ARCH - History repeat itself

Wilim Penbras wilim.penbras at
Wed Apr 11 10:17:41 PDT 2001

I've heard many the arguements for and against Some form of eye protection and the simple fact of the matter is that the SEM says it's not going to happen.  The choices are for us to fix the problem or for them to fix the problem.  The proposals for a FIX from the heavy community have been everything from GT arrows only to NO CA. Period the end.  We can complain and write all the letters we want but in the end if we don't have a solution for them they will have one for us.


---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Dewart, Charles R. --G3 Contractor (Anteon Corp)"
Reply-To: ansteorra-archery at
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:09:03 -0500

>Personal eye protection comes in several types; safety glasses, goggles,
>lexan strips and wire mess.
>While an ABD might have stopped or reduced the severity of the injury,
>personnal eye protection would have prevented it.
>The whole point of my arguement is this, if the issue is eye safety, then
>protect the eyes from all penatrations.
>Combatants don't have to wear it if CA isn't involed.
>Plus we really should feel put upon here.  Almost every fighter is a walking
>arsonal of things that can penatrate a helm; shield corners, the wings on
>elbow and knee cups, etc.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Wilim Penbras [mailto:wilim.penbras at]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 11:36 AM
>To: ansteorra-archery at
>Subject: RE: ARCH - History repeat itself
>No Problem on the Snippage.  I'll delete the rest since I only want to clear
>up a few points.  Also Speaking as an Archer whose also Authorized as a
>Heavy fighter and Marshal and yadayadayada...  There were several documented
>and reported cases of people being injured by Grill penatration.  Not the
>least of which was Sir Erika that missed losing her eye by about a quarter
>of an inch.
>I've adding a bird blunt to the nock end of a shaft takes an hour or so to
>get used to then it's about the same.  maybe loose ten yards or so on range.
>If Erika had been hit by that, Even though testing shoes the odds against it
>happenings are increased about 10 fold, it would have caused bruising but
>she wouldn't have had the sharp edge to scratch her eyeball.
>And While waivers are great it doesn't actually protect anyone from lawsuit
>except the SCA INC and her employees and officers.  We're very open to
>lawsuit as the shooter.  We're generally protected from that as long as we
>have met acceptable risk and such.  Basically if we know or think there's a
>problem and don't do anything to address it then a person that got hit could
>very easily have a case.  Maybe not a good one but a case none the less.
>I don't know about you but if I can spend an extra $.50 an arrow and reduce
>the risk of people getting hurt and me getting sued than I think I just
>might do that.
>I'll tell you here and now that you're right about Safety glasses or lexan
>being potentially dangerous.  I will not be using them anytime soon.
>Just another .02 worth,
>     Wilim
>PS We can talk more at Business Meeting if you make it
>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: "Sam Milligan" <padraig_ruad at>
>Reply-To: ansteorra-archery at
>Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:17:21 -0400
>>Sorry about the massive snippage Willim, but I wanted to address some
>specific points in what you wrote.
>>Speaking as a heavy fighter who is also an authorized combat archer, I have
>to say that I too am concerned with safety issues.  I want to play the game
>with the absolute munimum of injuries possible.  However, I know that every
>time I armor up and face an> opponent or take part in a melee, there is a
>possibility that I am going to get hurt, perhaps seriously.  By signing the
>waiver section of the membership application form, and then by signing my
>blue membership card, I acknowledge this.
>>Can we make SCA combat in general safer, so that no one ever gets hurt?
>Almost certainly.  But if we do so, most of us will simply stop fighting,
>for there will be no excitement, no adrenaline rush, no thrill of combat, no
>reason to do it at all.
>>Can we make issues like combat archery safer by requiring everyone to wear
>safety glasses?  Possibly.  Personally, I would intensely dislike having to
>wear safety glasses under my helm, as I sweat heavily in armor, and would be
>more than half blinded by t>he resulting fog on the glasses.  I feel this
>would prove more of a safety issue than the possibility of a bounced-back
>arrow or some other object getting in through my helm's grill.
>>I have been in numerous melees with combat archery, and have yet to
>experience or observe someone injured by the nock end of a combat arrow.
>Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but I've not seen it myself, nor do I know
>anyone who has spoken of seeing or ex>periencing such an injury.
>>I like having combat archery in melees - it adds a dimension of reality to
>the game (even if it is annoying to get taken out by an arrow or a bolt
>instead of in face-to-face fighting).  I don't want to see it made so safe
>that it won't make a difference i>f it's there or not.  I don't see that a
>real problem exists here - let's not fix what's not broken.
>>Just my 2 pence worth.
>>Nunc Est Bibendum
>>Politicians prefer unarmed peasants.
>>Go to to perform mailing list tasks.
>Go to to perform mailing list tasks.
>Go to to perform mailing list tasks.

Go to to perform mailing list tasks.

More information about the Ansteorra-archery mailing list