Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
33 <br /> we just let people shoot whenever they want and where ever they want then we have failed. <br /> Shoot at the right place at the right time. Night time is not the right time, unless it is at the right <br /> place: if you got access to 18 acres on which you can shoot in the middle of the night then go <br /> ahead. As long as you are not bothering your neighbors. If"loud" is problematic to the <br /> Committee then let's take it out, but if shooting is disturbing to one's neighbors then that <br /> shooting is wrong, and should not be allowed. The first thing that happens when a gun goes off is <br /> that the non-shooters start worrying. Responsible shooters also worry if another person's <br /> shooting is at the wrong time in the wrong place. We worry more than the non-shooters do. <br /> So, (g)needs to stay, said Dr. Arvik. I would propose that the definition of disturbing become (g) <br /> (1) and that portions of(1)be incorporated into the definition of disturbing: "consider or find <br /> substantially incompatible with the time and location to the extent...". I want to get time and <br /> location in there, he said. If you are shooting at the wrong time and the wrong place you are <br /> violating the regulation. Citizens cannot determine what that is. Law enforcement can make the <br /> determination. And law enforcement needs to be trained to be able to do that. The Chief Deputy <br /> says that we don't have a training program for that. Then let's talk to the BOCC to direct them to <br /> begin that training, and give them the resources to do it. <br /> Ms. Barksdale said that she does not want to discount that some people are alarmed by loud <br /> gunfire. Maybe the word to use in the ordinance is "alarming." To discount the people who are <br /> alarmed by loud gunfire and do not want to be around it is as discounting as discounting the <br /> people who want to be around it. There needs to be an investigation if somebody is alarmed. And <br /> I like having the two civilians and the one law enforcement officer all involved in establishing <br /> what is alarming. <br /> Chief Deputy Sykes said that if somebody calls and says they are alarmed by their neighbor's <br /> shooting because they do not what is going on, then certainly we can respond and investigate <br /> what type of shooting is occurring. If it violated (a) through (f), and we could not come to a <br /> conclusion using conflict resolution between the neighbors, then we would have teeth to charge <br /> the shooter. Ms. Barksdale said that she cares about the ordinance being enforceable, and if it is <br /> enforceable without(g)— even though the three-person provision is in(g) -- then she could <br /> support an ordinance that excluded(g). Yes, said the Chief Deputy, if we find a violation under <br /> (a)— (f) then we can enforce under those provisions. <br /> Dr. Arvik says that nothing under(a)— (f)would allow the Sheriff's Office to enforce against a <br /> person shooting in the wrong place or at the wrong time. If we could pull those concepts from (g) <br /> somewhere into (a)—(f) then we would be giving the deputies the tools they need to address <br /> disturbing or alarming shooting. Reasonably intelligent and prudent people who are bothered by <br /> shooting—not because it is loud, but because it is occurring at the wrong place or the wrong time <br /> 14 <br />