Well all right, I will stick my nose in.............I, thrice (over the years) have seen excited shooters, blow down their muzzle after having a flash in the pan (one was a cap that popped but failed to ignite the main charge. Everyone was v lucky those 3 times.... shows that there is in fact someone up there looking out for careless folks down here....It is also poor guidance for young and or new inexperienced shooters. Nuf said.
No one is arguing that blowing down the barrel after a misfire is a desirable or safe practice. As far as I can tell, no one has
ever advocated doing so.
No one today is advocating blowing down the barrel to see if the gun is loaded; the only case I know of where someone suggested that doing so was appropriate goes back to the writings of Audubon in the first part of the 18th century.
But no one has ever shown that there is any risk to blowing down the barrel after the gun has been discharged. (Despite what one NMLRA Field Rep and some others claimed about "some guy" back east who had unburnt powder go off when he blew down the muzzle AFTER THE RIFLE WAS FIRED.)
Over the years, rules have been made for legitimate reasons and were accompanied by some explanation. The rule about using a separate measure for powder came about after several instances where flasks or horns went off when used to load directly into the barrel or cylinder. The rule about tying a false muzzle to the bench came after someone loaded and capped his rifle, got ready to shoot and noticed the false muzzle in place, and reached forward to remove it--removing a couple fingers in the process.
The rule about not blowing down the muzzle was imposed with no explanation. No need for the rule has ever been shown (aside from the various stories about "some guy" that seem to have never been reported to the police or made the newspapers). At least in the first years after the rule was put in place, the NMLRA refused to respond to requests for information. Those factors have bred resentment over the years, and that was the point of my post to which you were responding.
If rules are going to be passed for peoples' own good, let's be consistent. Every year or two we hear of a powder horn explosion, almost always because the horn wasn't plugged after use. There is an actual--provable if not quantifiable--risk there; people have actually been injured and no one has to make up stories about "some guy." Shouldn't all non-automatic horn closures be banned, or even the use of powder horns be banned completely and a requirement be made to use pre-measured charges in little fire-proof containers?
If there are going to be rules about things that might give beginners the wrong idea, let's add a little honesty to the consistency. Alcohol is present at almost every shoot. I suspect most of us have seen a shooter or two (or more) over the years who had a beer or two (or more) with (or for) lunch, then returned to the line to shoot.
The rules only state that "use of or impairment from intoxicating beverages and/or drugs on the firing line" is grounds for disqualification, but fail to define "impairment" in this context. What kind of example is that setting for "young and or new inexperienced shooters?" Shouldn't all use of alcohol on the day of the match prior to shooting be banned? It would certainly make the RO's job easier! Or better yet--if the goal is
really to provide guidance and set an example for newbies--ban the possession and use of alcohol completely until the match is over.
