Hoss Posted October 5 Share Posted October 5 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? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted October 5 Share Posted October 5 8 minutes ago, Hoss said: it definitely broke the 170. SDQ. The rest of the narrative is irrelevant. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tex Jones, SASS 2263 Posted October 5 Share Posted October 5 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 5 Share Posted October 5 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 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Duncan Posted October 5 Share Posted October 5 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? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene, SASS # 27489 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
PaleWolf Brunelle, #2495L Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kloehr Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 53 minutes ago, Matthew Duncan said: “… muzzle more or less straight up.” Noticeably not straight up? Not a lot, but noticeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 1 minute ago, John Kloehr said: Noticeably not straight up? Not a lot, but noticeable. Is this 10 or 5 degrees from vertical? Phantom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 6 Author Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
John Kloehr Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip Snorter Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 (edited) 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 October 6 by Rip Snorter Clarity 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kloehr Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
John Kloehr Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 6 Author Share Posted October 6 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”? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene, SASS # 27489 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
Randy Saint Eagle, SASS # 64903 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 3 hours ago, Matthew Duncan said: “… muzzle more or less straight up.” Less straight up, within 170 degrees? I don’t understand your question. OP then said, “…it definitely broke the 170.” That’s all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
Captain Bill Burt Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 6 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. This. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 6 Author Share Posted October 6 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. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Duncan Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 (edited) 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 October 6 by Matthew Duncan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 6 Author Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
Rance - SASS # 54090 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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’.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliphalet R. Moderator Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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. 5 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 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 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 6 Author Share Posted October 6 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 More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 6 Author Share Posted October 6 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+) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 3 minutes ago, Hoss said: It would be if you swept someone with it. Isn’t breaking 170 essentially sweeping everyone? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted October 6 Share Posted October 6 A friend of mine broke the 170 by quite a bit with a loaded rifle and got a MDQ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts