Guy down range at USPSA Event

[ARRAY]

that guy was lucky he only lost a pair of underwear and possibly pants depending how much he had to eat before the match, but on the serious side safety is everyone's issue.

 

[bwframe]

The RO's USPSA member lookup shows RO Certification Level "none". He's not been to school.

 

[rvb]

Tangential to my point. "The Internet" is coming at this as 100% the ROs "fault." Why? (Not a rhetorical question).

i can't find a rule to support that. the rule book talks about how the RO " closely monitors safe competitor action." and that's it. Making sure the competitor acts safely.

My RO & CRO book says safety is our primary responsibility... Ok. Does that = taking on 100% of the responsibility for anything unsafe that can happen (outside of chapter 10)?

Yes it's taught in RO school that the ROs "job" is to ensure the course is reset and clear. But just because someone's willing to pick up a noisy box (and is within the rules to do so without having attended Ro school), that doesn't absolve everyone else of their responsibility to keep things safe, imo; why can't the shooter and brasser share in the responsibility here?

im open to a citation I've missed that answers that.

-rvb

 

[bwframe]

Tangential to my point. "The Internet" is coming at this as 100% the ROs "fault." Why? (Not a rhetorical question).

i can't find a rule to support that. the rule book talks about how the RO " closely monitors safe competitor action." and that's it. Making sure the competitor acts safely.

My RO & CRO book says safety is our primary responsibility... Ok. Does that = taking on 100% of the responsibility for anything unsafe that can happen (outside of chapter 10)?

Yes it's taught in RO school that the ROs "job" is to ensure the course is reset and clear. But just because someone's willing to pick up a noisy box (and is within the rules to do so without having attended Ro school), that doesn't absolve everyone else of their responsibility to keep things safe, imo; why can't the shooter and brasser share in the responsibility here?

im open to a citation I've missed that answers that.

-rvb

You're right, it's nobodies fault. Just one of those things...

 

[Rob377]

You're right, it's nobodies fault. Just one of those things...

Not even close to what he said.

 

[bwframe]

If you blame it on everyone, it's the same as blaming no one. That is the root of this whole problem.
Someone has to be in charge. Someone has to be responsible. Water it down and no one is, which is exactly what caused this problem.

There is a reason why "the Internet" is blaming the RO. It's because they are right.

 

[Rob377]

Allocating blame to more than 1 party is the same blaming no one? That's a new one.

in any system or process for safety, redundancy is a good thing. Isn't that why you carry 4 knives and 3 guns or whatever it is?

Giving all the people on that squad a free pass on the responsibility for safety is the real root cause of this problem. You carry extra weapons because you expect that they may fail, and they're probably significantly more reliable than humans' ability to see everything at all times.

 

[rvb]

If you blame it on everyone, it's the same as blaming no one. ....

tell that to the brass chicken's lawyer (or his widow's lawyer)... I bet they'll blame everyone. "The ROs fault" won't help you there, unless you have something to cite...

There is a reason why "the Internet" is blaming the RO. It's because they are right.

I've yet to see a "why." "Show me the rule" as we say (or reference in the RO training material, or NROI website, or...).
"It's on the internet, it must be true."

Wouldn't it make you the least bit nervous as a shooter or the guy downrange to blindly assume someone else is doing their "job?"
I'm allowed to think "Not my fault" if some brass chicken gets plucked w/ one of my slugs?

If everyone involved doesn't accept some of the blame, then unsafe behaviors are destined to repeat themselves. Our safety rules very much have a belt and suspenders approach, except here we're ok w/ single point of failure?

-rvb

[ha, looks like Rob and I were typing at the same time.... "what he said!" ]

 

[rhino]

which rule?

-rvb

I don't think this counts as a rule....
but I think RO school is where most are coming from that it's the RO's 'job.' And it is. But I can't find a "rule" to assign blame. And I think blame can be shared.... RO could have done a better 'job;' all could have been more safe.

You are correct and duly noted. There is no explicit rule. In a stretch, I would say it falls under the responsibility of the RO to assist the competitor in safely completing the course of fire, but again, it's not explicitly stated as you showed.

Yeah, the shooter and the guy who might get shot have to accept responsibility, although blame & fault are a different discussion.

 

[rvb]

...have to accept responsibility, although blame & fault are a different discussion.

ok, I'm an engineer, not a english major or lawyer. don't make me dust of websters. I don't see the difference. If you accept responsibilty, then I can blame you and it's your fault. maybe that's why most of my writing is tech writing.....

-rvb

 

[bwframe]

I'll just continue to squad with RO's who understand their responsibilities, whether it's in writing or not.

 

[rhino]

ok, I'm an engineer, not a english major or lawyer. don't make me dust of websters. I don't see the difference. If you accept responsibilty, then I can blame you and it's your fault. maybe that's why most of my writing is tech writing.....

-rvb

Allow me to illustrate by example.

My personal safety is my responsibility. If someone breaks into my house and tries to hurt me, it's not my fault they did it. You can't blame me (logically) for their actions. What they did to my safety at risk is their fault, not mine.

Another ...

If I'm the leader of a team at work, all of the work product is my responsibility. If someone else on the team makes a mistake, it's not my fault, but it's still my responsibility to deal with the consequences.

 

[ryan3030]

I agree the RO is ultimately the person that should be held responsible, but as a member of that squad I would've personally felt at least partially responsible for not noticing.

 

[rvb]

I'll just continue to squad with RO's who understand their responsibilities, whether it's in writing or not.

haha, ok. um, I guess I'll just continue to only RO competitors who aren't so dumb as to hang out downrange when a match is going on.

show me a certified RO in this thread who doesn't understand that part of their job at the match to make sure the stage is reset/clear.

just because I think the other guys could have helped prevent the situation, you're going to imply I don't do my job as an RO and not safe to squad with?

wow

-rvb

 

[Rob377]

It is perfectly reasonable to expect a single person to juggle multiple things, watch the competitor as well as any and all entrances to the course of fire at all times simultaneously without making a mistake or missing anything. Ever.

Redundancy here is bad, because then we wouldn't blame anyone, and that would lead to this kind of problem again. Ergo, we shouldn't have more than one person take any responsibility for range safety.


Or something.

 

[rvb]

Allow me to illustrate by example.

My personal safety is my responsibility. If someone breaks into my house and tries to hurt me, it's not my fault they did it. You can't blame me (logically) for their actions. What they did to my safety at risk is their fault, not mine.

In that case, being responsible for your safety and responsible for the shooting/break-in aren't the same thing.

If I'm the leader of a team at work, all of the work product is my responsibility. If someone else on the team makes a mistake, it's not my fault, but it's still my responsibility to deal with the consequences.

At my job, to my bosses, it absolutely is my fault and I get the blame when I accept the responsibility. If my team doesn't meet objectives, I can't say "but so-in-so screwed up or took too long." That's just excuses, that doesn't make it not my fault. Hence my statement that if I accept responsibility, I accept the fault/blame. Been there.

Haven't we heard / used the expression before: Safety is everyone's responsibility?

-rvb

 

[praff]

If you blame it on everyone, it's the same as blaming no one. That is the root of this whole problem.
Someone has to be in charge. Someone has to be responsible. Water it down and no one is, which is exactly what caused this problem.

There is a reason why "the Internet" is blaming the RO. It's because they are right.

Look.....they guy downrange has to accept some of the responsibility here. If there is a stage that has wall sections up front and I am down range for ANY reason, I let the RO know that I am there and to wait to start a shooter. Is that a written rule or responsibility of the people pasting or watching??? Absolutely not, but I dont want to get shot regardless of whose fault it is. I am nervous as hell downrange on a stage like that because I know how easy it is to make a mistake. Should the RO make that mistake??? Absolutely not, but unfortunately thats what humans do.

 

[worddoer]

Ive been to ~100 matches in the last 3-4 years, and in those 100 matches, there's been nothing even close to the quantity and severity of safety issues I saw in my first 5 minutes at Wilbur wright or pop guns.

And yet, we had a thread in February on how so many of the range officers are "Range Nazi's". And how they need to shut up and go away because they are ruining the shooting experience for so many other people.

And yes, while some of those people are just jerks, it is stuff like this that makes most of those individuals so intolerable of anything that they think could even lead up to endangering someone else. More likely than not, these 3 people in the video are now going to be "Range Nazi's". Because, hopefully in the future, they will not tolerate anything that could lead up to a safety issue....as this video was an extreme example of.

Please keep in mind that when most RO's are getting on your case (although I would admit not all), it is not because they are on a power trip. It is because they don't want to see anyone hurt. They have probably seen something similar in the past, to what may be going on now, and it led to a dangerous or unsafe situation. Or worse yet...someone actually got hurt. And they are doing their best to keep everyone safe and out of harms way.

Just my

 

[rvb]

http://uspsa.org/document_library/2015/NROI PA.pdf

"reminds us all that safety on the range is everyone's responsibility." (emphasis in original doc, not mine)

"The Range Officer ... must KNOW that the range is clear of all people before proceeding... NROI strongly recommends that the RO is the LAST person to return to the starting position" (emphasis in original doc, not mine)

Nothing in the doc from NROI I disagree with.
As an asside, I like seeing more communication from USPSA lately.

-rvb

 

[actaeon277]

Instead of playing the "assign blame" game, like happens at work, why not try the "let's fix this and keep it from happening again" game.

Such as
Looking at rules to see if they need to be revised.
Anyone going on the range needs to let someone know, such as the RO. Maybe even use the suggestion listed earlier about having a status board.
RO does a quick walk thru before.
etc.

These are just ideas, I'm just throwing them out.