obviously a lot of other rules need to be changed... 

 

Flame away.

I certainly won’t be flaming you my friend. I think we can respectfully agree to disagree on this one.

[The Surgeon]

8 hours ago, Griff said:

Language that's been in the shooter's handbook since 2006 is suddenly deemed inadequate?  What I see is a clear case of public cowardice.  An unwillingness to enforce rules suddenly transforms itself into a need to remove said rule.  I'm somewhat dismayed at the what future holds.  But, after this, not really surprised.  Obviously a lot of other rules need to be changed... 

 

Flame away.

I'm kinda new around these parts... what is the issue with any rule changes short of making the guns shoot themselves? I see cowboy action shooting as a sport and competition not a reenactment. Even if you want it to be a reenactment I fail to see the case against modifications since I would bet that anyone that wanted to and could, would of been able to modify anything they wanted in the late 1800s.  If your issue is fairness for all. If a modification is available to everyone then it is no advantage to anyone. all the rule change #3 does is remove the objectivity of what constitutes "to thick" of a wrap. since the current rule specifies no set measurement. 

[Barry Sloe]

1 hour ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I certainly won’t be flaming you my friend. I think we can respectfully agree to disagree on this one.

No flaming from me. 

I've still got my 2009 Shooters Handbook that will fit in my back pocket. Now it's a 3 ring binder that's an inch and a half thick.

Here's a couple of thoughts:

- item #1 on the agenda; yes, but from what I've been told from various TGs, that's the way it was voted for last time. 

- no need to have a Shooters Handbook and a RO1 Book because they've grown to be essentially the same. Combine the two documents. 

- Are the Covenants "rules"? If so, why do we have rules that duplicate them and/or morph them?

I tried to not go too far off on a tangent, I think I may have failed. 

 

If I were voting it would be yes, yes, and yes. 

 

Happy Holidays to all, 

BS

 

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

9 hours ago, Griff said:

Language that's been in the shooter's handbook since 2006 is suddenly deemed inadequate?  What I see is a clear case of public cowardice.  An unwillingness to enforce rules suddenly transforms itself into a need to remove said rule.  I'm somewhat dismayed at the what future holds.  But, after this, not really surprised.  Obviously a lot of other rules need to be changed... 

 

Flame away.

Cowardice...nice.

 

If you've been actively traveling to multiple SASS clubs/shoots you'd recognize that some rules have been inconsistently applied. So now we have a time limit on when we can correct weaknesses in our rules? That somehow this is indicative of our future? As the game broadened, so has the rules.

 

I'm sure you call violations on everyone that has their SG belt too high...or the violations on breaking the 180 holstering rule. So you'd be completely fine with never touching those rules because theoretically we've been fine all these years.

 

You say it's unwillingness to enforce rules in reference to the proposed rule change #3. Have you EVER considered that the hesitation to call a violation has nothing to do with "unwillingness"...or 'cowardice", but instead has something to do with ambiguity? Oh no...couldn't be that. Instead you choose to insult those that think differently than you.

 

Like I said...nice.

 

Phantom

[Hoss]

13 hours ago, Yul Lose said:

Prolly depends on which side of the bed the MD or TO got out of that morning.

Or if you shoot in his category 

[Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728]

Hmmmm.....I have only been a SASS member since 1995, but since then I have seen some major rule changes.  Shotgun belt location, pickup of dropped round, external modifications, etc. etc.  Yet, CAS has continued to keep folks coming out and having fun.  So, if new rule changes are made to enhance the CAS experience, why not try it.

I do NOT like "Covenants!!!"  It's either a rule or it's NOT a rule.      

[Wyatt Hurts SASS#72737]

Simply 3 thumbs up on the rule changes and with 3 thumbs in the lever, the size of the wrap is never an issue 

[Deuce Stevens SASS#55996]

On 12/13/2023 at 11:38 PM, Griff said:

Language that's been in the shooter's handbook since 2006 is suddenly deemed inadequate?  What I see is a clear case of public cowardice.  An unwillingness to enforce rules suddenly transforms itself into a need to remove said rule.  I'm somewhat dismayed at the what future holds.  But, after this, not really surprised.  Obviously a lot of other rules need to be changed... 

 

Flame away.

Griff, I absolutely understand what you are saying and understand your frustration probably better than most. There has been many times over the years in my time on the ROC we've felt like the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dyke. With growth comes change. SASS and CAS is strong. But our demographic and the "whys" as far as why shooters play have changed a lot since 2006. That's a whole nother topic. Remember back when the action open action closed rules were being debated and talked about. It was exhausting. The sky was falling. Fast forward 8 years later and it's been fantastic with no ill effects and actually had made life easier on match Ro's, To's, MD's etc. Just like in that case the membership will get to decide on these 3 issues via their TG's. We'll see how it all hashes out. Although I disagree with you on this particular subject I do understand where you are coming from and respect your opinion. 

[Griff]

33 minutes ago, Deuce Stevens SASS#55996 said:

Griff, I absolutely understand what you are saying and understand your frustration probably better than most. There has been many times over the years in my time on the ROC we've felt like the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dyke. With growth comes change. SASS and CAS is strong. But our demographic and the "whys" as far as why shooters play have changed a lot since 2006. That's a whole nother topic. Remember back when the action open action closed rules were being debated and talked about. It was exhausting. The sky was falling. Fast forward 8 years later and it's been fantastic with no ill effects and actually had made life easier on match Ro's, To's, MD's etc. Just like in that case the membership will get to decide on these 3 issues via their TG's. We'll see how it all hashes out. Although I disagree with you on this particular subject I do understand where you are coming from and respect your opinion. 

Deuce,  Thank you for taking the time to respond.   I, too understand both sides of the issue...  But, probably ain't wise enough to determine where the compromise (if any), should be... Like a few other changes, it seems we tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater.   Or stated another way, maybe while we recognize something is flawed... instead of trying to remedy the flaw, we go all-in changing to something that is only slightly less, or equally flawed in another direction.   While I've taken a firm stance in my previous posts... I ain't so inflexible as to not see the value in both the rule and some allowance for individuality and need.  There can be cases where Yes or No choices are not the best options... Maybe in some cases, it's best to offer multiple choices.

[Possum Skinner, SASS#60697]

After discussion with my local shooters, I voted yes to all 3.

[Hells Comin]

On 12/10/2023 at 2:22 PM, McCandless said:

About the only argument against some of the built-up "blocks" or spacers is "they don't look cowboy".   But, I wasn't around back then, and I don't know what some 19th century person may or may not have done.  

 

To my eye, this just doesn't "look" right.   But, outlawing a bit of foam under a leather lever wrap doesn't sound right either.

 

(photo courtesy of Jokers Wild)... no it's not his rifle either.

Are going to vote yes for this ?

[Captain Bill Burt]

One of our local clubs voted yes on all three today. No dissenters.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

On 12/15/2023 at 10:17 AM, Griff said:

Deuce,  Thank you for taking the time to respond.

What?

 

No thank you's for all the other folks that took the time to respond????

 

 

Phantom...one of the Peons...

[Eyesa Horg]

Just think of the fun when we start discussing where a belly button is!  Obviously some are just above the waist and others are just below the arm pits!

[Captain Bill Burt]

21 minutes ago, Eyesa Horg said:

Just think of the fun when we start discussing where a belly button is!  Obviously some are just above the waist and others are just below the arm pits!

If someone wants to embarrass themselves by wearing a shotgun bra I say have at it. I’m not going searching for belly buttons and I’m not going to embarrass myself by wearing a shotgun belt under my armpits either.

 

I’ve yet to meet the shooter who can’t beat me with a legally positioned SG belt but can once they hike it up.

 

I reserve the right to photograph those folks, post the pics and laugh at them.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

The height of the SG belt is one of those things that just bugs the crap outta me. Not from a competitive perspective, but rather from a "don't they fricken know the rules" and "that looks absolutely stoopid" perspective.

 

I'm going to start carrying nylon gloves (or equiv), so that next time someone evites me to feel for their damn BB, I'll say let's go!

 

Phantom

[Yul Lose]

39 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

The height of the SG belt is one of those things that just bugs the crap outta me. Not from a competitive perspective, but rather from a "don't they fricken know the rules" and "that looks absolutely stoopid" perspective.

 

I'm going to start carrying nylon gloves (or equiv), so that next time someone evites me to feel for their damn BB, I'll say let's go!

 

Phantom

Pervert.

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

4 minutes ago, Yul Lose said:

Pervert.

Nooooo...I'd be a pervert if I didn't wear gloves.

 

Phantom

[Hoss]

42 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

The height of the SG belt is one of those things that just bugs the crap outta me. Not from a competitive perspective, but rather from a "don't they fricken know the rules" and "that looks absolutely stoopid" perspective.

 

I'm going to start carrying nylon gloves (or equiv), so that next time someone evites me to feel for their damn BB, I'll say let's go!

 

Phantom

Ifn yore gonna poke around feeling for my belly button you gonna hafta buy me dinner first 

[Phantom, SASS #54973]

Just now, Hoss said:

Ifn yore gonna poke around feeling for my belly button you gonna hafta buy me dinner first 

If that's what it takes...

 

[Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728]

All of you folks have heard about people having "plastic surgery".   Well, I heard a rumor about someone who was trying to be the TOP world wide SASS shooter, who had his belly button surgically moved to within 6" of his neck line.   Of course all of his other body parts also moved.  Now he just has to unbutton the top four buttons of his shirt to pee.

 

[John Kloehr]

I was actually going to start another thread about the shotgun belt thing. But the discussion is live here.

 

Am I wrong that a bandolero (I think the rules use the word "bandoleer") is within the rules? And it is above the belly button? But for some reason a belt needs to be below it.

 

And the cartridges can not tilt out but can angle laterally, though a bandoleer can not be secured, which would prevent tilt out?

 

So this leads me to conclude the rule is about looking stupid? I'm OK if that is the reason, I'm OK if someone fishes rounds out of any shirt or pants pocket, though if a pouch and not a pocket, it must have a flap... Separate from all that, I need no further info on how "any other bodily orifice" got into the rules.

 

Just curious if appearance is the reason for the belly button rule. And also note when rules say one must or one can not, and the reason is not given, it makes one think... Yet I also do not ned to know about the rule for other bodily orifices...

 

On edit:  If the actual discussion on the rules is not over, this off-topic discussion could (should) be moved to another thread.

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

1 hour ago, John Kloehr said:

I was actually going to start another thread about the shotgun belt thing. But the discussion is live here.

 

Am I wrong that a bandolero (I think the rules use the word "bandoleer") is within the rules? And it is above the belly button? But for some reason a belt needs to be below it.

 

And the cartridges can not tilt out but can angle laterally, though a bandoleer can not be secured, which would prevent tilt out?

 

So this leads me to conclude the rule is about looking stupid? I'm OK if that is the reason, I'm OK if someone fishes rounds out of any shirt or pants pocket, though if a pouch and not a pocket, it must have a flap... Separate from all that, I need no further info on how "any other bodily orifice" got into the rules.

 

Just curious if appearance is the reason for the belly button rule. And also note when rules say one must or one can not, and the reason is not given, it makes one think... Yet I also do not ned to know about the rule for other bodily orifices...

 

On edit:  If the actual discussion on the rules is not over, this off-topic discussion could (should) be moved to another thread.

 

If you start a separate thread...it'll be a week or so before I get around to answering any questions regarding the history of those particular rules...low priority at the moment.

 

Before you do, PLEASE READ the SHB (pp.3-4).

 

You want to have "reasons why" individual rules included in the SHB?? Dream on! 

 

...and "bandoleer" is an accepted alternate spelling for that equipment.

 

[largo casey #19191]

I remember when there was a vidio with Tex & a new person trying out years ago & his SG belt was way up on his Torso.

                                                                                     Largo

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

There is NO RULE CHANGE being proposed regarding how shotgun ammo may be carried.

 

Since this thread has wandered off the original path (SURPRISE!!) it is being locked down.

 

Let your club Territorial Governors know how you feel about the actual ballot items so they can vote on them.