[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: Suspension of Certain Combat Arrows
Poster: "David Ritterskamp" <email@example.com>
To a large extent, the SCA puts the onus of a fighter's individual
protection on the fighter by essentially stating that "these are the
MINIMUMS that we the SCA consider to be safe. Anything else you put on
your body to protect it is your business."
I don't see any reason why eye/face protection should be any different.
I also don't see why a fighter that is worried about being hit by an
arrow can't just remove him/herself from that battle.]
So here's an EASY fix, both for wood battles and for any battles
involving archery: Institute a rule that eye goggles or hockey masks
are RECOMMENDED (not required) equipment for those who wish to protect
themselves from this potential problem,
and let the rest of us get on with life. Personally I don't think this
even needs to be made an official rule, since it's just common sense to
cover something if you're afraid of getting it hit, but at least this
would officially acknowledge the potential problem. I know that a bunch
of people will probably have a coronary over this next bit (not the
least of which is me), but I agree with Janos. With the track record
compiled by combat archery to this date, banning BB's isn't the answer.
Too many people have expended too much effort throughout the SCA
Ld. Jonathan Blackbow
"Good...bad...I'm the guy with the gun."
-Bruce Campbell, "Evil Dead III: Army of Darkness"
>Poster: Logan & Arielle <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Actually they are more dangerous than woods battles.
However, banning "baldar (what a dic.......
>ooops never mind) blunts" is probably not the answer.
>Logan (ya' know..... that Atlantian Duke guy..)
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
Admin. requests: email@example.com