LEVER ACTION RULES REVISITED

[cptr24250]

I read this forum occasionally, but have never posted, till now.

Please...Let's all read the Lever Action Rules again.
The Committee is supposed to keep this game simple with the least rules. This was done to get the average gun owner into the program. That is why the Lever discipline is so popular.
In Silhouette over the years, I have seen deterioration because of infighting over the interpretation of rules. I have seen different shooting disciplines fail to prosper because of rule changes made for the few with the loudest voices. The most harm was the so-called need for changing something for their advantage. The end result was an "equipment race". Then, the dwindling members not wanting to keep up with the Joneses led to the decline of the game.

The Lever Rules state that "front sights must be a post or bead". They also state "The intent of these rules is to establish a match for common hunting carbines and other lever action rifles. The match is focused toward shooters who enjoy shooting arms and do not want to make the investment required of other specialized types of shooting competitions."
The currently used fiber optics is individually made, extremely thin fiber, hand fitted to the rifles in different improvised ways. They are designed only with winning in mind. The only reason they were installed is to gain targets on someone with standard legal metallic post or bead sights. These very thin optic sights are not standard production items and are not available thru any major retailer. Sight factories like Marbles don't make them because the are too small for hunting and break very easily in the field. No one used these on a large scale till this year. Just the phrase, "fiber optic", should be enough for one to understand they are not a post or bead. The fiber optic sight is in essence is a glow-dot; the same as a battery operated electronic sight. I feel the NRA Committee dropped the ball on this by letting people use them in the first place.

If one thinks they can shoot better with fiber optics...GUESS WHAT! The person that initially could see better, can use them and will still have the advantage. What was gained? The results of which is a vicious circle of spending money unnecessarily.

For the first 5 years fiber optics were only used by a very, very small percentage of shooters. Just about all National Championships were won by Senior Citizens using a standard post or bead. I would bet that 97% of all the lever rifles in the hands of potential competitors of this game only have iron sights mounted on them. If one can not see the sights clearly, then one needs to get a proper pair of shooting glasses. Better yet, start petitioning the NRA for a scope category.

New people wanting to try this sport should not feel required to buy or make their own custom sights from the very beginning. If they feel that way, then we will probably lose them from the start. If you are using a custom made front sight or you are making your own sight....Then you are participating in an ]equipment race. You have created an un-level playing field; you have taken advantage of the generous rules and now are complaining that the Committee has wronged you. The people complaining the loudest are probably the ones that have been caught up in the race. I will note that the Committee was wrong to have let this develop.

I am explaining what the intent of the rules was from the beginning and pointing out what has happened and where we are headed. Think about what has happened and where we are headed. Think about what has happened to the Small-bore and Big-bore Hunting Rifle Categories. If one thinks I am attacking optic sights, then they better read the rules. They should think first before making a comment. What are they actually doing regarding the intent of the rules and for the good of the sport?

Surely, there will be people that just ton't get the intent of these Lever Action Competition Rules. They will still want to bend and twist the rules so they can win at any price. They certainly have a right to their opinion and can try to get around the rules. The Lever game has had a steady growth rate for six years without optic sights; let's keep it headed in the right direction.

The committee is late in acting, but I feel they have corrected a mistake by eliminating the "Equipment Race".

[AMB]

My sentiments exactly, well written post. Hit the nail on the head. Al

[jnyork]

Very well said indeed, my exact sentiments as well, in addition to being the sentiments of every lever action shooter of my acquaitance, and there are many. Ol' Sitting Bull, Tom Horn, Teddy Roosevelt and Gene Autry sure didnt need fiberopics to get the job done, did they?

Why dont you guys all just put on some nice Leupold scopes, some hook butt plates, maybe a nice palm rest, etc? Might as well, the way things are going.

[44 mag]

very well written.I agree 100%.Lets keep it simple.

[glen ring]

I could not have said it better!!!!!

[TXCharlie]

Fiber Optics Sights were listed as approved, in former rule books; this listing is now conspicuously deleted. Once this was removed, there was not any change in the tech inspections and the fiber sight rifles continued to be approved for the National Championship, ignoring the rules as published. As with most folks, I looked at the rules some years ago approving the fiber sights and did not look at the rule book again until recently.

Having fiber optic sights listed, is another example of a poorly written rule that did not take into account the unintended consequences. Rules/Laws must be properly written, a common problem with rule making, especially when competitors are attempting to “push the envelope”. The rules for Hunter Rifles did not stop the advent of the “Frankin Rifles” that are acceptable today. Today’s Hunter Rifle is the perfect example of what was not intended by the competition committee. Hunter Rifle was to be the “off the shelf” event for new shooters attempting our sport. The Hunter Rifle is now much closer to an open class gun than an entry level rifle, both in PRICE and capabilities.

Glen, glad to hear you are going to run some matches in OKC. I will attempt to get up there for a match. The OKC range is not far from our old family farm.

[glen ring]

I'll let you know sir about our matches at the Oklahoma City Gun Club.We'll treat you like company should be treated. I know it'll give you an excuse to visit your old family farm, and that's worth the trip itself.

[toad]

hi all
so do we ban the rocky mountain knife edge sight made by marlin in 1891 ( not a bead or a post )?? what about there ivory bead made by marlin in 1893 or the gold bead on the new marlins.all made with the intent to illuminate the front sight.as usual there are a few that are trying to take advantage of the rules allowing fiber optic sight that by the way are a bead. the one that they are having trouble with are the shooters that are attaching a six to eight inch
length of fiber optic cable to there sight and running it down the barrel.not in the spirit of the comp.
there is very little difference in the cost of a fiber optic sight as to a standard gold bead from brownells so as for a " equipment race that is crap" now having said all that if they would take away all the peep sight's and none standard front sight's and shoot with standard front and buck horn rear.no black spray and use LEAD BULLETS AS WITH THE cowboy period then you have my vote.
but until then because i am a blind old bar#$$ i will shoot with a STANDARD FIBER OPTIC BEAD FRONT SIGHT. now i am ready with my flame suit flame away.

ps: and yes i was there this year and did observe several shooters with the long strands of fiber optic also noted plastic remington auto being shot now there is a point that need addressing are but
that's rimfire you only need a tube mag well this shoot ( lever action cowboy silhouette ) should be what is stated LEVER ACTION

regards
toad ( ted chambers )

[Innocent]

Croak on dear Toad!!! May I suggest that if you are so blind that you use your tongue to sense where things are? LOL

If, as Mr. Glen Ring so states, that he likes things the way they are at the nationals, then the fiber optics are allowed. So the question is moot. Yes, I saw the extra long fiber, I get back to my point that there is only so much light a fiber can absorb and therfore the whole process was purley psycological, and it seems that it has worked very well in disturbing those that shake easily, rather worry about their own shooting abilites, including Mr. C. And yes glen, I still am dealing with local match issues and the NRA's ability to keep the paperwork sent in correct.
Us match directors do this stuff as volunteers, the NRA people handling the paperwork requests for match programs, results bulletins, long run record forms etc. are PAID by your and my entry fees. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET THINGS CORRECT AT LEAST BY THE SECOND TIME AROUND. And while I will not apologize for my yelling on this, the BS starts at the top and rolls down, so don't blame the clerical help, go to where the problem orginates, and this has gone on for years through several different clerical help employees...the only thing consistent is Mr. C. himself, and yes I am aware of his previous empolyment, a child of a retired Navy Commander myself. Maybe you should look into what Mr. C retired as, and the number of years in the service.

Perhaps my dislike comes from the inconsistencies in the rule applictations. I have shot in a few nationals, where no jury has been picked before the start of the tournament, it is picked after a protest has been filed, then Mr C. picks the jury that will rule the way he wants the rule to be judged. Yet in a registered tournament, we are required to declare a jury prior to firing a match, what is wrong with this picture? This 'choice' of the match director to allow or not allow fiber optic sights in matches, but to disallow at the nationals...again what is wrong with this picture?
I have met very few Marines that are as wimpy as Mr C. and yes Commander Kitty you can dig out and post the picture again if you must!!!LOL A blonde still owes me a dinner over that, and I have yet to ever say what Mr. C had to say at the time...although Pat French is still sorry she missed it.
Mary

[TXCharlie]

Verified on Snopes.com:

The trouble with quotes on the Internet is that you can never know if they are genuine." -

Abraham Lincoln

[silhouette13]

post is a post weather or not it is sharp at the top, knife-edge as issued on a new firearm i would imagine would be a post, a bead is a bead gold ivory what ever, nothing in the rules about color, so i guess once could melt a fiber into a dot and stick it in replacement of a factory bead?

also nothing inthe rules about finish being applied to a post or a bead. back in the day we had glowing paint for our archery sights. could solve a lot of issues if the no riber rule gets enforced

dave

[toad]

hi all
N.R.A RIFLE SILHOUETTE RULES REVISED MARCH 2008 page (8) cowboy lever action silhouette rifle
(1) rear sights may be open sight's,receiver or tang sights manufactured for the rifle they are mounted on. no olympic type sights or extended mounts are permitted.
FRONT SIGHTS MUST BE A POST OR BEAD,MAYBE HOODED OR IF INTERCHANGEABLE MAY USE A POST INSERTS ONLY.

what part of that states what the bead must be.
also anyone that has or has seen the fiber optic BEAD sight made by williams or marble for most lever action rifles already know that it is a bead running the length
of the sight the same as the iron,gold bead or ivory bead for those that are finding it hard to unstand this WWW.BROWNELLS.COM part number579-503-121 ad
is the gold one 579-503-122ad is the ivory one 579-603-125ad is the fiber optic one please feel free to look and compare the bead's or if you have the brownells
book number 63 then go to page 255 as they are side by side for comparison .

BUT WHAT IT DOES STATE CLEARLY IS THAT PEOPLE WITH A INTERCHANGEABLE SIGHT THE LYMAN 17 A RANGE MAY ONLY USE A POST INSERT NOT A BEAD.????
why when all other shooters are allowed to use a bead.??? there needs to be some re writing of this rule and set in stone what is what and not leave
it for the shooter or the match director's interpretation . flame suit back on

regards toad

[toad]

hi mary
i tryed that once and the flower called me a dirty old b@#$%&d ;) so i have given up on that.


regards toad

[Innocent]

Toad..cheers to the flower!! And thanks for so politely pointing out what all of us are really saying..the rules are up to the interpretation of the match director and knowing Greg C's history of choosing a jury after a protest has been filed so that he can hand pick the jury shows how riduclous the NRA has become. I have recieved an email last night with a quote from Mike Krei, very typical and disturbing of the NRA direction towards competitors now. I'm sure it will come to this forum eventually but they are doing everything possible to destroy the sport of competitve shooting, either from pure stupidity or on purpose.

Mary

[RBriscoe]

I read this forum occasionally, but have never posted, till now.

Please...Let's all read the Lever Action Rules again.
The Committee is supposed to keep this game simple with the least rules. This was done to get the average gun owner into the program. That is why the Lever discipline is so popular.
In Silhouette over the years, I have seen deterioration because of infighting over the interpretation of rules. I have seen different shooting disciplines fail to prosper because of rule changes made for the few with the loudest voices. The most harm was the so-called need for changing something for their advantage. The end result was an "equipment race". Then, the dwindling members not wanting to keep up with the Joneses led to the decline of the game.

The Lever Rules state that "front sights must be a post or bead". They also state "The intent of these rules is to establish a match for common hunting carbines and other lever action rifles. The match is focused toward shooters who enjoy shooting arms and do not want to make the investment required of other specialized types of shooting competitions."
The currently used fiber optics is individually made, extremely thin fiber, hand fitted to the rifles in different improvised ways. They are designed only with winning in mind. The only reason they were installed is to gain targets on someone with standard legal metallic post or bead sights. These very thin optic sights are not standard production items and are not available thru any major retailer. Sight factories like Marbles don't make them because the are too small for hunting and break very easily in the field. No one used these on a large scale till this year. Just the phrase, "fiber optic", should be enough for one to understand they are not a post or bead. The fiber optic sight is in essence is a glow-dot; the same as a battery operated electronic sight. I feel the NRA Committee dropped the ball on this by letting people use them in the first place.

If one thinks they can shoot better with fiber optics...GUESS WHAT! The person that initially could see better, can use them and will still have the advantage. What was gained? The results of which is a vicious circle of spending money unnecessarily.

For the first 5 years fiber optics were only used by a very, very small percentage of shooters. Just about all National Championships were won by Senior Citizens using a standard post or bead. I would bet that 97% of all the lever rifles in the hands of potential competitors of this game only have iron sights mounted on them. If one can not see the sights clearly, then one needs to get a proper pair of shooting glasses. Better yet, start petitioning the NRA for a scope category.

New people wanting to try this sport should not feel required to buy or make their own custom sights from the very beginning. If they feel that way, then we will probably lose them from the start. If you are using a custom made front sight or you are making your own sight....Then you are participating in an ]equipment race. You have created an un-level playing field; you have taken advantage of the generous rules and now are complaining that the Committee has wronged you. The people complaining the loudest are probably the ones that have been caught up in the race. I will note that the Committee was wrong to have let this develop.

I am explaining what the intent of the rules was from the beginning and pointing out what has happened and where we are headed. Think about what has happened and where we are headed. Think about what has happened to the Small-bore and Big-bore Hunting Rifle Categories. If one thinks I am attacking optic sights, then they better read the rules. They should think first before making a comment. What are they actually doing regarding the intent of the rules and for the good of the sport?

Surely, there will be people that just ton't get the intent of these Lever Action Competition Rules. They will still want to bend and twist the rules so they can win at any price. They certainly have a right to their opinion and can try to get around the rules. The Lever game has had a steady growth rate for six years without optic sights; let's keep it headed in the right direction.

The committee is late in acting, but I feel they have corrected a mistake by eliminating the "Equipment Race".

cptr24250,

I do not believe I know you and so I do not know your background, experience or knowledge in competition such as motorsports, boat racing, skeet, trap, sporting clays or other competitive venues. That said, and with all due respect, I do not believe you have any idea what an "equipment race" actually is. Adding a little bit of fiber optic "wire" to an existing sight, a Lyman 17a for example, most assuredly is not an "equipment race". It does not obsolete all other equipment and offers no particular advantage over an unmodified Lyman 17a except for those circumstances where the unmodified sight is simply not visible. The modification is rather inexpensive and, other than a few people who simply don't like the idea, does not change the nature of the sport in any particular way.

I am informed that the matter was not even brought up at the competitors' meeting at nationals which tells me that it was not considered anything worth even talking about.

The interesting thing that you completely ignore is the despotic, totalitarian nature of the silhouette committee proceedings. Without belaboring the point, even when you may occasionally concur with the result, do you really want to be subject to arbitrary decisions by people who are not responsible to you and whom you have had no say whatsoever in their appointment to their positions?

Those who have been around the sport for a while have seen actions taken previously that have damaged the sport, sometimes permanently, by the committee which had absolutely no understanding of the matters they chose to change.

Though I consider the fiber optic sights to be fully within the rules as they were written and "no big deal" from a rules perspective (most assuredly NOT an "equipment race"), I believe that the competitors should be the ones making such decisions. Those who are unwilling to stand up for their rights may not be pleased when the circumstances change. Perhaps you should think more about that than the current question about sights. There is a lesson to be learned from Sir Thomas Moore's exhortations as portrayed in "A Man For All Seasons". What will you do when the Devil turns 'round on you?

Instead of focusing on what the Silhouette Committee and the NRA can do to promote the sport they have chosen, yet again, to divide the sport in ways that will benefit no one. The committee's action is a solution in search of a problem and more particularly is the result of the continued intervention of a politically motivated individual who has nothing to do with the sport and whose agenda is self aggrandizement, not promotion of the sport.

Respectfully,

Rick Briscoe
At the Alamo