TargetTalk

When, how and why were the stiff trousers and jackets utilized for rifle? What is the history of the allowing rules? If you ask me such support should never have been allowed. Also it's a financial roadblock for a lot of new shooters.

jackh wrote:If you ask me such support should never have been allowed. Also it's a financial roadblock for a lot of new shooters.

Why is it a financial roadblock?
1) Anschutz, FWB, or other precision air rifle ---- $2000+
2) Same on any Smallbore Rifle ------- $2300+
3) Years worth of practice & match ammo (.22 & pellets) --- $500+
4) Spotting scope, prone mat, OH stand -----------$500+

Decent Shooting Jacket --- $150
Decent Shooting Pants --- $125
What is the issue???
(edit: oh yeah .... Decent Shooting Boots --- $150)

You can ALWAYS spend more on any of these items ... you DON'T need custom jacket & pants .....

I've had 3 daughters in dance at the same time ... look at the price of the "costumes" (~$500/year per kid) and the toe shoes ... $250 min (and they wear out FAST!).

Lifting a 12-14lb rifle offhand, I'd much rather be proactive and protect a shooter .... especially a youngster.

Oh & BTW ... Jacket and Pants are not required by the rules ... they are, as you note, allowed.

Jack.

Shooting jackets and pants were originally meant to be very light and flexible, and not give any support to the shooter. They began as a place for elbow pads in prone, and a waterproof pad for the knee and seat for kneeling and sitting.

Unfortunately, over the years the rules have been pushed to, and past, the limits. Often this was done by high level shooters at high level games, and the officials did not have the courage to use the rule against "artificial support", when there was no specific rule against the new change.

This has been hashed, and rehashed, for about 8 years or more, with the most vociferous against change beeing the highest level shooters (who would be least impacted, as they have already demonstrated they are among the best shooters in the world. They will complain of possible back problems, demonstrating the fact that they do rely on the clothing for "artificial support".

Much of this came with increased weights of rifles from the 10 pounds or so of the Winchester 52 and Remington 40x, to the 15 plus pounds of the Anschutz. I feel many shooters are using guns that are to heavy. Yes, a lighter gun is easier to shoot better, but who said this is supposed to be easy?

With the number of folks shooting 600 around the world, perhaps it is past time to do away with special clothing, ala pistol shooters, and spend more time working on building our core muscles to be able to use reasonable weight equipment.

jhmartin is correct about costs on an individual basis, but the clothing race keeps many junior clubs from being competitive, as they cannot afford more than a finite number of standard jackets and gloves, but no pants or boots due to the tremendous difference in sizes of member.

Pat to say the elite at the top would be the least effected misses the point that they are also the ones that put the most time in actually shooting thus would most likely be effected by changes.

There is not a large amount of people shooting 600 in AR or Small bore standing either I love this fallacy.