[Flexmoney]

I've heard it mentioned, a number of times recently, that safety infractions cannot be arbitrated.

That isn't exactly accurate.

Quote

11.1.2 Access – Appeals may be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the following rules for any matter except where specifically denied by another rule. Appeals arising from a disqualification for a safety infraction will only be accepted to determine whether exceptional circumstances warrant reconsideration of the match disqualification. However, the commission of the infraction as described by the Range Official is not subject to challenge or appeal.

The way that reads is that what the Range Official saw cannot be arb'ed. That doesn't mean the application of the rules cannot be arb'ed.






I should note, we had a thread that debated a specific arbitration. This is not the thread for that. That thread was closed, due to getting into specifics that were out of place for Brian's Forum.

Please keep the discussion focused on the general process of arbitration.

- Admin.

[kgunz11]

I understand this to mean;

You cannot argue that it did not happen, only rather or not it was an unsafe act.

[JThompson]

Flexmoney, on Sep 21 2009, 09:01 PM, said:

I've heard it mentioned, a number of times recently, that safety infractions cannot be arbitrated.

That isn't exactly accurate.

Quote

11.1.2 Access – Appeals may be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the following rules for any matter except where specifically denied by
another rule. Appeals arising from a disqualification for a safety infractionwill only be accepted to determine whether exceptional circumstances warrant reconsideration of the match disqualification. However, the commission of the infraction as described by the Range Official is not subject to challenge or appeal.

The way that reads is that what the Range Official saw cannot be arb'ed. That doesn't mean the application of the rules cannot be arb'ed.

I think this one was just used and the shooter was reinstated....

[Chills1994]

Thanks Flex for clearing that up.

The things you hear being discussed at local matches sometimes...well... it could lead you astray at a really big match.

[splashdown]

"exceptional circumstances"
So if something beyond your control causes the mishap, you may arb it. For example, if a meteor (or more realistically, a tree branch) falls and knocks the gun out of your hands, and the RO/CRO DQ's you for a dropped gun, you can go ahead and arb that. You cannot argue the fact that the gun was dropped, but only ask that the arb committee consider that it was completely beyond your control.

This post has been edited by splashdown: 21 September 2009 - 10:46 PM

[JThompson]

splashdown, on Sep 21 2009, 11:45 PM, said:

"exceptional circumstances"
So if something beyond your control causes the mishap, you may arb it. For example, if a meteor (or more realistically, a tree branch) falls and knocks the gun out of your hands, and the RO/CRO DQ's you for a dropped gun, you can go ahead and arb that. You cannot argue the fact that the gun was dropped, but only ask that the arb committee consider that it was completely beyond your control.

"exceptional circumstances "

[George Jones]

kgunz11, on Sep 22 2009, 12:54 AM, said:

I understand this to mean;

You cannot argue that it did not happen, only rather or not it was an unsafe act.

That phrase is no longer in the rulebook.

[slflr]

Poor stage design (if that is/were the case) is certainly not "exceptional circumstances".

[Flexmoney]

I should note, we had a thread that debated a specific arbitration. This is not the thread for that. That thread was closed, due to getting into specifics that were out of place for Brian's Forum.

Please keep the discussion focused on the general process of arbitration.

- Admin.

[Canuck223]

Many moons ago, I was at a match where the course designer expected that this one target would be shot from a position about 15 yards back. All was well until a competitor for reasons lost to time, fired a shot into it from nearly contact distance.

The problem was the target was placed in a shallow pit, and the competitor was in effect putting a bullet within 3 feet of his tootsies.

He was DQ'd, but won on appeal that he was engaging a target.

Another match I attended had a couple of stealth ninja RO's and scorekeepers, running behind the competitor at his 5 and 8 o'clock position while he was whacking targets left and right.

On realizing that he'd missed a close 90 target, he slammed on the breaks, only to be overshot by the two officials on either side. The competitor immediately raised his muzzle upwards, out of thier direction, and was DQ'd for breaking 90.

He lost on arbitration. His argument was it was RO interferance that created the situation, and his actions were a reasonable response.

This post has been edited by Canuck223: 22 September 2009 - 04:59 AM

[JThompson]

Canuck223, on Sep 22 2009, 05:58 AM, said:

Many moons ago, I was at a match where the course designer expected that this one target would be shot from a position about 15 yards back. All was well until a competitor for reasons lost to time, fired a shot into it from nearly contact distance.

The problem was the target was placed in a shallow pit, and the competitor was in effect putting a bullet within 3 feet of his tootsies.

He was DQ'd, but won on appeal that he was engaging a target.

Another match I attended had a couple of stealth ninja RO's and scorekeepers, running behind the competitor at his 5 and 8 o'clock position while he was whacking targets left and right.

On realizing that he'd missed a close 90 target, he slammed on the breaks, only to be overshot by the two officials on either side. The competitor immediately raised his muzzle upwards, out of thier direction, and was DQ'd for breaking 90.

He lost on arbitration. His argument was it was RO interferance that created the situation, and his actions were a reasonable response.

As to th4e first part...

10.4.2 A shot which strikes the ground within 10 feet of the competitor, except
when shooting at a paper target closer than 10 feet to the competitor.

No DQ

As to the RO out of position... Technically correct, but a bad call imo.

8.6.4
In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another
external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of
fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course
of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing
either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the
event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such
interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

It could be the ROs thought the guy put the brakes on to cause a situation that would get him a reshoot. I'm not saying that's the case here. just that it has to be considered in such a case.

[Rob Boudrie]

Arbitrations from major matches should be posted with the results to www.uspsa.org (currently, you have to contact HQ or me to arrange for this).

The arbitrations from the 2009 Handgun Nationals are now posted with the results.

Rob

[ima45dv8]

Rob Boudrie, on Sep 22 2009, 10:28 AM, said:

Arbitrations from major matches should be posted with the results to www.uspsa.org (currently, you have to contact HQ or me to arrange for this).

The arbitrations from the 2009 Handgun Nationals are now posted with the results.

Rob

Rob,

I get the following error for both links:

Quote

File does not begin with '%PDF-'.

[Rob Boudrie]

The open ones are OK; the Ltd ones are not.

I have the good ones on my system at home and will fix this tonight.

[SteveZ]

download them....change the file extension from .pdf to .jpg ..... double click and there ya go!

This post has been edited by SteveZ: 22 September 2009 - 12:18 PM

[bbbean]

Rob Boudrie, on Sep 22 2009, 09:28 AM, said:

The arbitrations from the 2009 Handgun Nationals are now posted with the results.

There's a problem with the file. Adobe says its either not a PDF or is corrupted.

[Flexmoney]

Rob Boudrie, on Sep 22 2009, 10:28 AM, said:

Arbitrations from major matches should be posted with the results to www.uspsa.org (currently, you have to contact HQ or me to arrange for this).

Interesting. That is the first I have heard of that. I know you are supposed to report them to NROI.

[Flexmoney]

Quote

11.6.2 Implement Decision – It will be the responsibility of the Range Master to implement the Committee’s decision. The Range Master will advise the appropriate match personnel who will post the decision in a place available to all competitors. The decision is not retroactive and will not affect any incidents prior to the decision.

Two points in that rule:

- Posting...I have only ever seen an arb (I really haven't seen many arbs) posted with the match results...at the range. It would make sense to post them online too, but if there is no automated way for match staff to do so, it would come well after the fact. (Still a good idea though.)

- Clearly spelled out...the decision is not retro active. Between this and the one hour window to arb given in 11.3...match staff has no means to undo a similar call that happened earlier.

[ChuckS]

Here are the pdf'ed versions:

 tasha_hanish_limited_arb.pdf (423.46K)
Number of downloads: 112
 tasha_hanish_limited_decision.pdf (341.12K)
Number of downloads: 99

[ima45dv8]

It was a brilliantly crafted arbitration. Many have been lost for citing the wrong rule.

[slflr]

ima45dv8, on Sep 22 2009, 08:44 PM, said:

It was a brilliantly crafted arbitration. Many have been lost for citing the wrong rule.

Sort of a "Jonnie Cochran" arbitration.

[Rob Boudrie]

Quote

. It would make sense to post them online too, but if there is no automated way for match staff to do so, it would come well after the fact. (Still a good idea though.)

I can add the ability to post the on-line (like we now have to stage diagrams for major matches), however, arbitrations are generally hand written and the match that has a scanner on site is the rare exception.

[Flexmoney]

True.

Hmmm...what about a jpg ?

I have a buddy that uses the camera from his blackberry to similar effect (emailing pics of documents). Works fairly decent. (I think it comes thru as a jpg ?)




(just thinking out loud)

[BritinUSA]

It would be nice if the arbitrations that are posted were typed up. The one for Randi Rogers is practically illegible

This post has been edited by BritinUSA: 22 September 2009 - 08:06 PM

[JThompson]

Flexmoney, on Sep 22 2009, 09:55 PM, said:

True.

Hmmm...what about a jpg ?

I have a buddy that uses the camera from his blackberry to similar effect (emailing pics of documents). Works fairly decent. (I think it comes thru as a jpg ?)




(just thinking out loud)

In this age of cell phone video? Ya, that should be doable...