At my first match there was a qualification before the match, where i had to load, unload, move, engage multiple distances etc, before i was allowed to shoot.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
PRS Talk Negligent Discharges Need To Stop!
- Thread starter Cjwise5
- Start date
At my first match there was a qualification before the match, where i had to load, unload, move, engage multiple distances etc, before i was allowed to shoot.
Only thing I can say in defense is they had at least three RO there and one was standing between barrels and other stage making sure no flagging happened. As well as very clearly marked ribbons at waist height to prevent pedestrians.
180 degrees is better, but at least it was recognized and had precautions in place.
Talk about crazy timing...just announced!!!
There seems to be a cultural difference in between a 1 day match and a 2 day match.
The same guys, might be in both.. but you'll hear people giving advice "before" the issues happen, in most 1 day matches. Bolt back, bolt back or mag out, mag out...etc.. and you'll see DQ's for NDs.
Fast forward to a 2 day match and that very critical squad safety reinforcement all but disappears. Sure the pond sizes are different
The same guys, might be in both.. but you'll hear people giving advice "before" the issues happen, in most 1 day matches. Bolt back, bolt back or mag out, mag out...etc.. and you'll see DQ's for NDs.
Fast forward to a 2 day match and that very critical squad safety reinforcement all but disappears. Sure the pond sizes are different
again, with a 6, 6.5
can I like this 7 times??? I carry at every match the stuff.. no go really with 308 class cartridges.. unless around the neck
This is likely true because I have only shot one day matches and have never felt unsafe. It’s super laid back and everyone is looking out for everyone.
Cause point chasing and hoping the other guy doesn’t do as well.
Instead of just shooting the best you can and having fun. If you don’t miss, they can’t beat you.
If you are suggesting that ND's be assessed within the context of a particular rage template you are promoting a system that is guaranteed to produce more dangerous scenarios. The entire reason ND's garner (or should garner) harsh penalties is precisely because the variables are always in flux - what might be considered safe in one instance can't be guaranteed to be so in another. Hence why we should all want a ND penalty that is applied consistently across the board. People who fire weapons when they do not intend to can certainly do so safely SOME of the time - but that's not the point. I do not personally want to feel as though I'm rolling the dice when I attend a match - this has absolutely nothing to do with the range template and everything to do with protocol.
Last edited:
Not that my opinion matters, but I really don't think you should take it down.
When I teach students firearm safety, I use examples - I have an entire slide dedicated to youtube. - I'll be the first to tell you that it works...It works because I walk them through the entire "event" and we identify what went wrong. They identify the problem and when we qualify, they take EXTRA time to ensure that they're safe.
Ownership of that bullet is yours the moment the gun goes bang. Our #1 priority as a community should ALWAYS be safety. Period.
@Lowlight nailed it with the layers post. There's far too much complacency.
You're removing an example that shows a layer of safety being peeled away from the whole.
Quite frankly, the fact that someone won the match having ND'd is identifying a cancerous ideology in our industry - That safety isn't a priority.
To me, this video and the results of the match are examples of the ideology and deserve to be shown so that we may all benefit from that individual's lack-there-of.
No they wont. we have been down this road every single match for years now. NOTHING CHANGES. Because the people that CAN shoot it are in the majority. Tell you what, if there is a short person in the match that cant shoot a particular object they subtract those points from everyone. You good with that?
"The FACT that someone won the match having ND'd"
This keeps getting brought up. Do you have any evidence of this? Or are you blindly following 4th and 5th hand rumors from strangers on the internet? I and several others I know were AT the match and didn't even hear about this. I don't know if it happened or not for a FACT but for a stranger on the internet to know more about it than multiple people AT the match seems a little peculiar...
Clearly you know more than myself and several friends that attended the match so I'd love to hear your factual evidence that supports your claim.
This keeps getting brought up. Do you have any evidence of this? Or are you blindly following 4th and 5th hand rumors from strangers on the internet? I and several others I know were AT the match and didn't even hear about this. I don't know if it happened or not for a FACT but for a stranger on the internet to know more about it than multiple people AT the match seems a little peculiar...
Clearly you know more than myself and several friends that attended the match so I'd love to hear your factual evidence that supports your claim.
Frank said it a few pages back. I don't consider Frank to be a "random stranger on the internet".
Regardless of Frank - Let's identify the issue.
Did anyone finish the match having an ND? We know this answer is yes. That in and of itself, is the cancer. Period.
The bigger issue were that there were ND's at all, obviously, but the lack of persecution and/or consequences for those individuals obviously means the threat will go on.
Apparently this is a 4th or 5th hand rumor from a stranger on the internet.
Congratulations Frank, you can now give yourself "the stranger" in 4 or 5 different variations!
Look at what Joel has said and he was there filming it
He talks about 3 NDs at the match and one that is not being talked about for political purposes.
I talked to people at the match, and not on the internet about it and my phone was blown up about this since the video posted on FB.
I suppose they could have told me something that is not true, that way when it comes out I was wrong, but so far everything I have been told says yes it happened.
If the mandate from the MD was don't worry about it if the incident happens downrange within 10ft of the target, and the ND happened downrange (which odds are pretty good it did) then there is your answer.
We know there was 3, if you were there, name the 3 and save us all the drama
He talks about 3 NDs at the match and one that is not being talked about for political purposes.
I talked to people at the match, and not on the internet about it and my phone was blown up about this since the video posted on FB.
I suppose they could have told me something that is not true, that way when it comes out I was wrong, but so far everything I have been told says yes it happened.
If the mandate from the MD was don't worry about it if the incident happens downrange within 10ft of the target, and the ND happened downrange (which odds are pretty good it did) then there is your answer.
We know there was 3, if you were there, name the 3 and save us all the drama
Yes it happened. I’m not dragging sources into this mess, but these are people I highly trust.
Believe it or don’t. Your choice.
So it appears you can be at a match and still have no clue what happened at the match
that is my read on the pushback
that is my read on the pushback
One fix I havnt seen mentioned, that I would love to see implemented, is you are not allowed to shoot in any sanctioned series unless you RO at least 1 match. Would love to see how many of the shooters at the either Finale actually RO'd a match last year. I would guess less than 10% and of those they were MD's.
Get the shooters RO'ing.
And I actually like Franks idea of REQUIRING on deck shooter (or shooter that just finished prob better) be a redundant safety RO during shooting and their actual job is to say, "Mag out bolt back." They can also be brass grabber to speed things up.
Last idea is what Ive seen Vegas club do for their matches (besides having bad ass stage designs and requiring their club to help out) every 5 picks on the prize table, and RO name is drawn from a hat.
ETA:
-Have a marked staging area for rifles. Hate when there isn't. Very easy to do and will save someone life someday.
-#1 RULE TO ADD - BOLT OPEN DURING MOVEMENT 1 warning then you 0 stage.
Just a couple EASY layers to prevent accidents as mentioned WILL go a long way.
Regards,
DT
Get the shooters RO'ing.
And I actually like Franks idea of REQUIRING on deck shooter (or shooter that just finished prob better) be a redundant safety RO during shooting and their actual job is to say, "Mag out bolt back." They can also be brass grabber to speed things up.
Last idea is what Ive seen Vegas club do for their matches (besides having bad ass stage designs and requiring their club to help out) every 5 picks on the prize table, and RO name is drawn from a hat.
ETA:
-Have a marked staging area for rifles. Hate when there isn't. Very easy to do and will save someone life someday.
-#1 RULE TO ADD - BOLT OPEN DURING MOVEMENT 1 warning then you 0 stage.
Just a couple EASY layers to prevent accidents as mentioned WILL go a long way.
Regards,
DT
Last edited:
I remember when the head Canadian SOF Commander was held accountable for an ND he had overseas. He accepted responsibility and paid the $2000 charge. So many people in the sport claim to be Alphas and walk around like the own the space but part of being one is owning your fuck ups.
The whole "political" justification of forgiving some shooter is bullshit. If a guy in charge of such an elite group of alphas is man enough to humble himself and own up to his screw up then these "pro" shooters have no excuse. "Pro" in name only I guess.
What people don't get is NDs have serious consequences especially if that bullet travels into a residential area and hits someone. Do you want to get a range shut down? That's the way to do it. I think the idea of a deck shooter would be great. Many people just mill around between stages anyway and I'm sure many would not mind. I also think that an ND should at minimum result in a stage DQ. Match? Eh I'm mixed on that one especially if it's a big event where many people travel and invest resources. Maybe stage DQ and automatic drop in rankings. But then again how are you going to justify a new shooter with impeccable safety discipline placing below a guy who had a ND when safety is touted as paramount. Maybe tell the person with the ND they can still shoot but it's an automatic last place finish.
It was the right thing to post the video and bring attention to this. Did the camera, RO, or MD pull your finger for you? No. You own your trigger pull.
The whole "political" justification of forgiving some shooter is bullshit. If a guy in charge of such an elite group of alphas is man enough to humble himself and own up to his screw up then these "pro" shooters have no excuse. "Pro" in name only I guess.
What people don't get is NDs have serious consequences especially if that bullet travels into a residential area and hits someone. Do you want to get a range shut down? That's the way to do it. I think the idea of a deck shooter would be great. Many people just mill around between stages anyway and I'm sure many would not mind. I also think that an ND should at minimum result in a stage DQ. Match? Eh I'm mixed on that one especially if it's a big event where many people travel and invest resources. Maybe stage DQ and automatic drop in rankings. But then again how are you going to justify a new shooter with impeccable safety discipline placing below a guy who had a ND when safety is touted as paramount. Maybe tell the person with the ND they can still shoot but it's an automatic last place finish.
It was the right thing to post the video and bring attention to this. Did the camera, RO, or MD pull your finger for you? No. You own your trigger pull.
Last edited:
I had an ND at a match a couple of years ago. All I could figure later was that too much New Mexico moondust had gotten in my trigger. There were quite a few mechanical failures due to the high winds and dust at that match. Anyway, when I closed the bolt, I had a slam fire. I was aiming at the target but I wasn't in control of the rifle. The stage it happened on was a high point stage. I was rightly worried they'd give me a match DQ. In the end the MD decided on a stage DQ because I stopped myself and only after I could prove that the issue with my trigger was resolved (I had a spare). It sucked bad and I wasn't as professional as I should've been. After much contemplation on the ride home, I came to the conclusion that if I'd been the MD, I'd have given myself a match DQ. When it happened it scared the shit out of me. Shooting in the southwest, dust and debris can cause issues. I'd never cleaned out my trigger, so it was a learning experience for me on proper maintenance of my equipment. It was not my best moment at a competition, but in the end, after I calmed down a bit, all of the things in this thread were driven home to me. It's just a rifle match. Thankfully no one got hurt. I'd gotten so competitive and wrapped up in what other people thought that I was actually upset about getting a justified DQ. I'm almost embarrassed to admit that, but it's true. I'm much more careful these days and I take better care of my stuff, but the incident that occurred in the video that started all of this could happen to any of us if we continue to be complacent. We've stepped up safety protocols at our local matches and have always had stiff penalties at the 2-day we run. There are just too many new shooters at every event these days to slack off at all.
For those throwing out USPSA and IDPA, the first place I ever heard "there are those who have and those who will" was at a pistol match regarding AD/ND's. So there's that... I'd guess we can all do better.
For those throwing out USPSA and IDPA, the first place I ever heard "there are those who have and those who will" was at a pistol match regarding AD/ND's. So there's that... I'd guess we can all do better.
Last edited:
I can attest that you can be at a match and have no earthly fucking clue what happened anywhere you weren’t at.....at even at places you were standing at.
So, I would not use that as a reason you know more about what happened at a match.
Hell, no one standing next to the guy in the video knew he ND’d until the video was released.
So, I would not use that as a reason you know more about what happened at a match.
Hell, no one standing next to the guy in the video knew he ND’d until the video was released.
Eh, maybe. If the MD gave specific guidance as to what was considered a DQ’able ND prior to match.....then it’s not corruption.
I may not agree with it, but it’s not corrupt if it falls in line with what is being put out at the match brief.
Not corruption at the match, corruption of our values as shooters. I teach my children the four rules of firearms safety. If I give him a polite pass on anyone of those four rules, it could cost a life later.
The fact that the winner of the match had an ND sets a terrible example. What about the shooter who did everything perfect, and did so safely. In my mind they are the real winner.
I’d like to know the MDs name, I don’t t ever want to shoot one of his matches.
The fact that the winner of the match had an ND sets a terrible example. What about the shooter who did everything perfect, and did so safely. In my mind they are the real winner.
I’d like to know the MDs name, I don’t t ever want to shoot one of his matches.
Last edited:
Really.
An ND is an ND, period.
Violating any of the 4 cardinal rules at any time (especially in a “game” situation) should never be tolerated in any way shape or form.
When I was doing this stuff, even a gamer who put rounds on the clock at tough targets in the dirt to get easy points was sent packing.
This ain’t laser tag, and every individual is responsible for any round that comes from their weapon. Being lax on your first example leads to lax attitudes that cause the second (or worse).
Good post!
As to your last statement regarding USPSA/IDPA, I also heard that bit while shooting those disciplines. I also learned another gem there; “If you've never been DQed, then you’re not trying hard enough.”
Hahaha you obviously have been shooting in the PRS very long. Wait till you figure out what happened with last years winner of the PRS.
I shoot the occasional match, but only care about bettering my shooting. I have no illusions of grandeur.
Please relieve me from my suspense. What happened?
Last edited:
It's somewhere in here:.
Very informative and provides a great deal of background. Thanks for the reference.
(It wasn’t Jim See, that was just what started thread)
1: apparently that’s “being negative on social media” which is frowned upon by PRS
2: top shooter
3: shooter is a good dude, had a bad day. No one wants to be “that guy.”
4: the prop was absolutely retarded
5: video didn’t surface until after initial decision was made
Not making excuses, just giving answers to a question. It seemed to be a perfect storm for stupid shit in that situation.
Much of this is our own making. Anytime you don’t take a zero tolerance policy on some things, you open up yourself to shit show.
It’s really easy to give someone a pass because they are good guy or a top shooter or generally really safe. And in a perfect world, that would be ok. But then it’s a trickle down effect and the new shooters, unsafe shooters, and cheaters get passes too.
With video becoming more and more prominent, you’re going to have to make some hard decisions.
1: you can’t compare it to video playback like say, the NFL. They have access to real time video. So to use them as an example that you don’t change a ruling on Wednesday for a Sunday game is apples to oranges
2: if you do make an exception when some sort of overwhelming evidence (likely video) is presented past the “arbitration period) you’re going to create a problem. People will purposely wait for a few days to release video because either a) they genuinely just don’t want an in person conflict or b) they’re an asshole starting shit just to start shit.
3: if you stick with the arbitration only period, when you have a legit person like Joel who has footage he genuinely didn’t know he had.......he’s going to be in a bad spot when he finds it.
In the end, PRS, NRL and whoever else is running a series or a match has to make a decision as to what will happen and it’s not going to please everyone. It’s up to shooters to decide if they want to continue to shoot said series or match.
We can bitch here till the cows come home. If it’s not something the crosses a line for enough people to stop going to a match or series, then it’s not worth bitching about.
If the ND’s continue and a pattern emerges for a particular series or match, I would stop attending said pattern.
But I can totally understand how changing scores and taxing shooters after a match has taken place is a sticky situation for the above mentioned reasons.
1: you can’t compare it to video playback like say, the NFL. They have access to real time video. So to use them as an example that you don’t change a ruling on Wednesday for a Sunday game is apples to oranges
2: if you do make an exception when some sort of overwhelming evidence (likely video) is presented past the “arbitration period) you’re going to create a problem. People will purposely wait for a few days to release video because either a) they genuinely just don’t want an in person conflict or b) they’re an asshole starting shit just to start shit.
3: if you stick with the arbitration only period, when you have a legit person like Joel who has footage he genuinely didn’t know he had.......he’s going to be in a bad spot when he finds it.
In the end, PRS, NRL and whoever else is running a series or a match has to make a decision as to what will happen and it’s not going to please everyone. It’s up to shooters to decide if they want to continue to shoot said series or match.
We can bitch here till the cows come home. If it’s not something the crosses a line for enough people to stop going to a match or series, then it’s not worth bitching about.
If the ND’s continue and a pattern emerges for a particular series or match, I would stop attending said pattern.
But I can totally understand how changing scores and taxing shooters after a match has taken place is a sticky situation for the above mentioned reasons.
Why does everyone tiptoe around this. If there is inherent wrong doing, or inherent bias, it should be made public immediately. It should be shown for what it is. Nothing changes unless this is done. I just don't understand mindset.
Maybe it's more of a case of not wanting to speak out of turn.
Maybe it's more of a case of not wanting to speak out of turn.
I think it's more that nobody wants to be "that guy"...
After many years in LE I've noticed most people shy away from conflict, particularly in person conflict. So it takes some stones to notice something AND speak up about it immediately.
Frank talks about this a lot, always hears about fucked up shit AFTER the match. 'Cause nobody wants to bring it up when it happens and have it be obvious who saw what and what was said by who.
Easier to shut up and dump it on the MD later.
After many years in LE I've noticed most people shy away from conflict, particularly in person conflict. So it takes some stones to notice something AND speak up about it immediately.
Frank talks about this a lot, always hears about fucked up shit AFTER the match. 'Cause nobody wants to bring it up when it happens and have it be obvious who saw what and what was said by who.
Easier to shut up and dump it on the MD later.
Because many times it’s not cut and dry.
In Joel’s video it was obvious. Shooter ND’d (maybe not a match DQ ND according to that particular match) and then accepted a point that he almost absolutely knew he didn’t get.
At the finale, there was currently no rule on a dropped weapon. Only a 180 degree rule and it was debatable if it broke 180.
Can’t start blasting someone if the rule doesn’t exist.
I believe there is a rule now. So, fair game if similar situation happens again.
Fail to maintain “positive control” = match DQ if it breaks 120 deg.
If not 120deg, stage DQ.
The 180 looks to be 120 now.
Well that is progress. I don't want to be anywhere around a dropped weapon with sub 1 pound triggers.
Naw dog, in USPSA ND's are Match DQ. There are no questions asked. You're simply done shooting and out of the match.
Coming from the USPSA / IPSC side of shooting PRS / NRL "Safety" rules terrified me at my first match. I still worry about the culture cultivated with statements like, "Meh, it hit a berm." Hell even Outlaw Multigun (3 Gun) rules where they are dealing with staging firearms along a course of fire are better defined than Precision Rifle safety rules.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all in on precision rifle. It's a shitload of fun with amazing people. Safety MUST be addressed with a no compromises attitude.
180 or 120 rule is from the direction of fire. A 180 or 120deg arc from shooter spot with direction of fire as the center (zero) with 60 or 90 deg from that spot to each side.
Has nothing to do with where the other shooters are standing or anything else. If a stage is set up withiut the 120 or 180 where other shooters or rifles are stages, that’s an entirely different situation that should be addressed with the MD.
The weapon falls, if muzzle brakes that 120 or 180, it’s match DQ under that particular rule.
Has nothing to do with where the other shooters are standing or anything else. If a stage is set up withiut the 120 or 180 where other shooters or rifles are stages, that’s an entirely different situation that should be addressed with the MD.
The weapon falls, if muzzle brakes that 120 or 180, it’s match DQ under that particular rule.
I should clarify, by shooter I mean the general shooting point or prop.
Shooter starts here or prop is here. That’s where the 0 degree is.
Again, for this particular rule of not maintaining positive control, it doesn’t matter if someone or something was already in the 120 or 180 zone. That is either a separate conversion with MD or a separate violation.
This rule isn’t regarding flagging at all. It’s a set 120 arc from the direction of fire. If the shooter loses control of weapon and the muzzle breaks this line, doesn’t matter who, what, when or where, it’s a match DQ.
Shooter starts here or prop is here. That’s where the 0 degree is.
Again, for this particular rule of not maintaining positive control, it doesn’t matter if someone or something was already in the 120 or 180 zone. That is either a separate conversion with MD or a separate violation.
This rule isn’t regarding flagging at all. It’s a set 120 arc from the direction of fire. If the shooter loses control of weapon and the muzzle breaks this line, doesn’t matter who, what, when or where, it’s a match DQ.
That’s just plain unsafe gun handling all around. He dropped a loaded rifle, then he picked it up and kept going. Every rule I have ever heard was the shooter does not touch the dropped weapon, the RO would a t that point pick it up and clear it.
He should have gone home, plain and simple.
He should have gone home, plain and simple.
Pistol and 3-gun matches I have attended give a Match DQ if a firearm is dropped. Personal opinion drop a gun you get DQd.
I say match DQ regardless of 180 or 120. Losing control of your firearm and dropping it off an obstacle is a big deal. As you and many here in this forum have, I’ve spent a lot of time humping through some crazy shit with a metric ton of gear and NEVER dropped my weapon system. Don’t convolute it with 120, 180, 37.5 degrees etc. that’s just opening yourself up for bitching and arguments. That’s no different than arguing whether or not an ND is still an ND if the round hit the berm or next to the target.
Drop your rifle, match DQ.
Last edited:
This has been an interesting read. I’ve been shooting USPSA and 3gun for the last eight years or so.
From an outside perspective it looks like there is a culture problem with respect to safety. If experienced or top level shooters can’t handle the embarrassment of a DQ that’s a big problem.
It’s not unusual for top level USPSA GMs to DQ. I don’t want that to sound like it’s an acceptable thing, but there isn’t a negative stigma to it. The rules are absolute and if you violate them you’re done. Enjoy your blizzard and see ya next match.
From an outside perspective it looks like there is a culture problem with respect to safety. If experienced or top level shooters can’t handle the embarrassment of a DQ that’s a big problem.
It’s not unusual for top level USPSA GMs to DQ. I don’t want that to sound like it’s an acceptable thing, but there isn’t a negative stigma to it. The rules are absolute and if you violate them you’re done. Enjoy your blizzard and see ya next match.
