The Minuteman » Home Page

On That “DQ” Issue.

By | |
3 Comments

So we bounced back and forth a couple emails.  I sent the last one Monday night asking for additional clarification regarding the issue previously brought up here.   Mainly because I had an issue with trying to use section 10.5 to attempt to DQ a competitor.

If you’re wondering why I wanted to get to the bottom of this, its’ because I don’t want to see someone else do something like I did and have it turn into me ruining their day at the match.  I knew how easy it was and even other RO’s at the time didn’t really think of it either.  That said the rules exist for safety first and foremost.  So I want a clear and concise reason and I want to have my facts straight if I have to drop the hammer.

So let me start at the beginning of my major issues.  Rule 10.5.1 states:

Handling a firearm at any time except when in a designated safety area or when under the supervision of, and in response to a direct command issued by, a Range Officer.

And is prefaced with:

Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to:

Which my main issue was that the Rule Book clearly defines what is and is not handling:

(As in “handling a firearm”) The act of manipulating, holding, or gripping a firearm while the trigger is functionally accessible.

The other RO did bring up a valid issue with casing, uncasing, and holstering of firearms.  2.4.1 states the following:

Competitors are permitted to use the Safety Areas for the activities stated below provided they remain within the boundaries of the Safety Area and the firearm is pointed in a safe direction. Violations are subject to match disqualification (see Rules 10.5.1 & 10.5.12).

Which he then pointed out that 2.4 specifies activites that are permitted at the safety table, not that you must be at the safety table.  Which makes sense because you could uncase when when you step into the shooters box.

So the problem comes in that the case was opened, but no one actually touched the firearm.  How can it be a DQ?  Turns out it wasn’t.  There are two things worthy of note from the email:

This sort of thing is just asking for a DQ.  Might as well pass around a plate of chocolate chip cookies and tell people to look, don’t touch.

I can agree with that and sympathize whole heartily.  Yeah all things considered, probably not a good idea since everyone will be staring at it going “Oooohhhh Shiny.”  However it does open you to a potential DQ under 10.6.

One RM suggested that if someone had handled they would be DQ’d and the person displaying would get a DQ under 10.6.  It’s a bit of a stretch but I can see that.

For those unaware, 10.6 is the section pertaining to unsportsmanlike conduct.  As said above, it’s like tempting people with a plate of cookies, probably not the smartest idea.  Like Kevin, it’s a stretch but I can see it.

So, in closing, not a good idea, expect a talking to, and if you see someone else do it, give them a gentle nudge that it isn’t a good idea and use the cookie example.  Yes new toys are fun to show off, just walk over to the safety table just in case the monkey brain goes, “Shiny” and tries to pick it up.  Then your bases are covered.

The following bit from the authority on this one is worthy of remembrance as well:

Remember, the basis of our rules is safety.  You can game the non-safety related rules all you want but there is a very, very low tolerance for gaming the safety rules.

That is why I wouldn’t have an issue with it being brought up or a nudge.  Show and tell is creating a situation that can lead handling.  From a safety stand point, that’s bad, mmmkay.

This decision and justification does however solve another issue I had.  New shooters may show up with said case and open it to put on mags and holster while in a more comfortable area away from the safety table which is usually quite busy at the start of a match.  They key is they can not touch the gun.  Once the holsters are on they need to go to the safety table to remove the gun from the case and holster.

Personally I advise putting the gun in a separate case and calling it good.  The only reason I hadn’t yet was because I hadn’t had a chance to rearrange my range bag yet.  I still want my other XD, mags, and ammo as a backup so I need to do some rearranging.  However I can see new shooters showing up with that case, it as everything they need but eyes, ears, and ammo.

SSCC #468 & #469 – DOJ

By | | ,
Comments Off on SSCC #468 & #469 – DOJ

The details of the following case are quite disturbing and honestly the people on trial are state sponsored criminals in their own right.  That said, if the allegations by the defense are true, that behavior by the prosecution is unacceptable.  Especially since it provides an avenue of escape for the guilty.  Here’s the details though:

The defendants then filed a motion with Judge Engelhardt for new trials, claiming that the government attorneys had “engaged in a secret public relations campaign … [to ensure] that public opinion would be inflamed against the defendants, and that the government’s version of the facts would be well known before anyone set foot in a courtroom.” This was done through leaks to the media about “the activities of the federal grand jury, the identities of targets, the status of plea negotiations, and other sensitive confidential information that became widely known publicly before trial.”

Some of these leaks, particularly those of grand jury proceedings and sealed proceedings, violated the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

There were also anonymous postings on Nola.com, the website run by the New Orleans Times Picayune, “both before and during the trial.” These postings “mocked the defense, attacked the defendants and their attorneys, were approbatory of the United States Department of Justice, declared the defendants obviously guilty, and discussed the jury’s deliberations.”

The two lawyers in question definitely should have known better and there was no actual ground to be gained by their behavior.  If anything this is like throwing a curve for the defense to hit on appeal.  No matter how I look at this, it stinks.

State Sponsored Criminal #468: US Attorney Salvador Perricone

State Sponsored Criminal #469: US Attorney Jim Letten

Because Federal Rules of Criminal procedure are for everyone else to follow.  Besides, they’re not really rules, they’re guidelines.  Especially if we’re trying to get our own out of a jam.

h/t Bob S.

SSCC #467 – Hatboro

By | | , ,
1 Comment

John Becker, 43, of Horsham, who had served as a Hatboro Police officer for 17 years prior to hisMarch 2011 suspension and his resignation in June 2011, was sentenced Friday afternoon following his guilty pleas in August to 18 charges, including 10 felony firearms counts, stemming from his arrest in May. 

15 days in Jail and a $1000 dollar fine is his penance for those crimes.  Given the firearms counts as well as the drug issues, I know that had at been anyone not involved in law enforcement, 15 years would have been the likely minimum.

But remember, they justice system is mainly upset he was dumb enough to get caught.  Otherwise everyone would have just looked the other way.

State Sponsored Criminal #467: John Becker

Because when you’re a cop, if you screw up and do something blatantly illegal, the system will make sure you don’t get a punishment like the rest of the population would see.  They will make sure to slap you on the wrist to make it look like they care.

Orwell Was Right on the Money…

By | | , , ,
2 Comments

So flying back last week I had to fly back commercial.  I flew out of Ronald Reagan National Airport (DCA) Terminal B, while waiting for boarding my coworkers and I grabbed lunch.  While eating one of them said, “TMM, look up to your right.”  I looked up and I sat there in astonishment and damn near devolved into a full verbal rant on the spot.  For you see, what did my wondering eyes see?  This pile of propaganda.

IMAG0443

(fine print: In Madrid, smarter surveillance helped cut response times by 25%.)

And there was more than just that, around the entire terminal were these ads all relating to the same big brother type mentality.  What I find most ironic though was the company who the ads were for:

IMAG0444

That’s right folks, the company responsible for that propaganda campaign was none other than IBM.  Why did I find it ironic that it was from IBM, well from their historical role with Germany during World War II.

That first picture though and it’s blatant propaganda is almost down right unbelievable.  Then I remembered that I was standing in an airport with A Security Theater at the front and everyone believes that they are actually accomplishing something.  Never mind that anyone with half a brain who can actually red team the issue knows that A Security Theater ultimately doesn’t really do anything to stop terrorism in the end.  It just makes us all live as slaves.

Nothing says free like being left to cower in front of someone who wants you dead and hoping that someone will show up and save you. I have a better idea, sling lead at over 800 fps and give the criminal a reason to choose a different profession.

SSCC #466 – McAlester

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #466 – McAlester

Don’t worry about the officer though, he will receive more training and a 10-day suspension.   I highly suggest that he learn to control his monster.  While the woman did provoke a response, it is his duty to restrain himself to the correct level of force, despite what his monster may want.

State Sponsored Criminal #466: Officer John Doe

Because when you’re in law enforcement, the government will shield you when you cannot exercise proper self control.  The fact that there are good officers who can do their job and do it well while doing so won’t be used against you.

The Canary is OK

By | | ,
2 Comments

I got an email last night from someone inquiring about the canary in the coal mine.  It seems he’s having hosting issues.  I figured I’d at least drop a note that the canary is alive, well, and is not currently sitting in jail.

What this means for you, it’s business as usual and the internet sucks!  Well at least Joe’s hosting does anyway.

*Irony is my website went down as I first attempted to post this.