The Sky Is Falling! The Sky Is Falling!

[Col. Riddles]

For the past few days I've been reading most of the threads concerning the proposed Modifications Covenant. At first reading I thought it sounded pretty good and thought it it should be accepted and put in place. I agree that a line must be drawn on future modifications but the Covenant, as written, is full of holes that need to be filled in and some changes need to be made.

In the SASS Wire forum, as with any internet forum, there is a great deal of misinformation being bandied about and not just on the proposed modifications rules. This is caused by what I call lazy reader syndrome. Let me explain. Someone will start a topic asking a question or posing an opinion or thought. 20 others will reply some giving good and correct answers. Then the lazy reader will read the initial post in the topic and immediately hit the reply button and jump in with his/her answer that is often incorrect or duplicates the correct information that has already been given without taking the time to read the rest of the posts. Ie; in one topic someone posted that the Marlin pump shotguns have already been banned. That's odd. Maybe I missed that. But I've never seen it on a TG agenda, published in the Chronicles, or here on the Wire. Others have stated that the Wild Bunch makes the rules. I want to address that here.

Let's go back a few years in SASS history. When a group of men got together to play cowboy with real guns they were having so much fun that they wanted to share it with others so they formed SASS in 1988 with themselves as the board of directors. Now that just sounded too modern for a group of middle aged men playing cowboy so they decided to call themselves the Wild Bunch. Early on they realized that some safety rules had to be in place or our game was doomed to failure. Thes men had been shooting in other diciplines for some time so they took the USPSA and adapted them to cowboy action shooting. They served quite well for a number of years.

When I joined SASS in 95 there were a few shooting classes or categories and a few folks involved in the game. There weren't many guns to chose from either. Then the boom started. It didn't take long for the Wild Bunch, who all had jobs or businesses to run, to understand that they couldn't fulfill all their responsibilities and handle the rule making too so they needed some help. About 96 or 97 they formed the Territorial Governors as an advisory board. The membership boom skyrocketed and these new members were demanding more & more shooting categories and/or classes and the gun manufacturers started building more and more guns for us. Why not? They saw they marketing potential and everybody wants a slice of the pie. The WB still couldn't handle the rapid growth and demand alone. Therefore, about 98-99 they decided to make the TGs the deciding body as far as the rules go & the WB would stick to the business end of SASS.

If you go to the SASS Home page and click on the Territorial Governors. You can see what their responsibilities are. But you don't have to do that. Here they are:

"A Territorial Governor is the elected/appointed representative of his or her SASS affiliated club. The Territorial Governor's term of office expires each December 31st. There is no limit to the number of terms one individual may serve.

The Territorial Governor not only represents his constituents to the national body, but also represents the national body to the membership. As with any good politician, the Governor may have personal reservations regarding a position adopted by the Governors, but is always in a position to support and defend "the party line".

The SASS Board of Directors recognizes the Territorial Governors must be in a position of more than mere advisors for this vision to work.

While the SASS Administrative Office and the SASS Corporate Officers have their roles and responsibilities and are chartered with making the decisions necessary to run the company, those issues, policies, and decisions that directly impact the rules of the Cowboy Action Shooting? game will be voted upon by the Territorial Governors.

Questions and issues may originate anywhere, but once they are forwarded to SASS Headquarters, the SASS national organization will frame the questions for the Governors, collect the Governor responses, and construct the proposed revised rules or policies. These proposed revisions will then be reviewed and approved by the Governors.

While many of the Territorial Governor votes will be at the national and regional match meetings chaired by the Wild Bunch, the Territorial Bulletin will generally be used to set the agendas and often used to distribute voting issues. Instructions will be provided in the Bulletin describing the response process."

We, the members of SASS, through our Territorial Governors, voted to have all new rules go into effect March 1st. This was done so that SASS would have time to publish the new rules and all members have the opportunity to become familiar with them by Winter Range and EOT. Clearly we were wrong this year. IMHO, the Modification Covenant is such a massive undertaking that no group of people could get it right in such a short time as we gave them.

As of this day the Covenant is merely a proposal. It still must be voted upon by our TGs. I sincerely hope that our TGs will vote to reject it as written, send it back to the Mods. Committee and tell them to take it back to the drawing board, clarify it, close the loopholes, fill in the gaps and remember to KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid).  Just my 2¢.

PS:

I don't have a dog in this fight as I don't own one and might never own one. But I see no purpose in banning the Marlin, Spencer, & Burgess pump shotguns that have been SASS legal since the game was started. Remember the best gun safety is mounted on top of the neck & located between the ears. It is ultimately the responsibility of every shooter, regardless if he/she is hunting, plinking or shooting in an organized competition, to be sure that the gun in their hands is safe to use whether it's 125 years old or brand new.

Asbestos suit is on. Flame away.

[Tensleep]

Amen and AMEN!

Thanks Colonel Riddles.

[Four-Eyed Buck]

Pretty good, Col., couldn't agree with you more. This is such a large undertaking that there should be more time to flesh it out fully. At least maybe the language used should be rewritten to make things a little less cloudy..........Buck

[DR.A.W.FAST]

Col. Riddles, You hit on the main point I see with the Covenant. It will cost many of the members more money and time and frustrate the same amount. I know of some who have sold they're former rigs to buy the slicked up pieces because they felt more comfortable with them in they're shooting. Now some are going to have to try to find a way to buy new rigs and hope they can find buyers for the many rifles, shotguns and pistols that are illegal under the new provisions.. Seems a waste of time and effort for a hobby.

[Big John Denny]

First, I understand the concerns of others about the MOD Doc as currently written.

Second, I still think its an improvement on the rules we have now concerning modifications. Look at the growth in the "race gun modification" industry that was not halted by our current, very less specific rules.

There had to be something done, and it was. Is it perfect, no it isn't. Is it better then what we had, yes it is. I believe the effort of the MOD Com was to halt the modification race at a point, to stop further, on the drawing board, even more drastic modifications.

I am heartened by the fact this is a living document and can be added to later by TG vote at the convention each year. I still support it, but then I also support others rights to express their opinions about it as well.

Is it done yet, no it isn't. It still has to receive its up or down vote from the TGs by the middle of February. However, we've already been told that some points in the Mod Doc, like the ban on pump shotguns other than 16 and 12 GA Winchester 97s, and the Lightning Rod will still be banned by WB Edict.

I still believe the Mod Doc will be adopted as is by the vast majority of SASS members, most of whom never visit a cowboy web site, but are concerned over the modification rush they have witnessed at SASS matches.

[Arcey]

I'm a SASS member, 13901, but I don't belong to a SASS club so I reckon I won't get to vote.

If I did, I'd vote 'no' just to see what the WBs' reaction is.  They're always good for a laugh.........

[Tensleep]

I'm a SASS member, 13901, but I don't belong to a SASS club so I reckon I won't get to vote.

If I did, I'd vote 'no' just to see what the WBs' reaction is.  They're always good for a laugh.........

Vote with Levi, he will take yer vote.

[Wildcat Will]

I realize that this is going so sound very "head in the clouds", however, I thought this sport was about being safe and playing cowboy.  It seems to me a few folks have forgotten what the "spirt of the game" is.  There will always be a few folks who will do anything they can to get a piece of paper or a wooden plack what says they were the best.  I remember hearing 7 years ago when I joined this sport that 2% of the people will be really competitive and will win most matches.  The other 98% (me included) are out to have fun.  Self rule is a wonderful thing.  Does the person dress appropriately for a match and are the guns safe and period appropriate.  When I was a match director I was not shy about telling people the guns they had were not within the rules.  Some of them never came back.  Oh well. 

I agree there needs to be some rules about the guns which can or cannot be used, but lets try not to forget why most of use are here to do.  That is to spend time with good friends and shoot cool guns and try to look good doing it. 

I vote no because the document to detailed and confusing to be of value.  I will find a TG and let them know my opinion.  My two bits for what ever they are worth.

[Lucky Irish Tom]

I think rules are fine as long as they are clear, concise, easily understood and enforced equally across the board.  That being said I think the greatest danger comes from the new shooters who don't understand the rules and have to rely on someone telling them what's alright or seeing something in an add that says CAS approved.  They buy it and no one particularly cares at small local matches, but then they get a chance to shoot a Regional or State match where the letter of the law is strict and are told they will recieve a DQ for the weapon they are using.  This is not condusive to our sport.  If you are going to have rules then you need to be explicit, if vendors say their guns are CAS or SASS approved then the organization should take legal action against them, even if they are sponsors that invest in the sport.  Like Will said whatever the rules there will always be that 2% that ride the razors adge to try and gain a tenth of a second over the competition, but the majority are in it for the fun and will be confused by all the in and outs of the rules.  Remember if the majority of people are in this for the fun and fellowship and that's why its spreading, then be careful you don't regulate the fun out of it while trying to Police those that push the envelope.  Just the simple musings of someone who is out to have fun and will never be in the 2% competitive group and doesn't care how much they tweak to get an edge as long as things are safe.  I would have to vote no because after reading the new rules I am still confused as to what's right and wrong and am one of those that would have to rely on someone elses integrity to tell me if what they do to me firearm is lagal under this or that rule.

[Arcey]

Well said, cuz............

John, you're probably right and I hope I'm wrong about that.  Too many folks will say "oh, ok" without looking at it, much less applying any thought to it.

What I saw in the document when I read it:

My pistols are straight.  So is my shotgun.  Then I look at my rifles.

They're Marlins.  I didn't care for the safeties so I replaced them with blanks that look like a screw.  Those offer no competitive advantage unless one wants to argue I could accidentally knock the stock safety on during a stage and have to take the time to push it off.  In my opinion that's a silly argument.  Still, they aren't approved by the document therefore illegal under its authority.

I go to two shoots a year, well, I hope two, where the rules could be strictly enforced.  So, what will I do?  I'll pull the blanks out, put the stock safety back in without the spring and plunger then crank down on the set screw so the safety doesn't work.  That's legal.  Mechanically, there's absolutely no difference.  Just something else to do I don't want to do and I'm going to put the blanks back when I get home.

That most likely was just an oversight by the Mods folks.  But in a shoot with bragging rights on the line, I can't afford not to make the change.  If someone whines about it and an MD takes his point I lose.

The wrapped levers.  All it is is two layers of Tandy lacing leather.  The stuff is a 1/8" thick.  Add in the thickness of the lever itself and there's no way it can make the ¼" maximum.

Those wraps have been on so long, they're slick and grooved where my fingers have hit them so many times.  Those wraps were on them in the "big" shoots I've attended.  They're there not for competitive reasons, but to keep me from beating my fingers up because I hit them kind of hard.  Now, this specification has been thrown in with various and sundry other items to be voted on as a whole.

I've talked with a shooter who isn't active in internet discussions.  He interprets that to mean ¼" in the inner area of the lever.  His argument is it doesn't matter what hangs on the outside and he's correct in theory.  But, that isn't what it says.

This shooter is very pro SASS but after a completely civil discussion he has voted "no" along with me.

The thought that things will be straightened out later isn't very comforting.  Let's get it straight before it's promulgated.

These two issues are minor, I know.  But, they're two issues that are going to cost me time and effort for no other reason than a poor decision, or a series of poor decisions, and omissions made by a committee.  The issues in question should be line item.  Ban the Marlins if there is a serious liability issue.  There's no reason to put all the non-safety issues in one basket and no need to act on them quickly.  It can wait for the next TG summit.

There was a "flip" tone to my earlier response to this topic.  My focus will still be on local monthly shoots.  In all seriousness, Ms. Graham's response to that post was correct and proper.

[Big John Denny]

Arcey, I understand your concern. The following was put out on the big wire by a member of the committe. The intent of the lever wrap rule was to prohibit the interior of the lever from being reduced by more than 1/4". You could, if you wanted to, put a 1/8" thick wrap on the interior of the bottom and top of the lever, and still only reduce the interior space by 1/4".

That's what they were trying to do all along, they just didn't get the wording right. I know it sounds silly, but I shot with a pard two weeks ago that had more then half the interior of his lever filled with sheeps wool. He called it a poor man's short stroke kit, and showed everybody how easy it was to lever by just flicking his fingers. He is probably not the only shooter doing that, hence the new rule to clarify how thick the wrap can be in total.

If your wrap is already made with two 1/8 " wraps of the same material, it should equate to 1/4" overall, and be perfectly legal. The body of the lever is not taken into account, merely the interior space of it cannot be reduced more then 1/4".

I don't know about the replacement for the Marlin safety since one member of the committe admitted he had never heard of it before. You could always check with the big match MD prior to signing up, since the applications usually include either a phone number or e-mail address.

[Tensleep]

I hate to disagree with you BJD but checking with the MD without him seeing what you are talking about is asking him to make a judgement call sight unseen.
In order for the rules to be fair to all they should be spelled out so that a judgement call or "interpretation" is not needed.

[Big John Denny]

Tensleep, I understand, but don't know of any other answer right now. I do know a bunch of Marlins out there have that modification, so I don't understand why the Mod Com didn't know about it. Maybe they'll clarify it better in the final print out of the rules, if the document is voted up by the masses and TGs. On the big wire, they were made aware of this modification.

[Arcey]

Next, I want to say the tone and tempo of a conversation is difficult, if not impossible, to reproduce in these forums.  Please understand there is no anger in my posts on this subject.  Only a civil discussion respectfully held between peers.

That said:

John, the answer is to vote no and encourage every shooter you know to do the same.

On the wrap issue.  On another forum I've already seen how a MD is interrupting it. He's getting ready to unwrap his.  He read it the same way I did.  Reading it in another way, one could wrap a lever as desired as long as the leather one wraps it with is a maximum of ¼".  It simply isn't well written and open to too many interpretations.

Intent is all well and good, but it's silent.  What's written isn't.

As for a member, or possibly members of a committee, not being aware of a popular Marlin safety modification, that leaves me with an uneasy feeling.  Leads me to wonder what else they're unaware of.

These are simply two issues I have found that apply to my hobby equipment.  Little doubt others have found issues that apply to them.

Again, we're being asked to vote on this as a whole.  On that basis, it's poorly done.

[Big John Denny]

Arcey, Allie Mo, a TG, on the big wire asked for suggested changes to the current Mod Doc wording. She apparently was told clarification of wording would be considered. She is preparing a list of suggested wording changes to forward the committe. One of those concerns the lever wrap. The suggested change spells out the interior dimension of the lever can not be reduced by more than 1/4" by use of a lever wrap.

She also advised that today the TG votes cast so far are 12 for and 7 against.

Of course all this voting is hypothotical since the WB can do whatever it wants anyway. Some of the non-negotiable items were the current shotgun ban, the 20 GA 1897 ban and the ban on the Lightning Rod.

I never thought you were upset, and I hope you don't think I was.

[Arcey]

I never thought you were upset, and I hope you don't think I was.

Nope, didn't.  I've pissed folks off accidently before.  Wanted to make my intent clear was all.

..

[Doc Shapiro]

Big John, regardless of what changes are made to the document, or even considered, we are still being asked to vote on the copy that was sent out. 

That version isn't clear.  Vote no.  Then they can clean it up and try again.

Doc

[Big John Denny]

Doc, I know. The more you look at the Mod Doc the more confused you get. I can change my vote because neither of my TGs has voted yet, waiting on other members to make up their mind. I was told that most are voting yes.

I believe we've got a lot of folks not really looking at the Mod Doc before voting, and all that concerns them is slowing down the fast shooters. The only way I know how to do that is tie their hands and legs together.

You and others have brought up very valid points on your problems with the Mod Doc as currently written, but I'm still unsure if it was voted down the WB wouldn't just enact it anyway.

I may yet change mine to no. Maybe Allie Mo can get some of the clarifications in, but I'm not sure she can.

[Tensleep]

Big John, regardless of what changes are made to the document, or even considered, we are still being asked to vote on the copy that was sent out. 

That version isn't clear.  Vote no.  Then they can clean it up and try again.

Doc

I agree, vote NO and ask for clarification.

[Wildcat Will]

I too have to say that this is just not a comfortable document.  One other item I know Sleep, I and others talked about at a recent match, was the leather wrap on the shotguns.  I shoot BP and after about 6 rounds them barrels git a tad warm.  I thought it would be nice to wrap something around the barrels to help in those stages with 6 or more shotshells.  Then you read on and the doc says you cannot wrap the barrels or rifles and shotguns.  What is the right answer?

I spent 20 years in the military and I cannot count the number of times I was told to work with the procedure we had and we will fix it later and it never go fixed.  I agree with everone else.  Get it right so everone can enforce the rules the same way.

I remember when I moved up to Va from SC and started shooting with Arcey, Sleep, Tom and others.  I did not have to wonder what the rules were because after all SASS rules are SASS rules.  That was what made going to new clubs to shoot comfortable.  You did not have to figure out the rules the club had.  Sure there were some local tweeks but generally the rules were the same.  Can you imagine now taking your match guns to a new club and them telling you "sorry your guns do not meet our interpretation of the rules". 

Vote no until it is clear.