NRA RULE CHANGES FOR 2005

[tirador]

Hello everyone, here is a link to view the rule changes for 2005.  As far as HP and SB silhouette go they do not look bad at all, the Silhouette Committee was just trying to clarify some of them, hopefully the lawyer types will not take them apart and give them a different meaning creating confusion for all.  

The biggie is rule 3.21, the old OBI is now called ECI empty chamber indicator which must be used to indicate that the rifle's action is open and it's chamber empty.  Some of us who hate to stick things in our .22 chambers used to put our OBI's through the opening for clips or magazines on our repeater rifles, now will not be able to do that any more.

One suggestion until someone comes up with a well designed ECI would be to use a pipe cleaner brush or bent .22 nylon brush with a yellow or red flag at the end, both are soft enough to prevent scratching the chamber and will clean it at the same time.

2005 rule changes are now available on-line. To view these changes go to:

http://www.nrahq.org/compete/rulechanges.asp

[nomad]

Unless I'm reading it wrong, IMO the change in sporter air rifle is going to immediately revamp the class.

There are a gajillion 'sporter' air rifles that are precharged, recoil-less, high velocity and accurate. For all practical purposes, they're open guns marketed as 'sporters'.
The day of the 'springer' in silhouette would seem to have ended...

I'm just off the phone with GC and the guy (Viskoskie?) who promulgated this change. It was done with good intentions -- it's an effort to bring 4H kids into the game -- but nobody apparently thought it might make sense to discuss it with any airgun match directors or state directors!

I plan to talk with Theodore, Strickland, Motl and others asap and determine if I'm being Chicken Little or if this really is as DUMB as I think it is!

[tirador]

Nomad, in my opinion the High Power Rifle Committee has a better way for dealing with proposed rule changes than ours.  They give their shooters ample time to voice their opinions before any rule changes occur.

What they did in 2004 was pass their proposed rule changes in draft form will published them for comments which will be considered along with the ones received, at their meeting in 2005 and if approved then they become effective in 2006.  

Seems to me that it is exactly what our Silhouette Committee should be doing instead of passing proposed rule changes that were only discussed briefly at their annual two-day meeting.  

I am planning on bringing up this subject at the competitors meeting at Phoenix this year and if enough people write letters to the Silhouette Committee or Greg Connor’s boss Gil Gilchrist it may be possible for the Silhouette Committee to do the same thing as the HP one did in 2004.  Tony Tello

[nomad]

Tony,

I have repeatedly suggested the same thing: That rule changes -- other than for safety reasons -- should take the form of a 'NPRM' (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) that would be subject to discussion for at least a major portion of the period between committee meetings. AFTER the measure had been given time for the competitors to evaluate it and comment, THEN the committee should move on it.
That suggestion has never met with acceptance.

This one is going to cause problems, I think. I've already had one match director call and tell me that he's wondering why he should remain in the program if the people making the rules won't ask for opinions from the people actually involved in the game. I'm not that annoyed but I'm close!

Ernie

[DanDeMan]

Greetings,

It would seem that the "Sporter" Air Rifle category has been changed in a most unfortunate way.  To allow pre-charged pneumatics into what was basically a "Springer" class will turn it into an 11 lb Open class with the only restriction being that the stock look like a "Sporter" stock.

If in fact the rule was changed as reported by Nomad:

"I'm just off the phone with GC and the guy (Viskoskie?) who promulgated this change. It was done with good intentions -- it's an effort to bring 4H kids into the game -- but nobody apparently thought it might make sense to discuss it with any airgun match directors or state directors!"

the action was taken without thinking things through.  As the rules were written 4H kids were in no way restricted from shooting Air Rifle Silhouette.  This makes no sense to me at all.  Any rifle can be used in Open Class so the kids would in no way be prohibited from participating.

Why this was done I have no clue as the facts as presented do not add up.

[tirador]

Nomad, I feel that there is still hope for us; A couple of weeks back I received the first email from the NRA advising me that the National Records were available to be viewed on line and today the day after the R&C Committee voted on all rule changes I received the second one letting me know that the changes were also available to be viewed on line.  I like the idea of them keeping us informed via Internet.

When I was part of the Silhouette committee I heard a lot of talk of them doing things like that but nothing ever happened and now it is a reality.  

So don’t give up and keep sending your letters with suggestions to the NRA.

[nomad]

I spoke again with GC and it appears that there is no way that this silliness about the sporter airgun class can be rescinded. We're stuck with it for at least a year.

The question will be, of course, if at the end of the year there will be any reason to return to a 'springer' class. I like things just as they are (WERE!) but, once people buy new 'sporters', is it reasonable to outlaw those guns after one season. (Shades of chin guns!)

I suggested (again) that we move to a NPRM system with a comment period but Greg seemed to feel that there are problems with that in ATC and that it would be resisted.

I also suggested that, in light of this fiasco -- created by someone who doesn't shoot silhouette at all and compounded by the committee members...who don't shoot airgun -- that it might make sense to mandate that: "Rule changes may be proposed only by competitors holding a CURRENT silhouette rifle score book with at least one entry showing participation within the previous year in a match in the SPECIFIC discipline involved. Further, in the event that no committee member meets that requirement, then the committee may not act upon any such proposals without consulting at least one match director who is CURRENTLY conducting matches in the affected discipline." (Or words to that effect.) That, I'm certain, has the same chance of acceptance that a pro-gun suggestion would get at a Kalifornia legislative hearing...but it can't hurt to try.

Comments?

[K2]

Dan the change was to get air rifle thinking along the lines of small bore so that you can spend any amount you can afford to gain any percieved advantage you can think of.  After all 11 lbs and the term "sporter" seem a bit out of sink don't they?  The terms sporter or hunter etc. are just terms that have no more meaning than X class or Z class.  Springers are on the way out anyway so why worry over them.  Carburaters are gone on automobiles and no one is crying over that, fuel injection is simply better.  

Greetings,

It would seem that the "Sporter" Air Rifle category has been changed in a most unfortunate way.  To allow pre-charged pneumatics into what was basically a "Springer" class will turn it into an 11 lb Open class with the only restriction being that the stock look like a "Sporter" stock.

If in fact the rule was changed as reported by Nomad:

"I'm just off the phone with GC and the guy (Viskoskie?) who promulgated this change. It was done with good intentions -- it's an effort to bring 4H kids into the game -- but nobody apparently thought it might make sense to discuss it with any airgun match directors or state directors!"

the action was taken without thinking things through.  As the rules were written 4H kids were in no way restricted from shooting Air Rifle Silhouette.  This makes no sense to me at all.  Any rifle can be used in Open Class so the kids would in no way be prohibited from participating.

Why this was done I have no clue as the facts as presented do not add up.

[DanDeMan]

As Ollie of Laurel and Hardy often said in their movies when the proverbial stuff had just hit the fan, "Another fine mess you've got us in,” It seems that our silhouette committee and the NRA Competitive Shooting Division have once again created another fine mess.  Since we do not live in a totalitarian dictatorship we have a few options.

The first option is for Air Rifle Silhouette Match Directors to refuse to let anybody shoot a pre-charge pneumatic in Sporter Class.  This prohibition would be listed on the application form.  The wording could be:

Sporter Class is restricted to springer or single/multiple pump pneumatic air rifles.  No pre-charge pneumatic air rifles allowed in Sporter Class.  They may be shot in Open Class.

Rule 3.18 lends itself to proceeding with this approach.  It reads:

“3.1.8 Equipment – General – All devices or equipment which may facilitate shooting and which are not mentioned in these Rules, or which are contrary to the spirit of these Rules and Regulations are forbidden….”

Given that the “spirit” of the Sporter Class is to allow only those rifles using spring or pump pneumatic power it seems reasonable to disallow pre-charged pneumatics.

A second approach is to not hold a single “Sporter” match this year so as to not set a precedent for the use of pre-charge pneumatics in Air Rifle Silhouette Sporter Class.  This would be especially important for State and Regional Championship Matches.  That way no one can say, “I used a pre-charged pneumatic for Sporter Class in 2005, you can’t outlaw them in 2006.”  If this course of action is taken it might behoove the match directors to include in their match applications that Sporter Class is not being shot as a protest to the actions taken by the NRA Silhouette Committee that was not vetted by any knowledgeable person concerning the rule change for Sporter Class.  This approach is certainly on solid ground as there is no issue of rule interpretation.  It is up to the match directors to hold whichever air rifle classes they so choose in a match.  They are under no obligation to hold all three of the classes in any match.

A third approach is to flood Gil Gilchrist with letters and emails concerning how inappropriate the action taken to change the definition of Sporter Class was and its negative effects on the sport in general and to demand that the rule change be rescinded immediately.  A form letter could be written to be sent by all interested parties to Gil.  Match directors would be the appropriate individuals to coordinate such an effort as they have email and address lists.

The above are just a few thoughts concerning how we, as a shooting community, can make our displeasure known and demand corrective action on the part of the party(s) that caused this fiasco.  From this writers perspective using approach 2 and 3 in conjunction would probably be the most effective way to proceed.  The downside would be those that enjoy the challenge of shooting a spring gun would forego shooting it in Sporter Class for one year.  It can, of course, shoot it in Open Class.

To say that the NRA Competitive Shooting Division can’t reverse the ruling does not track what they have done in the past.  Just this past year they did just that in BPCR Silhouette.  Last year black powder substitutes were band by the committee in response to the overwhelming demand by competitors that only black powder be allowed in BPCR Silhouette Matches.  At the competitors meeting at Raton those voting to ban black powder substitutes was almost 100% and the Silhouette Committee voted to ban it.  The ban was also listed on the NRA web site.  But, low and behold, a certain vendor of black powder substitute powder did not like the ruling and so threatened the NRA with reduction in donations if the ban was not rescinded.  By golly, all of a sudden fake black powder was not banned in contradiction to the wishes of the majority of the BPCR competitors.  This change was not done through the required process, but was in fact done by executive fiat.  So, when the NRA says it can’t do anything about changing the Sporter Rule back to the way it was before it was so foolishly altered we need to call them on it as they have certainly used executive fiat in the past.

[DanDeMan]

Dan the change was to get air rifle thinking along the lines of small bore so that you can spend any amount you can afford to gain any percieved advantage you can think of.  After all 11 lbs and the term "sporter" seem a bit out of sink don't they?  The terms sporter or hunter etc. are just terms that have no more meaning than X class or Z class.  Springers are on the way out anyway so why worry over them.  Carburaters are gone on automobiles and no one is crying over that, fuel injection is simply better.

K2,

How did you come by the information that "the change was to get air rifle thinking along the lines of small bore"?  Were you at the Commettee meeting?  Do you shoot Air Rifle Silhouette?

[K2]

Hi Dan

No I was not at the meeting but the direction the changes will move the sport are obvious, and will follow the same basic ideas already in place in the other disciplines, namely more weight and fewer restrictions.  This favors those who are willing to upgrade to take advantage of the rule changes.  It has been the trend for a fairly long time in many shooting sports, so why does it come as a surprise?  Do you think there is anything magic about 11 lbs that will stop those who need just a bit more to make weight?  A few years down the line look for a 12 lb limit.    The Hunter/Sporter/ "everyday" class guns are so good that the emerging trend is for a shooter to use his Hunter/Sporter/etc. in the Open/Unlimited/target classes.  This is most likely the least expensive way to go anymore if shooting steel competitively is what you are after in any of the current organizations.  

I do not shoot air rifle silhouette competitively and most likely will not in the near future.  My equipment was marginal at best under the old rules and witht he new rules their isn't any reason to pay for a "match" just to "win" the lowest classes.  If you are looking for the reasons the rules were changed just look at who starts the season with a up to the limit PCP.  It should be obvious.  

Do I think the rule change is a mistake?  Absolutely.  Will my opinion matter?  Probably not.  

Dan the change was to get air rifle thinking along the lines of small bore so that you can spend any amount you can afford to gain any percieved advantage you can think of.  After all 11 lbs and the term "sporter" seem a bit out of sink don't they?  The terms sporter or hunter etc. are just terms that have no more meaning than X class or Z class.  Springers are on the way out anyway so why worry over them.  Carburaters are gone on automobiles and no one is crying over that, fuel injection is simply better.

K2,

How did you come by the information that "the change was to get air rifle thinking along the lines of small bore"?  Were you at the Commettee meeting?  Do you shoot Air Rifle Silhouette?

[tirador]

Dan, what’s so ironic about the new rule allowing the use of pre-charge pneumatic rifles in Sporter class is that back in the mid 1980’s when Fort Worth hosted the second Air-rifle Silhouette National Matches a shooter from CA. and an unnamed organization he belonged to, threatened the NRA with a lawsuit if they did not let him compete in the Sporter class with a pre-charged pneumatic rifle, he shot the match under protest and won it, the protest went to the NRA where as you know they do not like to hear the word lawsuit so they gave him credit for having won the match and awarded him the gold ring, then cancelled the Air-rifle Silhouette National program after only their second year of existence and have not had another one for almost twenty years.    

I got the above information second hand because even though I was in Fort Worth competing at the Smallbore Nationals that year, I had my family with me and did not shoot Air-rifle but anyone that was at that match can verify the story.

[dave imas]

Tony,

My understanding of the rules at that time is that there was nothing in them that would exclude a PCP rifle?  While, perhaps, not living up to the "sprirt" of the law, the individual was well within the letter of the rules at the time.  am i off base?
dave

[tirador]

Dave, it is my understanding that the group from CA. was notified before going to Fort Worth that they were not going to be allowed to use pre-charged pneumatic rifles in the Sporter class and they went prepared to take the NRA to court to be able to do so.  In the end there was only one winner and the rest of us lost.  In my case after the NRA cancelled the Air-rifle Nationals I sold my Air-rifles and have not gone to an air-rifle silhouette match since then.

[dave imas]

ahhhh...  of that i wasn't aware.  i had heard they, he, found out after he arrived.  and yes...  there were really no winners.  the individual that won was vilified and defiled in the process.  wasn't worth the effort.  it was very much an ugly event and made a mess of things for everyone.  
dave

[longgun]

Tony,  I shot that match in Ft Worth.   Can't remember if I shot both sporter and standard or only standard, since I was just starting out shooting air guns.   And as far as I know everyone was notified by mail that the pcp sporters would not be allowed to shoot.  I know I received a notice at the time.  I had saved all my stat books for all these years and threw them out only a couple of months ago, but if memory serves me, Robert Massey won the sporter class.  But that was a longtime ago.  There was a big protest at the match that took an hour or more to settle.   Was decided to allow the pcp to shoot under protest and let NRA settle the matter later.   However I think I remember that hearing that the Nationals were held in Calif after that a few times.  Don

[K2]

That story and others like it is why silhouette really need not bother with a so called sporter class.  There are enough that will build a specialty custom gun to "max out" the rules and it tends to upset the rest that think it should be a simpler game.  

The rules if uniformly enforced are fair although they may limit participation.  The new rules are "fair" but most likely will not attract new shooters to the sport, and may very well drive some long time players out.  

I have yet to see a shooting organization hold the line on the so called sporter or limited classes.  Too bad, because the idea has merit.