Browse
Search
Meeting Notes 080116
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Firearms Safety Committee
>
Approved Meeting Notes
>
Meeting Notes 080116
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2018 8:55:44 AM
Creation date
8/10/2018 8:55:36 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
9 <br /> <br />Zero tolerance for alcoholMr. Hunnellsuggested that the ordinance set a standard <br />consistent with the State impairment level of .08blood alcohol concentration. Mr. Webster <br />replied that no one who has been drinking in any amount should be handling firearms. It has <br />been proven that people can be impaired at .03, he said, even though the legal limit for driving in <br />North Carolina is .08. A zero tolerance also would be an easier standard to enforce: the officer <br />would only need to smell alcohol on the shooter, or usethe Preliminary Breath Test deviceto <br />determine the presence of alcohol without needing to record measured levels. Breath levels can <br />dissipate in minutes, he said. The officer’s write-up need only be “yes” or “no”with regard to the <br />presence of alcohol. Mr. Hunnell replied that with zero tolerance Orange County would be <br />creating a new legal limit even though the State “with all of its greater resources”has established <br />that .08 is the definition of impairment. No, said Mr. Webster, that definition is for driving. In <br />Orange County under current law, Chief Sykes added, having any level of alcohol while hunting <br />is illegal. In reply to a question from Mr. Tesoro, Mr. Roberts said that the zero tolerance for <br />drinking while hunting in Orange County is a good ordinance,authorized by the State of North <br />Carolina. Mr. Tilley concluded that it would not be a new standard if an Orange County firearms <br />safety ordinancetolerated no alcohol level, because the standard already exists in the hunting <br />ordinance. In reply to a question from Commissioner McKee, Mr. Roberts said that Orange <br />County would not need state authorization to adopt zero tolerance in a county firearms safety <br />ordinance. Mr. Roberts noted that Chief Sykes had also asked for tools in the ordinance to <br />enforce the zero tolerance, such as a field sobriety test. We would like to be able to use any kind <br />of valid observation to enforce the ordinance, Chief Sykes replied. He also asked the Committee <br />to consider expanding the restriction from alcohol alone to any impairing substance. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that the hunting ordinance prohibits alcohol or any impairing <br />substance, and Chief Sykes read the concurring language from the hunting ordinance. “Impairing <br />substance” is already defined in the North Carolina General Statutes, and a reference to that <br />definition is in the County’s hunting ordinance. Mr. Tilley supported using that same language <br />from the hunting ordinance in the firearms safety ordinance. <br />NoiseMr. Tilley proposed consideration of a paragraph from the Chatham County noise <br />ordinance that says a complaint from a law enforcement officer would be sufficient evidence that <br />a person’s shooting is unreasonably loud and disturbing. This would address the persistent, <br />annoying, aggravating shooter, he said. <br />Mr. Hunnell objected. The language means I can’t shoot my shotgun on my 26 acres <br />because some neighbor feels it’s too loud, he said. I typically have a couple of young people over <br />to my place, take them out, educate them, and shoot skeet for 30 minutes to an hour. I have two <br />neighbors that fall into the category of the shooter that’s behind Sara’s house, he said. On <br />Sundays, their shooting is constant. But we live in the country, and they have every right to shoot <br />on their property. The language cited by Mr. Tilley is too general, he said. It means that a deputy <br />will be required to enforce against anyone who fires a shotgun--say, every 8 seconds or 10 <br />seconds or 20 seconds--after a neighbor complains about it.Chief Sykes said that a deputy has <br />discretion, and would enforce against the shooter only when there is nothing else the deputy can <br />do. Enforcement will be one of the last things we will use where aneighbor is complaining about <br />noise from another neighbor, he said. The officer would first make a professional determination <br />about whether the gunfire is unreasonably loud and disturbing. No one on our force would arrive <br />on the scene, hear the noise, determine right away that the shooting is unreasonably loud and
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.