WTC

[runs with scissors]

Something happened at a match I attended last weekend that got me thinking.

 

Stage was rifle first, then pistols, then shotgun.

 

Shooter shoots the rifle sequence then puts his rifle down on the table and runs off down range to shoot the rest of the stage.  So happens he puts the rifle down on the edge of the table almost perfectly at its balance point.  As he is shooting the rest of the stage, the rifle is teetering back and forth like a teeter totter.  Shooter doesnt see it but the entire posse does.  A spotter moves next to the table and puts his hand down below the rifle to catch it if it falls.  Luckly the shooter finished the stage and collected his rifle without incident.

 

But I was wondering, what would be the call if the rifle did fall and the spotter caught it?  Would it be a SDQ because the rifle would have hit the ground or would it be a no call because in fact it did not hit the ground because the spotter caught it?

[Captain Bill Burt]

SDQ.

[runs with scissors]

2 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

SDQ.

 

Thats a possibility because he would have gotten a SDQ if the spotter hadn't helped him. 

 

But how many times have you seen a shooter stop in the middle of a stage because he forgot the sequence untill somebody yells out "two on the right" and then he shoots it correctly. 

 

He doesnt get a P because he would have gotten one without the outside help.  Whats the difference here?

[Captain Bill Burt]

1 minute ago, runs with scissors said:

 

Thats a possibility because he would have gotten a SDQ if the spotter hadn't helped him. 

 

But how many times have you seen a shooter stop in the middle of a stage because he forgot the sequence untill somebody yells out "two on the right" and then he shoots it correctly. 

 

He doesnt get a P because he would have gotten one without the outside help.  Whats the difference here?

From my perspective there’s no difference, but the rules say one is a SDQ and the other is a no call.

[runs with scissors]

Another thing, the handbook says you only get a SDQ if the rifle falls and breaks the 170 (underline in the rule book).  Here we'll never know if it would have broken the 170 or not.

[Billy Boots, # 20282 LTG-Regulator]

3 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

From my perspective there’s no difference, but the rules say one is a SDQ and the other is a no call.

kind of sad but true.  Good news is rifle was saved from possible damage and sweeping someone in fall.  

[John Kloehr]

MSV if the helper catches it without it breaking the 170 if it actually falls.

16 minutes ago, runs with scissors said:

... what would be the call if the rifle did fall and the spotter caught it?  

MSV if caught without breaking the 170. No call if it did not actually fall. On assumption it is not loaded.

 

SDQ if it does fall and break 170.

 

 

[Lone Spur Jake SASS #7728]

Shooter get's a "no call" because spotter interfered?

What say ye PWB?

[Captain Bill Burt]

7 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

MSV if the helper catches it without it breaking the 170 if it actually falls.

MSV if caught without breaking the 170. No call if it did not actually fall. On assumption it is not loaded.

 

SDQ if it does fall and break 170.

 

 

That depends upon whether the gun ‘slipped and fell’ or was dropped. OP said it was teetering the whole time. Therefore it never came to rest and didn’t slip and fall, it was dropped, so SDQ.

[Captain Bill Burt]

The idea behind the rule, as I understand it, is that it’s unfair for one shooter to avoid a penalty because he has a quick thinking TO, while another shooter might get the penalty. I’m not in favor of that rule for a few reasons. One reason being that it’s the TO’s duty to safely assist and this rule discourages that by locking in a penalty if the TO intervenes. Another is that it isn’t applied to other actions TO’s take that aid the shooter, like telling him what target to shoot.

[John Kloehr]

10 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

That depends upon whether the gun ‘slipped and fell’ or was dropped. OP said it was teetering the whole time. Therefore it never came to rest and didn’t slip and fall, it was dropped, so SDQ.

Shooter "puts his rifle down.."

 

A stretch to say "it was dropped."

[Billy Boots, # 20282 LTG-Regulator]

24 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

MSV if the helper catches it without it breaking the 170 if it actually falls.

MSV if caught without breaking the 170. No call if it did not actually fall. On assumption it is not loaded.

 

SDQ if it does fall and break 170.

 

 

JK,

If my memory is correct this was once the case.  Would be nice if still that way but I believe CBB is right on his call and comments.

[runs with scissors]

5 minutes ago, Billy Boots, # 20282 LTG-Regulator said:

JK,

If my memory is correct this was once the case.  Would be nice if still that way but I believe CBB is right on his call and comments.

 

It doesn't seem right.  If I was a spotter and saw a rifle about to fall, I would always move to stop it because an expensive piece of hardware could get damaged if it fell on the ground.

 

But here we are saying if I just let it fall the shooter has a chance at a no call if it doesn't break the 170.  But if I stop it from falling I doom the shooter to a SDQ!

[Cheyenne Culpepper 32827]

A msv if it slips and falls without breaking 170.   If it does break 170 sdq     In the past I’ve caught several in mid air. One even went on the win category at eot.   That was before the clarification.   I have by reflex caught one after it broke 170. Sdq

[PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L]

The difference between "slip & fall" vs "dropped" is whether the firearm was in CONTINUOUS MOTION once the shooter relinquished control of it.

"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.42

A TO or spotter preventing a DROPPED firearm from ending up on the ground does NOT negate the SDQ for a "dropped unloaded firearm".
 

...and verbal COACHING to get a temporarily confused shooter back "on track" regarding target engagement is irrelevant to this discussion.