Browse
Search
Meeting Notes 062216
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Firearms Safety Committee
>
Approved Meeting Notes
>
Meeting Notes 062216
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2018 8:55:24 AM
Creation date
8/10/2018 8:55:11 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
10 <br />“sustained shooting?” If you have someone shooting all day long on a Saturday or <br />a Sunday that would indicate to me that maybe there is some kind of commercial <br />activity taking place, he said, because you can spend a lot of money real fast if <br />you’re expending so many rounds for that long. When we’re hearing shots, he <br />asked, is it a guy taking ten minutes to zero-in a rifle for deer hunting, or is it <br />lasting for eight hours in a day? <br />Mr. Tesoro asked if there really was no line between private and commercial, for <br />example, fifty people shooting all day.Mr. Benedict said that there is no time limit <br />and no limit on the amount of rounds that go off to use in determining that an <br />individualand his family members shooting on a rural piece of land is a <br />commercial operation. There is some criteria, he said, but if a property owner is not <br />charging and not advertising, or there is no business sign on the property, then the <br />owner can invite people to bring, say, their go-carts over and that is in many cases <br />a private use. They can come over and play horseshoes all night and all day. They <br />might even have a tournament over there. It can range quite liberally on what is <br />considered to be private useon private property. We have had cases over the years <br />where we have tried to show that something is a commercial operation, and it has <br />been very difficult. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that the Sheriff [who was observing the meeting] had <br />sent to him the Sports Shooting Range Protection Act of 1997, which contains <br />definitions, for example of “a person,” and “a sports shooting range.” It looks like <br />there is a possibility under the Act that there could be valid complaints against <br />sports shooting ranges based onnoise or noise pollution, but if the range was in <br />place before the ordinance then you are out of luck. It appears that noise control <br />ordinances can apply if they are in place at the time a sports shooting range begins <br />operation, but otherwise they do not. <br />Ms. Conti said that, in her opinion, the definition of a “sport“ gun in the context of <br />the Sports Shooting Range Protection Act, “would not include these <br />AR…AK…the things that are so dangerous…that’s not a sport weapon, that’s an <br />assault weapon.” Dr. Arvik disagreed. I don’t know about different types of guns, <br />she continued, except that some of them are a lot louder than others and a lot faster <br />while they are being loud. I don’t know what a sport weapon is, but maybe how <br />one defines “sport” would be a good place for us to start, if that is subject to <br />regulation, she said. Mr. Tesoro said that he didn’t think that was part of the <br />Committee’s conversation at all.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.