Negligent Discharges Need To Stop!

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
Point being. In a safe world, there needs to be more DQs (when warranted) and even more pauses or time outs. Stop clock, figure it out. And then resume/restart/stop accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveM

LawnMM

Harbinger of Sarcasm
Belligerents
Jul 5, 2009
2,052
627
219
Colorado
www.accuracy-tech.com
You are right. I guess I didn't think that thru or really articulate my meaning. I guess I meant, if someone was unsafe enough to stop them in a stage and tell them to unload and show clear for the purpose of a stage DQ, then that should be a match DQ. Obviously if it's an ND, it's a no-brainer.

We just executed our club match today. I had to remind several new guys to watch their muzzles as they were beginning to point in the wrong direction. I had to ask folks to move their rifles in the staging area farther forward to the firing line bc a new guy got tempted to walk in front of them to move to the firing point. Someone got reminded to remove their mag before leaving the shooters box. We emphazised a member of the squad watching the shooter instead of keeping time, scoring, or spotting. This resulted in a cease fire call when one of the more expienced shooters spread the legs of his CkyePod out low and was borderline clearing the bullets path of a 6x6 tie embedded in the ground at the firing line. He knew he was good bc he'd shot from that position many times but he got up and moved in good spirits and thanked folks for watching for safety. I started a stage without ear pro and fired one round (it was a hit on a 1.5moa target at 615 from a rooftop) and stopped & cleared my rifle; asked my squad mates if they would be okay with allowing me to reshoot after I put foamies in. They we're fine with it. Of course, I missed the first round that time. We didn't coach each other for wind or impacts but we watched each other for follow thru and gave reminders to ride the trigger thru recoil while shooting. Several of the new guys came up after the match and thanked us for helping, coaching, and running the squad.



I really don't see these problems where I shoot. I don't think we're in some sort of disagreement gridlock. One of my buddies brought this thread up to me this morning before the safety brief. We chatted about it. He shoots more national matches than I do. We both agreed that issues tend to get blown up on Snipers Hide.

This video is a perfect example. It captured a really bad example. And it captured the incident not getting reported. Now it gets posted. Now there's nothing any of us can do about it to "right the wrong". Who is reporting it in that club in TX that it occurred? Is that shooter now DQ'd for safety and integrity because it was brought up to that local MD? If it did then it's a done issue, right? The correct actions took place by others even if that shooter didn't. If not, did it just get straight plastered on the internet to be feasted upon and as "Evidence exhibit A" for all the bad that is in the world? I don't know man. In my circle of shooters it wouldn't even occur to us to not take action then and there but rather post it on the internet later, even if we didn't discover it until the next day. The first people to know about it and be informed would be our loose collection of rotating match directors. In order to determine if we would let that guy shoot again. But then again, we haven't had that issue either. The core group of experienced shooters rotate MD duties, set up & tear down. We squad-mom every match. We run practice sessions for new folks that want to try the sport out in which we don't shoot; we teach the stages and skills required to shoot them. We have loaner gear donated by all the usual companies for new guys to try gear for a match before buying. I brought my second comp rifle with my .223 trainer barrel and 100rds to the match and offered it up for anyone that was having rifle issues. Reading this stuff on SH actually makes me pretty grateful for the group we have.

Ya, thanks Dave Thomas. I guess I'm a dickhead....
Sounds like a squared away club, wish ya'll were in Colorado! Even if you are a dickhead 🤣
 

Mech_eng

Private
Minuteman
Jan 18, 2019
5
10
6
“Depending on the weapon used, an ND can either create or destroy a family” - mech eng

In all seriousness:
I’m late to the party but wanted to provide my useless input.. So Im an engineer who fabricates offshore oil rigs for a living, sometimes we work over 100k man hours per week(back when oil was high at least)! We are lieneant on some safety issues but some are immediate grounds for termination. One example is working at heights without being tied off. Why do we fire so many people for not tying off? Maybe because it’s one of the top causes of construction deaths each year? Or maybe it’s because the consequences are so grave. We have a saying at work: “i would rather see you unemployed than dead”. I think this type of commitment to safety needs to and should be applied to firearms. A line has to be drawn somewhere, why not on the conservative side?
 

Diver160651

Who cares
Belligerents
Feb 7, 2013
3,255
1,747
219
BELMONTCA
I totally missed the part here about the team firing shots.

Again, easy answer here. You find your targets properly, and engage them.

You don’t just send rounds downrange for the shit of it.

The timer isn’t holding a gun to your head. Not all stages are intended to be cleaned within the allotted time.

If I’m on glass and people are obviously just slinging let when they are “kinda” on target trying to score lucky point, best case is I’m stopping timer, giving warning, and letting them pick back up. If attitude is given, stage or match DQ.

This is just as unsafe as other violations. If you’re moving the rifle fast and just trying to get lucky points, you could easily slip
2 brief thoughts-

1. I would venture to say a number of the folks who are very boisterous in this thread regarding safety do not carry medical in their pack. If you are one of those people, this is your wake up call.
2. It was mentioned to treat safety differently based on jersey vs new shooter. I vehemently disagree with this. Safety (a high level) should be expected from all shooters.
I do..

Although PB rifle round is going to be worse than Quick Clot or a tourniquet is going to fix.. maybe better putting it around the injured’s neck at that point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HogsLife

silhouette

Grey man
Belligerents
Mar 29, 2012
202
74
34
Unfortunately for your point of view, the PRS rules are written clearly, and this is an ND. The question is not whether it is or isn’t, the question is what do we do about these types of safety issues?
Yes there should be penalties for ND's and there can be no grey areas. But was that particular one less safe than a missed target?
What the Fuck are you talking about... no one that's correct no one can account for that round and you call that a miss. You sir are a big part of the problem.

That is the fucking problem, this is not paintball we are playing.

I have said it before look it up, this sport as a whole, we are lucky no one has been killed with attitudes like this it's not a matter of if. It is when someone gets killed. The lawyers will have a field day. Look at all the ammo that has been given.

Wake up people before it's too late.
Referring only to the example in the video, given that the rifle was pointed down range, if that projectile landed anywhere "unsafe" then the range safety template is not big enough. I stand by that comment.
I thought I was done with this thread.

You sir are a dangerous fuck.

Find another hobby.
There's really no need for name calling. Surely we are all above that. Let's keep it a civilized discussion.
 

LawnMM

Harbinger of Sarcasm
Belligerents
Jul 5, 2009
2,052
627
219
Colorado
www.accuracy-tech.com
I do..

Although PB rifle round is going to be worse than Quick Clot or a tourniquet is going to fix.. maybe better putting it around the injured’s neck at that point.
If it's an extremity wound there's a lot of data that supports you're likely to survive if it's tied off quickly and they get you to a hospital for surgery.

Take one in a juncture area or the torso and you're pretty much fucked if you don't fall on an operating table after you get hit. You can pack it but I don't think that's going to be enough.

Always happy when MDs have coordinates for a life flight landing and let local dispatch centers know the when/where of the match just in case.
 

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
Yes there should be penalties for ND's and there can be no grey areas. But was that particular one less safe than a missed target?

Referring only to the example in the video, given that the rifle was pointed down range, if that projectile landed anywhere "unsafe" then the range safety template is not big enough. I stand by that comment.

There's really no need for name calling. Surely we are all above that. Let's keep it a civilized discussion.
No, you’re an idiot if you’re arguing this.

You can call it name calling. I call it being honest.

There’s stupid people in the world. It’s a real thing. You’re one of them.
 

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
You have no idea where that round went. You have no idea if the rifle slipped down 2” and launched that round over the berm and out the range.

You’re defending the defenseless and you are part of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: regnar375

Bender

Known Troll
Belligerents
Feb 12, 2014
4,633
6,891
219
Cheyenne WY.
Hey, after we cover NDs, can we talk about muzzle discipline? Last match I ROed a guy was driving around the match with a rifle on his four wheeler front rack horizontally with bungee cords AND a closed chamber. Drove up a hill passing 20-30 guys and muzzled every one of them on the way by, I took him to the side to explain how unwise that was, in so many words....

And he was a MD.....
 

silhouette

Grey man
Belligerents
Mar 29, 2012
202
74
34
You have no idea where that round went. You have no idea if the rifle slipped down 2” and launched that round over the berm and out the range.

You’re defending the defenseless and you are part of the problem.
Do your ranges not have a safety zone beyond the berm? I know they do here and it would take a guided missile to get outside that.
 

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
Do your ranges not have a safety zone beyond the berm? I know they do here and it would take a guided missile to get outside that.
So it’s the range’s fault now??

Many ranges around the country have houses within a couple miles. Do the math.

Let’s teach people that safety doesn’t matter because there’s a safe zone behind the berm??

What in the fucking fuck are you speaking of?

This stuff carries over into real life. There’s no safety zone when you’re in the woods hunting or what not.

You put this kind of shit in people’s heads and they aren’t going to respect firearms safety.

What is your background with firearms? Prior or current mil/le? Have you ever hunted before? Have you ever, in real life, seen what a rifle round does to a person or animal???
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas and Bender

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
Let’s get real. Here’s a coyote at about 980 yds with a .338 lapua. (Not mine)

7061540
 
  • Like
Reactions: regnar375

Niles Coyote

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Aug 13, 2007
4,060
437
189
South West, MI
Do your ranges not have a safety zone beyond the berm? I know they do here and it would take a guided missile to get outside that.
Out of the dozen or so locations I've shot matches only one didn't have houses within range behind the back stop and that one still had an occasional boat or USCG helo that would occasionally wonder through.
 

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
Here’s a decent pic in which you can see the small entrance would on the left. Exit wound is slightly larger. The leg in the right also has several entry wounds from the shrapnel of the bullet.

7061547
 
  • Like
Reactions: regnar375

silhouette

Grey man
Belligerents
Mar 29, 2012
202
74
34
So it’s the range’s fault now??

Many ranges around the country have houses within a couple miles. Do the math.

Let’s teach people that safety doesn’t matter because there’s a safe zone behind the berm??

What in the fucking fuck are you speaking of?

This stuff carries over into real life. There’s no safety zone when you’re in the woods hunting or what not.

You put this kind of shit in people’s heads and they aren’t going to respect firearms safety.

What is your background with firearms? Prior or current mil/le? Have you ever hunted before? Have you ever, in real life, seen what a rifle round does to a person or animal???
That was a genuine question regarding the safety zone beyond the berm. I'm not in the US.
I've never said that ND's should not go without penalty. I've only referred to the example in the video, meaning that it's a best case scenario regarding a ND because the rifle was pointing down range.
 

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
What do you think a child would look like if struck by a shooter who’s ND is just “the same as a miss”?

7061548
 
  • Like
Reactions: regnar375

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
That was a genuine question regarding the safety zone beyond the berm. I'm not in the US.
I've never said that ND's should not go without penalty. I've only referred to the example in the video, meaning that it's a best case scenario regarding a ND because the rifle was pointing down range.
And you have no idea where that rifle was actually pointed. A couple inches difference at the muzzle equals a lot down range.

Again, you’re defending the defenseless. Change your opinion or sell all your weapons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: regnar375

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
The “best case scenario” is no ND. Anything less is unacceptable.

Somethings are zero sum games. Firearms safety is one of these things. The consequences are far too great to split them into levels of how unsafe they were.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sabrecross

Precision Underground

PrecisionUndergroundRifleGear.com
Commercial Supporter
Belligerents
Jun 21, 2017
1,357
776
119
Tallahassee, FL
Yes there should be penalties for ND's and there can be no grey areas. But was that particular one less safe than a missed target?

Referring only to the example in the video, given that the rifle was pointed down range, if that projectile landed anywhere "unsafe" then the range safety template is not big enough. I stand by that comment.

There's really no need for name calling. Surely we are all above that. Let's keep it a civilized discussion.
If you and your family are riding in a cab and the driver blows through a red light because he wasn’t paying attention, do you keep riding with him since there happened to not be an 18 wheeler crossing the intersection at the time? “It was the same as a green light because we didn’t get hit”. That’s the logic you are displaying.
 

Mr Flannel

Self-Licking Icecream
Belligerents
Feb 3, 2006
85
52
24
Australia
There has been discussion of NDs for some time now. To illustrate the point which some do not seem to get:

Effects of a 5.56mm projectile. Entry wound through right gluteal area. Exit through right thigh.

Entry

7061595

Exit

7061596


Bottom line. You are responsible and accountable for every round you discharge, regardless of circumstances. If you fire a round in a manner you did not intend, and the projectile travels somewhere else other than directly at your designated target - you have had a negligent discharge. No ifs, buts or maybes. If you are a person with any integrity and understand taking responsibility for your actions - you will own it when it you do it, stand square and accept the consequences. If you don’t, then you lack both character and courage and somehow believe that a few points in a rifle match are more important than those things.

Joel from PRN should be praised for raising this issue. Period. The fact that he has faced abuse for posting the ND video continues to mean that this sport has a small percentage of shooters who, in all likelihood, should not be handling firearms - and who continue to bring themselves and the sport into disrepute.
 
Last edited:

RoterJager

The Red Hunter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Oct 21, 2013
703
395
69
The Frozen Tundra
@Mr Flannel the fact that people are considering banning Joel or banning video at matches is extremely disappointing.

The guy brings up an issue and the response from some isn't: "What can we do to fix this?".

It's: "Hey let's ban this guy and/or video at matches so we don't get bad publicity."

Again. The bad publicity from this will pale in comparison to the bad publicity from someone getting smoked.
 

Mr Flannel

Self-Licking Icecream
Belligerents
Feb 3, 2006
85
52
24
Australia
@RoterJager - I hear you but ‘extremely disappointing’ is an understatement. You could safely call it ‘spineless’. The so-called bad publicity needs to continue until full enforcement of safety rules becomes the norm, regardless of whether you’re at the top or bottom of the scoreboard. Anyone with any moral courage isn’t afraid of owning up to issues and shining a light on them.

Cockroaches work best when the lights are off...
 

harleytuner

Private
Minuteman
May 15, 2018
14
18
6
There sound not ne any grey area for a ND. It should not be up for debate weather or not the ND had the potential of leaving the range. There needs to be a clear universal definition of a ND and a rule around that definition. If the rule is broke the penalty needs to be enforced. Seams plain and simple to me. If they governing body enforces the rule the shooters will start paying more attention and the number of ND's should decrease as a result. Shooting sports have a difficult enough time in the non shooting publics eye, if a ND leaves the range and hits someone it's not going to help or sport.
 

RoterJager

The Red Hunter
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Oct 21, 2013
703
395
69
The Frozen Tundra
@RoterJager - I hear you but ‘extremely disappointing’ is an understatement. You could safely call it ‘spineless’. The so-called bad publicity needs to continue until full enforcement of safety rules becomes the norm, regardless of whether you’re at the top or bottom of the scoreboard. Anyone with any moral courage isn’t afraid of owning up to issues and shining a light on them.

Cockroaches work best when the lights are off...
You're 100% correct. My filter is still working this morning. I haven't had my coffee yet.
 

pewpewfever

Raw Recruit
Online Training Access
Minuteman
Mar 31, 2019
53
10
12
DFW
There has been discussion of NDs for some time now. To illustrate the point which some do not seem to get:

Effects of a 5.56mm projectile. Entry wound through right gluteal area. Exit through right thigh.

Entry

View attachment 7061595

Exit

View attachment 7061596


If you fire a round in a manner you did not intend, and the projectile travels somewhere else other than directly at your designated target - you have had a negligent discharge. No ifs, buts or maybes. If you are a person with any integrity and understand taking responsibility for your actions - you will own it when it you do it, stand square and accept the consequences.
I’d like some clarification here. I’ve only shot a couple of PRS style matches so far, but we have some unstable supports and moving platforms that we are required to shoot from, and taking the shot is a matter of timing it as the crosshair moves up and down across the target. How is a miss not a ND in this case?
 

HogsLife

“Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes”
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Nov 28, 2018
344
301
69
Ventura, Commiefornia
I’d like some clarification here. I’ve only shot a couple of PRS style matches so far, but we have some unstable supports and moving platforms that we are required to shoot from, and taking the shot is a matter of timing it as the crosshair moves up and down across the target. How is a miss not a ND in this case?
The “conscious decision” to begin your trigger press is the difference between an ND and a bad shot.

Very simple. Very black and white.
 
Last edited:

Mr Flannel

Self-Licking Icecream
Belligerents
Feb 3, 2006
85
52
24
Australia
@pewpewfever Insofar as I see it, when you step up and commit to shooting, you commit to doing it safely. To your points:

When you engage a target deliberately, even if the prop is unstable and you have a wobble zone, you are shooting with intent. There is no unintentional element to your action.

That stated, you need to seek out and understand from the Range Safety Officer what the permissible ‘left and right of arc’ or engagement radius is around the target. A professionally run range or competition will have those (which also fall within a range safety template if the competition is run on an established range) and they should be available to you in commonly understood measurements - mils, moa, meters, yards, etc. If you cannot keep your wobble zone inside of the limits, and/or you feel you cannot engage safely, you should declare that you are ceasing fire, make safe and take yourself off the line. You may have a training delta to address, or there may be a stage design deficiency, or some combination of both. Either way, by doing the right thing and stopping you’ll get a lot of respect for your actions from the types of shooters you’d give the time of day to.

If you can’t see it, confirm it, don’t believe you can hit it and don’t 100% understand what surrounds it - for whatever reason, do not press that trigger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sabrecross

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
I’d like some clarification here. I’ve only shot a couple of PRS style matches so far, but we have some unstable supports and moving platforms that we are required to shoot from, and taking the shot is a matter of timing it as the crosshair moves up and down across the target. How is a miss not a ND in this case?
Couple things here:

1: you should vehemently voice your concern to the MD if you feel the prop is too unstable

2: you are an adult. Who is forcing you to take that shot? If you do not feel like you can safely shoot off of that prop, you don’t take the shot. End of story. You take a zero. This is a rifle match. Who cares if you lost some points?

3: as long as your weapon fired when you explicitly told it to (pulling the trigger) it is not an ND in that regard. Could there be a discussion of there is negligence in general on the shooter AND md? That is very possible.

Again, remember, we are adults and no one is holding a gun to your head. Negligence (not and ND) is a chain that can keep going.

The MD may be negligent by making a prop too unstable. But you as a shooter can be just as negligent by making the choice to shoot off that prop.

If you feel it’s not safe when you get behind the rifle, pull the bolt back, mag out, tell the RO you will not be shooting and ask to speak to the MD immediately. DO NOT just sling lead down range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sabrecross

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
It is not an “ND” in the sense of the definition.

But, you do make a good point, some crazy gimmicky stages could be irresponsible. This is a good discussion to have.

And sometimes, a shooter’s skill level isn’t good enough for a certain prop. In this case, it’s the shooter’s responsibility to pull himself off the line during that stage and take a zero. Practice the deficiency and come back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Flannel

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
The moving platform that you speak of, and I’m assuming, is likely the boat simulator?

You’re on a suspended platform that moves from your movement?

If so, this falls into the category of shooter skill level. Shooters will fall into (and the proper way they should go about it):

Not able to safely make a shot from the platform under any movement. Shooter should not take shots and take a zero.

Only able to safely take shots with minimal movement. Shooter should take a shot, then patiently wait for the platform to settle down again before taking another. This may result in not get off the maximum number of shots.

Able to safely negotiate the prop.


Remember, the stage round count is the MAXIMUM amount of rounds allowed. There is no minimum. You step up to the stage as your current skill level dictates what your round count is if you are unable to make the maximum. Sometimes the proper number is zero.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LH_Gina

pewpewfever

Raw Recruit
Online Training Access
Minuteman
Mar 31, 2019
53
10
12
DFW
Thanks for the explanations, and I have another newb question if you don't mind. In the OP vid, I can't tell if the shooter's finger is on the trigger during the discharge. It looked to me like the discharge occurred as soon as he slid the bolt closed. So my question is, does it matter if the discharge occurred due to mechanical failure? Is it a ND regardless of whether it was the shooter, the builder, or the manufacturer who was negligent? Seems like it would be, but maybe there's a difference in the rules?
 

CavScout85

Online Training Member
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2018
533
543
99
WNC
Thanks for the explanations, and I have another newb question if you don't mind. In the OP vid, I can't tell if the shooter's finger is on the trigger during the discharge. It looked to me like the discharge occurred as soon as he slid the bolt closed. So my question is, does it matter if the discharge occurred due to mechanical failure? Is it a ND regardless of whether it was the shooter, the builder, or the manufacturer who was negligent? Seems like it would be, but maybe there's a difference in the rules?

In this instance, he grabbed the trigger.
 

HogsLife

“Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes”
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Nov 28, 2018
344
301
69
Ventura, Commiefornia
Thanks for the explanations, and I have another newb question if you don't mind. In the OP vid, I can't tell if the shooter's finger is on the trigger during the discharge. It looked to me like the discharge occurred as soon as he slid the bolt closed. So my question is, does it matter if the discharge occurred due to mechanical failure? Is it a ND regardless of whether it was the shooter, the builder, or the manufacturer who was negligent? Seems like it would be, but maybe there's a difference in the rules?
He hit the trigger with his finger after the bolt closed.

An ND is an ND. Shooter induced or equipment induced doesn’t matter.

Shooter is responsible for his weapon system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Redmanss

christopher.dow

I can use measuring things
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Apr 28, 2017
339
175
49
San Francisco, CA
2 brief thoughts-

1. I would venture to say a number of the folks who are very boisterous in this thread regarding safety do not carry medical in their pack. If you are one of those people, this is your wake up call.
2. It was mentioned to treat safety differently based on jersey vs new shooter. I vehemently disagree with this. Safety (a high level) should be expected from all shooters.
There is no excuse for not having at least this in your match pack: https://controlbleedingkits.com/index.php/product/personal-bleeding-control-kit/
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rugster

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
Thanks for the explanations, and I have another newb question if you don't mind. In the OP vid, I can't tell if the shooter's finger is on the trigger during the discharge. It looked to me like the discharge occurred as soon as he slid the bolt closed. So my question is, does it matter if the discharge occurred due to mechanical failure? Is it a ND regardless of whether it was the shooter, the builder, or the manufacturer who was negligent? Seems like it would be, but maybe there's a difference in the rules?
Check the video out a few times. He closed the bolt and then touched the trigger. Was definitely a shooter caused ND.

What you’re describing is what I call a “mechanical failure.” However is is also considered and “accidental discharge.”

I hate this term because it gets intermingled and people like to use AD in place of ND because it sounds less harsh. This in turn creates the attitude “accidents happen” and makes our attitude toward safetly lackadaisical.

When you have a mechanical failure that results in a discharge, it’s likely (and should) handled in a similar way to an ND. You are done shooting with a DQ, and you need to find out what happened and fix it.

Properly built and maintained weapons don’t regularly fire without the trigger being pulled. So, when one does, it is an unsafe weapon and needs to be pulled from the firing line ASAP.

Some MD’s may allow you to fix the rifle or use another one. I don’t like this though, as then everyone will just the to blame the equipment for their ND. I think it’s best to treat it the same as an ND with a match DQ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tx_Aggie

pewpewfever

Raw Recruit
Online Training Access
Minuteman
Mar 31, 2019
53
10
12
DFW
Thanks again. I come from a couple of other shooting sports. In one, a malfunction gets you a reshoot, not a penalty. In the other, selective enforcement of "random" trigger pull weight checks against foreigners is one of the biggest controversies in the sport. So I'm just trying to get on the same page as other PRS shooters at this point, but I have some baggage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dthomas3523

Dthomas3523

That statement is too poor for me to comprehend...
Hessian
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Jan 31, 2018
3,209
2,788
119
South Texas
I know some MDs will allow a shooter to continue if they can show a mechanical failure that wasn’t anything the shooter could control. (I.E. you show them a broken sear in a reputable trigger).

But you have to show them what happened. They aren’t just taking your word for it.
 

Cjwise5

Full Member
Belligerents
May 23, 2014
178
72
34
www.youtube.com
Yes there should be penalties for ND's and there can be no grey areas. But was that particular one less safe than a missed target?

Referring only to the example in the video, given that the rifle was pointed down range, if that projectile landed anywhere "unsafe" then the range safety template is not big enough. I stand by that comment.

There's really no need for name calling. Surely we are all above that. Let's keep it a civilized discussion.
Yes it was more unsafe than a missed target, if shooter and/or RO sees the miss. In this particular case, no one saw it. The round was unaccounted for. Unless mirage is crazy, the person spotting can usually spot your miss. This bullet probably went over the berm, and that's the difference.
 

Mr Flannel

Self-Licking Icecream
Belligerents
Feb 3, 2006
85
52
24
Australia
If you have a mechanical failure with a weapons system that causes it to discharge:

If it is a technical parts or mechanism failure beyond operator control, it is an unintentional/accidental discharge.

If it is due to the way the operator prepared the weapon or ammunition (e.g. trigger too light/unsafe sear adjustment), that is a negligent discharge. The negligence occurs by failure to ensure the system was safe to operate beforehand and operating it when in an unsafe condition.
 

Cjwise5

Full Member
Belligerents
May 23, 2014
178
72
34
www.youtube.com
That was a genuine question regarding the safety zone beyond the berm. I'm not in the US.
I've never said that ND's should not go without penalty. I've only referred to the example in the video, meaning that it's a best case scenario regarding a ND because the rifle was pointing down range.
The range in the video has good safety zones beyond the berms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silhouette

brianf

Private
Belligerents
Apr 8, 2010
890
679
99
41
NY
@Mr Flannel the fact that people are considering banning Joel or banning video at matches is extremely disappointing.

The guy brings up an issue and the response from some isn't: "What can we do to fix this?".

It's: "Hey let's ban this guy and/or video at matches so we don't get bad publicity."

Again. The bad publicity from this will pale in comparison to the bad publicity from someone getting smoked.

because they are idiots

Ralph Nader was before my time and a hippy/commi in general but:

Without him GM and Ford were telling us that seat belts dont save lives and shoulder belts are a waste because they will wrinkle the drivers tie.

We are all bickering about what does/what does not or how/how not, which is fine.
That is just the regular pissing match we all like to go through

like i said a few pages ago along with scores of other posters PRS has to get more RO's, or start limiting matches

if that means $, prizes, free points for every stage you RO etc, thats what they have to do

once there are the proper amount of RO's PRS then has a baseline to review and make decisions off data not hearsay

If every RO agrees upon review about a certain situation then that becomes law, and so on

the best procedures come from speaking to the people doing the job, not from the ivory tower

if we cant agree on this or something like this, there is no way there will be a agreement on creating rules
 

pewpewfever

Raw Recruit
Online Training Access
Minuteman
Mar 31, 2019
53
10
12
DFW
If you have a mechanical failure with a weapons system that causes it to discharge:

If it is a technical parts or mechanism failure beyond operator control, it is an unintentional/accidental discharge.

If it is due to the way the operator prepared the weapon or ammunition (e.g. trigger too light/unsafe sear adjustment), that is a negligent discharge. The negligence occurs by failure to ensure the system was safe to operate beforehand and operating it when in an unsafe condition.
So what if a newb shows up to his first match with a rem 700 that is subject to the court ordered recall for discharge upon disengaging the safety. The shooter knows about the recall, has put in for the recall months ago, but rem has not issued the shipping instructions yet. One might presume the delay is intentional as rem appeals the judgment. The shooter would, in this case, be responsible for a discharge upon safety off because he has knowledge of the issue? But he would not be responsible if he was unaware of the issue?
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Belligerents
Sep 28, 2012
4,009
1,957
219
60
Central Florida
...shoot from, and taking the shot is a matter of timing it as the crosshair moves up and down across the target. How is a miss not a ND in this case?
If you had taken time to read this whole shit show of a thread, you would have seen that this has already been discussed and answered.

The bottom line boils down to intention. If you are on (or around in your case) the target and pulled the trigger intentionally, you are not going to create a potentially dangerous situation. You will create a miss. If you are moving the rifle to get on target and brush or squeeze the trigger before you are on target or even close, it is an ND.

Trust me, it’s not that grey of a decision as some would like to make it. Every ND that I’ve seen, even by those that are “pros” has been noticeable by an observer who is watching. There’s no secret sauce to hide them.

So what if a newb shows up to his first match with a rem 700 that is subject to the court ordered recall for discharge upon disengaging the safety. The shooter knows about the recall, has put in for the recall months ago, but rem has not issued the shipping instructions yet. One might presume the delay is intentional as rem appeals the judgment. The shooter would, in this case, be responsible for a discharge upon safety off because he has knowledge of the issue? But he would not be responsible if he was unaware of the issue?
So, we're back to parsing details again. If you come to a precision rifle match and haven’t shot your rifle enough to know whether or not it operates safely, then you are the problem and a safety concern for all around you.

Point being, we’ve been through all of these lawyer-like what if scenarios. They literally are just looking for excuses why it’s okay to have an ND.

And yes, I consider all of these niggling examples to be NDs. YOU are responsible for your weapon system and what happens while using that system. Does that mean that obvious circumstances cannot be resolved in the spot with common sense? No it does not. But pulling a game of 29,000 what-if scenarios in a forum thread does nobody any good and serves to only distract from the good things that have been identified and posed as good steps to move forward and get better at safety. This is well overdue.
 
Last edited:

seansmd

Sergeant of the Hide
Belligerents
Minuteman
Aug 8, 2018
220
83
34
San Jose, CA
I am completely in the camp of ND, MDQ,

As someone who is new and yet to shoot my first match, I am more worried about being "that guy" than scoring. This thread has me concerned by the reckless dismissal of what was a shooter clearly muscling his weapon trying to get in an uncomfortable position, moving again, and then trying to see if he can get his right hand in a trigger position, and bang. It also appears every time he closed the bolt his hand goes to the grip his finger goes into the trigger space in the same motion. Is this bad form?

I read somewhere in this thread there were multiple RO at this stage. Clearly the woman was on glass and did not see the shot and asked the shooter for clarification on the first weak side shot since she did not see it. Many have suggested multiple RO's to solve this, has it been mentioned what the other RO's were doing or saw?
 

morganlamprecht

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 5, 2013
1,058
1,022
219
It also appears every time he closed the bolt his hand goes to the grip his finger goes into the trigger space in the same motion. Is this bad form?
yes its terrible form and a training issue

find the target with sight, close the bolt, find the grip, settle on the target, find the trigger, press it

finger stays out of there until youre ready to actually send it, not getting ready to send it, especially with a single stage
 
Last edited: