|
22
<br /> the firearm pointed in a safe direction at all times, know your target and what is beyond it,
<br /> understand the all function of the firearm before you pick it up, just to name a few. To
<br /> disregard these basic fundamentals of firearm safety, in my opinion is reckless endangerment
<br /> and negligence, extremely dangerous negligence. I fail to believe that the county, its law
<br /> enforcement, and its court system are incapable of dealing with negligent, reckless, and
<br /> endangering shooters without this new amendment. If called to a scene, without this new
<br /> amendment, is a law enforcement officer incapable of making an arrest for a crime for the type
<br /> of actions being discussed, without the newly proposed amendments? Is our court system
<br /> incapable of preparing and presenting a case that will bypass reasonable doubt for these
<br /> types of actions, without the newly proposed amendment? I fail to believe that to be true. Our
<br /> municipal and county law enforcement agents are trained, skilled and experienced enough to
<br /> handle situations in which the reckless discharge of firearms occurs. Our court system,
<br /> prosecution attorneys, judges, and citizen selected juries are fully capable making sound
<br /> indictments, cases, rulings, and verdicts if and when a person or persons is/are accused of the
<br /> reckless discharging of firearms within the county under our current laws and regulations.
<br /> In closing, would like to thank all of you who have taken the time to read this at length and, in
<br /> your requirement as a public official, done your due diligence in attempting to understand my
<br /> reasoning for my stance on this issue. While I am in complete support of safe firearm
<br /> practices, I cannot, in good conscience, support this amendment or legislation of a similar
<br /> manner. I find the proposals in this amendment to be overly restrictive, undue, and
<br /> unwarranted. There is no doubt that, if this legislation were passed, that it would greatly restrict
<br /> the freedoms and personal property usage rights of citizens such as myself and others. While I
<br /> am sure this legislation is being proposed for good intentions and, more than likely, that events
<br /> have occurred which have compelled this legislation to be written, it is in fact, unnecessary.
<br /> Those who do not practice safe shooting can surely be dealt with using current county laws
<br /> and ordinances, without restricting the rights of those who regularly exhibit safety,
<br /> responsibility, and consideration when it comes to the discharging of firearms on their own
<br /> property. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or simply wish to
<br /> discuss this issue with me further; I am always available and willing to support my community.
<br /> Sincerely,
<br /> Charles Davis
<br /> 919-697-1725
<br /> LRFARMS27572 @gmail.com
<br /> Dear Orange County Commissioners,
<br /> I am writing to you concerning item 7a on the agenda for the meeting scheduled on 2/16/2016,
<br /> Amendment to the Orange County Code of Ordinances-Regulating the Discharge of Firearms.
<br /> As a newcomer to Orange County, I do not know the history of this amendment, and as I only
<br /> became aware of it yesterday, I have not had time to fully explore the ramifications of the
<br /> amendment.
<br /> However, after reading it over, I am concerned that this amendment is unclear in its purpose,
<br /> and should be carefully revised with the input of all concerned parties, preferably following a
<br /> period of notification and public input.
<br /> Specifically, I am unclear if the purpose of this legislation is to enhance safety, reduce noise
<br /> pollution, prevent the operation of businesses (i.e., shooting ranges) in residential areas, or
<br />
|