Safety: Retiring from the mound

For general announcements, and anything which does not fit into one of the categories below.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
DannyS
Posts: 968
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Hamilton
Contact:

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#16 Postby DannyS » Fri Oct 11, 2019 8:54 am

Buy an action where bolt removal and visual checking of the chamber is easy, then no probs

sungazer
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:58 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#17 Postby sungazer » Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:10 pm

Seems everybody here is in the camp it wont affect me so it doesn't matter. Well its not a problem for me either but I do care about getting more people in off the other forms of shooting and onto our ranges. It effects some Eliso stocks and there are plenty of modern rifles that it could effect to.
What do you think happens to the shooter that gets told sorry mate you cant shoot that here. It goes up on FB and all sorts of other social media that those old guys dont want us here, and a whole lot more.

lonerider43
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:55 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#18 Postby lonerider43 » Fri Oct 11, 2019 8:50 pm

thats never happened on a range ive been too.everybody follows the rules and nobody complains.
must be just a city thing :roll:
Australian's Against "Gun-A-Phobia"

PeteFox
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:20 pm
Location: Tas.

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#19 Postby PeteFox » Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:18 am

Tim L wrote:
So, in your first paragraph you say it's not possible, then in the second give 2 scenarios where it is.


Tim
Not exactly, I gave two examples of a breech flag improperly fitted/ not suitable for the job. If people aren’t going to do the right thing then no safety rules are going to work. If a breech flag is actually fitted into the chamber then a rifle is safe, and continuously and demonstrably so.
Going through the motions of visually looking down the breech is no guarantee of an unloaded rifle either if the marker isn’t actually doing the job properly either.

Pete

bruce moulds
Posts: 2660
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:07 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#20 Postby bruce moulds » Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:29 am

why not just allow both methods?
bruce.
"SUCH IS LIFE" Edward Kelly 11 nov 1880
http://youtu.be/YRaRCCZjdTM

PeteFox
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:20 pm
Location: Tas.

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#21 Postby PeteFox » Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:41 am

bruce moulds wrote:why not just allow both methods?
bruce.


Bruce
I think the rules actually allow this. The rules don’t say a look through the barrel is mandatory, they say “using any appropriate method”. Rule 2.1.5(b), page 13 of the SSR’s.
I was really just looking to clarify.
Pete

bruce moulds
Posts: 2660
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:07 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#22 Postby bruce moulds » Sat Oct 12, 2019 7:32 am

when shooting a falling block, it is impossible (impractical) to remove the block on the mound.
however with the block in the open position seeing through the barrel is easily done.
chamber flags can easily fall out.
this is the sort of thing where common sense needs to prevail.
in fact using the word "bolt" fails to accommodate falling blocks.
muzzle loaders of course need their own safety protocols.
I have often wondered about building an fclass rifle on a falling block for the ability to have a somewhat longer barrel than a bolt action in the same length rifle.
bruce.
"SUCH IS LIFE" Edward Kelly 11 nov 1880

http://youtu.be/YRaRCCZjdTM

scott/r
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:22 pm
Location: far north brisbane

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#23 Postby scott/r » Sat Oct 12, 2019 10:47 am

Umm, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we supposed to shooting a bolt action rifle?
Scott

Tim L
Posts: 463
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: Townsville

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#24 Postby Tim L » Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:01 pm

PeteFox wrote:
Tim L wrote:
So, in your first paragraph you say it's not possible, then in the second give 2 scenarios where it is.


I gave two examples of a breech flag improperly fitted/ not suitable for the job.


For me , and i believe what Peter H was getting at, the very fact that you can have a situation where a flag protrudes from the ejection port while there IS a round in the chamber devalues the method.

As i said previously, every firearm I've seen allows for the breach (rear end of the chamber) to be seen and checked its empty, even lever actions. IMO this is the only safe way to ensure theres notjing in there. I would say some people insist on being able to see daylight down the bore. IMO this isn't necessary,it cant be done with the SLR, SA80 M16 etc, lever actions, falling block, but you can see the rear of the breach in all.

PS we are all shooters. I would like to think we are the people who do do the right thing. We insist on it for ourselves and for our shooting colleagues. That is why check scorers insist on looking despite any objections they may encounter.

bruce moulds
Posts: 2660
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:07 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#25 Postby bruce moulds » Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:13 pm

scottr,
all rifles on nraa ranges.
there is no rule that says bolt actions are the only ones allowed.
for example, can a blr be used in so called hunter class.
it is certainly a hunting rifle.
bruce.
"SUCH IS LIFE" Edward Kelly 11 nov 1880

http://youtu.be/YRaRCCZjdTM

scott/r
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:22 pm
Location: far north brisbane

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#26 Postby scott/r » Sat Oct 12, 2019 10:02 pm

bruce moulds wrote:scottr,
all rifles on nraa ranges.
there is no rule that says bolt actions are the only ones allowed.
for example, can a blr be used in so called hunter class.
it is certainly a hunting rifle.
bruce.


Well there you go, I was under the impression that you had to use a bolt action as in rule 3.1.1. Target Rifle have to use a bolt action, but F Class can use any rifle that can be legally owned by the competitor, rule 20.1.1.
Scott.

bruce moulds
Posts: 2660
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:07 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#27 Postby bruce moulds » Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:54 am

and we might want other disciplines on our ranges to make them financially viable in the future.
bruce.
"SUCH IS LIFE" Edward Kelly 11 nov 1880

http://youtu.be/YRaRCCZjdTM

Barossa_222
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 6:58 pm
Location: Barossa Valley

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#28 Postby Barossa_222 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:45 pm

So we have to use chamber flags now? I think the system used now is the best one. There have never been any complaints or issues I have ever seen. I have always used the visual checking method with my hunting guns long before I started range shooting. Bolt removed (action opened in Bruce's case) scorer checks the action. The scorer is on the mound anyway. It in no way hinders me as I get off the mound, and I don't see how it could. This is simply rules for rules sake if there has in fact been a change. It isn't progressive and it isn't moving the sport forward. If people want to use them I'm not against it, but I shouldn't be forced into line 'just because'.

UL1700
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:39 pm

Re: Safety: Retiring from the mound

#29 Postby UL1700 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:14 pm

Tim L wrote:I would say some people insist on being able to see daylight down the bore. IMO this isn't necessary,it cant be done with the SLR, SA80 M16 etc, lever actions, falling block, but you can see the rear of the breach in all.


But it's good to see that no one is leaving the range with a squib and who may then return with it! Especially true at range / practice days on ET's where you have can have inexperienced shooters / loaders, shooting different length strings and without the express attention of a scorer...


Return to “General Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests