By Law 6: Authenticity

[Lars]

Hello fellow NCOWS members and others!

Thought it might be educational for us new and potential NCOWS members to read some comments directed toward what is actually written in the NCOWS By Laws re Authenticity. To this end I have C&Ped most of By Law 6: Authenticity.

I have highlighted some sentences that seem especially important to discussions of things apparently not expressly considered at the time the By Laws were written.

I would especially appreciate learning from those "that were there" how By Law 6: Authenticity was/is used to ban features of otherwise acceptable firearms, both replicas and modern versions -- for example, angle eject on Winchester 94s, ramp front sight on Marlins. By Law 6: Authenticity clearly requires a petition to allow something but, how does it work to disallow?.

I think it would also be informative to learn how this By Law does or should operate in the case of internal modifications, which apparently are not expressly covered anywhere in the By Laws. Perhaps they should be covered, as are the following "Cartridge firearms shall be original to the period or authentic reproductions of original makes and models." and "Sights for all firearms shall be of original design or configuration." in the section "NCOWS RULES AND REGULATIONS", but, perhaps more tightly worded.

I find the Approved-Unapproved Lists to be very useful because they are specific. They also have the wonderful feature of being based on easily observed "Yes/No" criteria, eg. Grip shape, model, angle-eject bevel, front sight ramp. How does this work with internal modifications that have no clear visual criteria?

I also wonder what the boundaries are on the term "authentic reproductions", given that few of the reproductions have parts interchanability and maybe not even the same external dimensions (Remington New Army C&B revolvers, for example). Again, the Approved/Unapproved Lists can be decisive here.

Thanks,
Lars

BY-LAW 6: AUTHENTICITY

6-1.  It is the responsibility of the individual to document the authenticity of all items of apparel, accouterments and firearms. The remainder of this By-Law shall act as a general guide, however the Territorial Congress, in conjunction with the Authenticity Committee, shall maintain, update and publicize specific lists of both "Approved" and "Not-Approved" items of apparel, accoutrements and firearms.  These lists shall be made a part of this By-Law and shall take precedence over any other portion of this or any other By-Laws with which they may conflict.  Questionable items may be granted temporary amnesty by the Judge on an individual member basis (not a blanket proclamation) until said item is listed by the Territorial Congress.

6-2. No modern (post 1899) firearms will be allowed unless they are authentic reproductions of traditional firearms or very markedly resemble traditional firearms.  Traditional firearms are defined as those manufactured and/or commonly used during 1865-1899 time period.  Center-fire calibers may substitute for original rim-fire calibers in reproduction firearms.  Reproduction firearms chambered in calibers not utilized in original models shall be allowed as long as such calibers are original to the period or otherwise approved by  the National Congress of Old West Shootists.

6-3.  The Territorial Congress shall establish and maintain a list of firearms and calibers approved for official competition.  This list will be reviewed and up-dated  yearly.  Members wishing to have a particular firearm or caliber added to the list must petition the Territorial Congress and supply full documentation attesting to the historical authenticity of the firearm or caliber.

6-3-a.  Petitions from members seeking to add firearms to the "approved" list (see By-Law 9), or to seek approval of disputed items of replica apparel or equipment,  shall be made through the Authenticity  Committee, to be chaired by the Judge.

6-3-b.  A successful petition must have at least the following: (1) a minimum of two (2) primary published references proving the historical existence of the original of the petitioned replica firearm or item.  Such references must adequately describe the original item being reproduced, prove its availability, use or manufacture for sale during the time period 1865-1899; and/or (2) A minimum of one (1) dated photograph, woodcut, engraving, catalog and/or advertisement  of the original of the petitioned replica firearm or item, or a photograph from a collectors reference (such as Flayderman's) proving that the original of the replica firearm or item did exist and could have been used during the period 1865-1899; and/or (3) an actual artifact representative of the petitioned replica firearm or item, properly authenticated and documented as to time period.

[Major Matt Lewis]

Lars,

Nicely Done

[Ol Gabe]

Thanks Lars, well done!
This might also be a good time to add O.T.'s '3 levels of Authenticity' to the thread for those that have not seen them since TFS suffered such an untimely demise. His 3 Levels, also seen as articles in THE SHOOTIST offer a methodology for the 'Newbie' to get started at a resaonable pace and seek his/her own 'Level of Authenticity' whilst carrying on with everything else in their busy life and uncertain economic situations.
Perhaps another NCOWS Pard or O.T. can post them here? My only e-link was with TFS and thus is gone. I'm sure we'll get it in-toto soon for all to peruse and that it will proffer another level of support to Lars' original posting.
Best regards and good reading!
'Ol Gabe
P.S. Lars, many thanks for posting the Nickelharp website, I found it enjoyable and helpful in my search for Scandahoovian 'Old Time' intsruments. FWIW, my fat fingers seem to want to learn the harp at some time in the future, must be a death wish...I dunno, old age and...whats the rest of it?

[Lone Gunman]

All three of Marlan's articles are available at the NCOWS website:

http://www.ncows.org/Downloads.htm

[Black River Smith]

I did not make a comment before in the 'other' post because I don't like the 'debates' and hard feelings that they bring.  But since you now have read the By-Laws (that is one good thing for a new person) here is just my understanding and my style of interpretation.

I mean this to help you think about thing not give a direct answer.

6-1  I have never been involved in the process.  But as a member I live with the decision of the Rep and Sen.  (Don't like the 4" pocket decision but won't debate it).  My interpretation is you look and prove that what you want to buy or use, in some way, shape or form resembles what existed in the period protrayed.

6-2  The US gov. has rules and reg on imports.  Our club is smaller than the importers so we must live with those items that they bring in.  We can influence to a point (no 1876 yet).  We can as a group/club decide collectively what we will accept from our members, in order to maintain a level of the pre1900 period.  Did Winchester produce a side-ejector before 1900? No No  Were there ramp sights on Marlins?  No


Look in catalogs/books to verify what you want then argue your point to use said item. That easy.  Or go with the generally accepted items.

Your concerns are valid.  The points could be push to the limits on available materials.

My example here will be the Ivory Grip.  Ivory Grips existed in the pre-1900.  But the present 'Polys' did not?   BAN Them/ Ban Them.  No use your logic. You can find Ivory at a cost.  You cannot buy fresh material (against the law).  But banning poly grip is not appropriate.  But its not pre1900?  Does it look liike Ivory.  YES

Short stroke -- Did it exist pre-1900?  No.  Are they meant to change the looks?  No.  Do they?  Yes.   30 degrees is a lot less than 95.  Kaycee I think got a bad job done on his short stroked rifle after hearing Booke's comment about Matt's rifle throw.

They are meant for a competitive edge?

Give me money or a promotional deal and I will do whatever it takes (cheap the stroke to win).  But NCOWS has no CASH DEAL so I will not attempt to cheat my fellow friends and pards to win.  That simple.  Now you make your decisions from the By-Laws.

Black River Smith

[Lars]

P.S. Lars, many thanks for posting the Nickelharp website, I found it enjoyable and helpful in my search for Scandahoovian 'Old Time' intsruments. FWIW, my fat fingers seem to want to learn the harp at some time in the future, must be a death wish...I dunno, old age and...whats the rest of it?

Ol Gabe, thanks to you and Major Lewis for the compliments!! As I recall we "met" at an NCOWS shoot at Holmen Rod and Gun club this spring.

Well, maybe it is a death wish .... has not killed me....yet. However, for a while I though I was experiencing gradual death by frustration. Be happy to start you down that path during the Muster!! After about 8 months I am now thinking ... Hej!! I am gonna be able to play this thing well enough to play for public dances!! But maybe I am dreaming .... but just cannot wake up?

Lars

[Black River Smith]

Something to add.

It is said that John Browning made a full auto out of a 73Win in the pre-1900.  So all of us should be able to use something similiar.

The question is, was it readily available?

Black River Smith

[Delmonico]

Prototype for the 1894 Colt (Potatoe Digger) Machinegun, readily avalible to those who had the money to by on.  Justlike in "Rough riders" Sgt. Tiffany bought a pair for the troop.

[Lars]

Black River Smith,

Thank you for your comments, they do help. And I do agree that a relatively small group as NCOWS is at the mercy of the vendors as regards new guns. At the other extremes are extant originals in shootable condition, custom guns made to fit NCOWS criteria, and modification of available replicas to meet NCOWS criteria.

I would like to pursue a few items, hopefully as an illuminating discussion. Maybe even as illuminating as your useful discussion of "ivory" grips.

Lets start with the angle-eject on Winchester 94s. My understanding is that it is a market driven modification, to make the previously top ejection lever action rifle more competitive with all the other deer rifles on which scopes can be mounted directly over the bore. In no other way does this add or subtract from the function of the rifle. For NCOWS use it is simply a visual modification and not a very noticable one that that. To my eyes it is much less noticable than the cross bolt safeties. I am still struggling to understand how this visual effect is so offensive as to be banned.

The ramp front sight on the Marlin can be discussed in much the same vein. To continue to ban it while reversing the previous ban on cross bolt safeties seems inconsistant. Why has not the "pregnant" stocks on most modern Marlins, save the Cowboy models, not been banned? It can easily appear that the line between "smal"l features that are banned and those that are not is an inspired zig-zag.

The whole topic of "short strokes" to toggle-link rifles is a can of worms, at least to this bystander. I will skip this topic until there seems some consensous as to the basic physical facts and their pros and cons.

I do think that the basic NCOWS yardstick, "did it exist before 1900", can be a two-edged sword. I wonder if a somewhat more weildy and precision tool is now needed.

Thanks,
Lars

[Lars]

Thanks Delmonico!!

I think I recall that back in that 20 page discussion of short stroked toggle-link rifles there were a few folks that stated that they "could affort any gun they wished". SO, when is the "Authenticity Committee" going to be petitioned to add those early designs for full autos to the list of approved guns?

Ditto for more prosaic guns, like the Savage 1899 lever rifles.

Lars

[Black River Smith]

First off I will not debate or argue and issue with you or anyone anymore.  Don't take that personal.  But after the last and before, it is no fun anymore.  These are my ideas and beliefs and approaches to NCOWS only.  Nothing is up for evaluation.  You will most likely argue your side because you want too.

But here goes.

You are playing with several hundred people, all with different thoughts and ideals.  To come up with an equation or theorem to determine the line or pattern of thinking is absurd to approach.

Give your items/ideals/beliefs/feelings to the reps and sen and they vote for the masses.  So I believe.  You may wish to become one.  I do not, I do not have the time.  And so I will live with that.

Is wood shape more important that the 'modern concept and design' of a ramped sight?  For me wood could be replace in those days but the ramp site took years before it was thought of or developed or put on a gun.  Don't forget you are trying to emulate the period of pre-1900.

As for the side eject. Market driven for the modern deer hunter not the game playing pre-1900 cowboy.  The same premise as above.

Now don't get this or take this wrong. It is the only immediate relationship I could come up with.   If a club had in it by-laws that only originals in original condition were to be use.  Are they the ones that are wrong or am I for believing their desires and mine were a match and I should want to belong..  I personally cannot afford all originals and even want too, then still shoot the heck out of them.  I would not join that club period end, I don't and could not fit.   I am not trying to say you don't belong but evaluate if your ideals and desire fit the club as it sits. Or written in the by-laws.  I did not join in the Civil War stuff because it was too restrictive for ME.

Think about this also don't you yourself just argue on some point, you choice.  Think, SASS restricted 'its' game in the very beginnings.  You shall use only lever action rifles.  H$ll there were bolt actions and a lot of  singles that where pre-1900 manufacture,  so why couldn't we use one of those?  Caliber size was also restricted.  Why?  Pressures.  You chose not to argue or debate that?  Because you 'accepted' their premise and rules.


I will through out one more thought for all to consider.  This club was started with a concept different than SASS.  How much like SASS can we become in our rule, regulations, concepts before we are similiar enough to SASS, that then SASS, will maybe think of suing us for infringements?  Can't happen?  Maybe!!! Maaybe not!!!

Please just accept NCOWS and enjoy the game.  And once again these are my ideas beliefs, nothing is up for debate.

Black River Smith

[Lars]

Black River Smith,

I share most of River City John's comments about your post. I also take the same actions vis-a-vis clubs, etc. as you. For example, I do not shoot Wild Bunch matches because I have no interest in shooting the guns they use, especially 1911s and Winchester 97s. I don't shoot formal trap and skeet because they are simply too boring to me, ditto for bullseye shooting. I do find the shooting format of Western 3 Gun, with its emphasis on accuracy and lack of dictated shooting sequence (essentially no Ps) to be very attractive. I do very much like shooting some of the guns of the late 1800s.

I have not renewed my SASS membership this year and may never do so, except perhaps to go to still another Winter Range match (my all time favorate SASS match by a wide margin). I do shoot CAS/WAS at specific local clubs that have especially interesting/challanging stages and go to all the W3G shoots I can. I really have no interest in "SASSifying" NCOWS. If the following does not fit you, please ignore it ----- I will note that "accusations" of wanting to "SASSify" NCOWS sometimes seems to be a knee-jerk reaction from some NCOWS members. Often NCOWS would be better served by straight forward explanations of things questioned. A question is not an attack.

I "argue", poke-at, whatever you want to call it as an effective means of arriving at an understanding. That is very much a part of my cultural background, as natural as breathing. It is netural. Having spent my entire life in a cross-cultural mix that spans some of the world's major cultures, if one does not ask, one is missing a lot and one is especially open to to some pretty wrong "understandings". My NCOWS persona, posted in another thread, can provide a measure of that cross-cultural mix.

Once again, I thank you for your assistance in helping me and potentially others to understand NCOWS and how some of the accepted and unaccepted items came to be on those lists.
Lars

[Trap]

  Lars'
  To answer a good question you posed, CBsafties were originally banned, but because of our litigation crazy society, NCOWS decided we had better allow them, rather than face a lawsuit from someone who Took theirs out, then had an accident.  jt

[Lars]

Thanks Trap!!

Do you happen to know the basis for nixing Winchester 94s that have angle-eject?

Thanks,
Lars

[Trap]

  See Blach River Smith's last post. jt

[Lars]

Thanks again Trap!

Sounds like more than just the angle eject is actually involved but that the angle eject is a distinguishing feature.

Looks like I will be looking for a Marlin 94 or Rossi M92 carbine in 44-40 to be the backup/replacement to my slicked up Rossi 92 carbine. The Winchester 94 Trail's End in 44-40 was otherwise looking like a nice reliable backup (I don't find them slow, or rough, or unreliable, at least not the few I have used, even though I do prefer the M92.) A couple of my Marlin-loving friends are gonna get a bunch of questions about how they keep theirs running smoothly and without jams.

Lars

[O.T. Buchannan]

I pretty much agree with Black River Smith.  Most of you all know my overly simplistic and inflexible approach...  To put it bluntly, if the INTENT of the organization is authenticity (as written into the By-Laws), then deciding what I PERSONALLY will use at an NCOWS match is simple:  All items that I choose must be original to the period (originals, or reproductions thereof).  If the item didn't exist, WHY would I want to use it? 

Now, with respect to the fact that not everyone wishes to go to this extreme, I don't wish to push these ideals on anyone who doesn't want them.  This is the purpose of the Three Levels of Authenticity, so that an individual coming in who is not as concerned with an intense level of authenticity can still have a place, and the person that puts a greater emphasis on authenticity can ALSO have a place....all under the same umbrella.  I like this approach, as opposed to having those authenticity nuts like myself trying to force other folks to conform, and vice-versa.  It's like driving down the highway....a bunch of folks might all be heading in the same direction, but at different speeds, and with different purposes in mind.  It sure helps if they have several lanes to choose from........

[Lars]

O.T. Buchannan,

I am sure that I am hardly the only new or prospective NCOWS member that much appreciates your defining/describing the three levels of authenticity. No idea currently where I will end up on that scale. For some things I am clearly well up into Level 3, on others I may only marginally make it into Level 1.

Thanks,
Lars

[Surly Bob]

Great post Lars!

Yeah, there were double action revolvers too. 
I don't think we want to go there, it's like a can of worms gettin' knocked over. 

The wording in the bylaws could be a lot less conflicting/confusing I suppose.