Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

WTC - 170 degree rule.


Hoss

Recommended Posts

I was at loading table, watching, so had no “official” standing, other than “everyone is a safety officer”. 
 

Shooter using single trigger intertial reset shotgun. Shoots first shot, BANG 

second shot- nothing trigger did not reset. Shooter un-shoulders SG bangs butt on table, muzzle more or less straight up. This resets trigger, shooter finishes stage with no further issues. 
 

No call was made.  After the stage I discussed this with shooter. (Very accomplished & experienced shooter). My thought was it should be a SDQ. He said he had seen lots of shooters reset like this, no call was ever made as muzzle was essentially pointed in a safe direction.  While I’m not disagreeing that the muzzle was pointed in safe direction, it definitely broke the 170. I supposed had it gone BANG while being reset, the posse would have been subject to a lead shower! 
 

I know what the rule book says, but would this fall under “don’t be a hardazz” exception, or would you call the SDQ? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the TO or spotters didn't say anything it's a no call.  However, the 170 was broken vertically and should be a SDQ.  I have seen shooters reset the trigger by slapping the butt with one hand while the barrels are pointed down range.  It isn't necessary to use the table, but I suppose it's faster.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the shotgun barrels point within 5 degrees from vertical???

 

Don't understand the question. It did or it didn't. 

 

That said, many folk will give a warning at a monthly match if the violation isn't approaching and egregious one. 

 

Phantom

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said:

SDQ. The rest of the narrative is irrelevant. 

“… muzzle more or less straight up.”

 

Less straight up, within 170 degrees?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say if all observers said "more less straight up" then they have to give the shooter the benefit of the doubt.  If someone saw it "straight up" or worse, then that is different.  Thinking about it, yes we occasionally see shotgun shooters do that, but if they hit the butt pad or butt flat against the table, then the barrels won't be straight up but slightly downrange due to the drop of the stock, unless they broke the 170 raising it up before hitting it on the table.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

No call was made.  After the stage I discussed this with shooter. (Very accomplished & experienced shooter). My thought was it should be a SDQ. He said he had seen lots of shooters reset like this, no call was ever made as muzzle was essentially pointed in a safe direction.  While I’m not disagreeing that the muzzle was pointed in safe direction, it definitely broke the 170. I supposed had it gone BANG while being reset, the posse would have been subject to a lead shower! 
 

I know what the rule book says, but would this fall under “don’t be a hardazz” exception, or would you call the SDQ? 

 

Please provide reference to that "exception".

The original verbiage has been changed to:

"Do not be over-zealous and don’t be harshly tough"
RO1 p.9 - Attitude

That does NOT mean ignore the violation because "lots of shooters reset like this, no call was ever made as muzzle was essentially pointed in a safe direction"

 

1 hour ago, Tex Jones, SASS 2263 said:

If the TO or spotters didn't say anything it's a no call.  However, the 170 was broken vertically and should be a SDQ.  I have seen shooters reset the trigger by slapping the butt with one hand while the barrels are pointed down range.  It isn't necessary to use the table, but I suppose it's faster.  

 

That would be a MIScall coupled with "dereliction of duty".

 

IMO.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Matthew Duncan said:

“… muzzle more or less straight up.”

Noticeably not straight up?

 

c-angle85_32743_lg.gif

 

Not a lot, but noticeable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L said:

 

Please provide reference to that "exception".

The original verbiage has been changed to:

"Do not be over-zealous and don’t be harshly tough"
RO1 p.9 - Attitude

That does NOT mean ignore the violation because "lots of shooters reset like this, no call was ever made as muzzle was essentially pointed in a safe direction"

 

 

That would be a MIScall coupled with "dereliction of duty".

 

IMO.

Not disagreeing with you!  Had I been TO I would have called it. That’s why I mentioned it to shooter. FWIW shooter is a nice guy, I have no doubt he would have accepted the penalty without comment of rancor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Is this 10 or 5 degrees from vertical?

 

Phantom

According to the Florida Center for Instructional Technology (source of clipart), 5 degrees from vertical.

 

10 degrees looks bigger:

 

protractor-01-1641440782.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when the 170 degree rule was a big deal with cross draws and reholstering pistols.  The ROC proposed a new way of holstering pistols.  I found the old videos for those that want to learn a little SASS history.  On paper and in the first video the "Circle of Safety" concept sounded good.  Then when people saw the part two video it became jokingly referred to as the Cone of Death.  Watch if you want otherwise skip to the next post.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

I remember when the 170 degree rule was a big deal with cross draws and reholstering pistols.  The ROC proposed a new way of holstering pistols.  I found the old videos for those that want to learn a little SASS history.  On paper and in the first video the "Circle of Safety" concept sounded good.  Then when people saw the part two video it became jokingly referred to as the Cone of Death.  Watch if you want otherwise skip to the next post.

 

 

 

I was initially against the Cone of Death...Safety...now I'm for it.

 

NO ONE is consistently calling slight 180 violations. If one actually called all the 180 violations they would have no one to shoot with.

 

Phantom

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually had an RO step in front of the line and call ME for breaking the 180° in another shooting game.  Been shooting longer then the little fellow has been alive and never did it.  Apparently I was doing too well against his friends.  Match DQ - I left the match and that game.  Did not bother to challenge a stacked deck as I had somehow been squadded with a group that was entirely strangers all from another area.

Edited by Rip Snorter
Clarity
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

First, the 180 was in reference to clearing and returning a revolver to holster...but...

I'll follow up on that, my newbiness considered it for all firearms and am not aware of a different rule for long guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

I'll follow up on that, my newbiness considered it for all firearms and am not aware of a different rule for long guns.

Well you don't holster long guns.

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Well you don't holster long guns.

 

Phantom

Agreed, and I don't do cross-draw. But I do promise to take a closer look. I'll be back to this and another topic, though it may be a few days. I will make well-considered posts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

Agreed, and I don't do cross-draw. But I do promise to take a closer look. I'll be back to this and another topic, though it may be a few days. I will make well-considered posts.

There are lots of 180 violations on non-XDraw holsters...

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 170/180 rule is probably the hardest one to call. It’s generally only a split second, and depending on where you are standing can be very hard to be sure. Once you ask. “Did he or didn’t he??? Hmmmm?” Doubt has entered in and benefit of the doubt goes to shooter. I’ve only seen a bare handful in 12 years. And one of those was pretty simple call.  I was TOing newish shooter. (Who was a big hard of hearing). He had shot pistol dry, but kept cocking and pulling trigger. Ii said “you’re done, next gun” he turned around to face me, with cocked pistol pointed at my gut, said “what”?  :o

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen Whiskey Kid call the 170 on holstering twice in the last few months, but it was obvious.  When the shooter with a straight draw holster misses the holster towards the rear.  He even brought it up at a shooter's meeting so people would know they will get called on it!  I always look mine into the holster.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I called an SDQ on a shooter today for breaking the 170, after shooting the last pistol, last gun on the stage, he held it straight down beside his holster instead of holstering it. When I said something about it he holstered it but didn’t let go and I saw it was cocked. I told him do not let go of your pistol, draw it and point it down range and pull the trigger, then reholster. He did and he got the SDQ for the 170 but I was able to stop him from getting the second SDQ for holstering a cocked revolver which would have in reality been a MDQ on his first stage of the day.

 

 I just got lucky catching it before he let go of the revolver.

 

Randy

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than the obvious violations...you know...when the revolver is pointing right at you...how often is a slight violation of the 180 called?

 

Not very often...

 

Phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

Other than the obvious violations...you know...when the revolver is pointing right at you...how often is a slight violation of the 180 called?

 

Not very often...

 

Phantom

October 6 2024. Mark it down. Phantom & I agree on something!!!!!

 

it’s the hardest penalty to call in our game. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said:

I don’t understand your question. OP then said, “…it definitely broke the 170.
 

That’s all that matters. 

My question is how can a “more or less straight up” be later used as evidence as breaking 170?

Edited by Matthew Duncan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matthew Duncan said:

My question is how can a “more or less straight up” be later used as evidence as breaking 170?

IMHO as stated, muzzle definitely broke the 170. Was it exactly 90 degrees from horizontal I could not say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why not making calls at local monthly matches 

cause shooters  to develop BAD habits..

And then they say “I have done it since I started and it’s never been called?”

 

I’ve mentioned many a time, at month matches, as shooters leave the loading table to start.. “Muzzles up!!”

Just sayin’..:huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was making the call, I would not use the words "more or less".  It either broke the 170 or it did not.  Don't equivocate.  I would commit myself to a position, or not make the call. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s not forget other than breaking the 170 there was a live round still in the chamber that didn’t go off! Hmmmm……If you break the 170 with a loaded gun isn’t that a MDQ??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:

If you break the 170 with a loaded gun isn’t that a MDQ??

Nope - just an SDQ. 

 

I'm sure someone will look up the exact wording, but I believe that the violation of the 170 doesn't distinguish between "loaded" and "unloaded".

 

Phantom

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:

Let’s not forget other than breaking the 170 there was a live round still in the chamber that didn’t go off! Hmmmm……If you break the 170 with a loaded gun isn’t that a MDQ??

It would be if you swept someone with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eliphalet R. Moderator said:

If I was making the call, I would not use the words "more or less".  It either broke the 170 or it did not.  Don't equivocate.  I would commit myself to a position, or not make the call. 

There was zero doubt in my mind that he broke the 170 rule. My “more or less straight up” comment was more it could have been slight past the 180. (More correctly stated as  90+) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hoss said:

It would be if you swept someone with it. 

Isn’t breaking 170 essentially  sweeping everyone?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of mine  broke the 170 by quite a bit with a loaded rifle and got a MDQ!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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