Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
12 <br />In reply to a question from Mr. Tilley, Commissioner McKee said that he did not envision the <br />Board of Commissioners removing the firearms exemption from the noise ordinance.I don’t <br />think we have defined how the noise ordinance is going to come back to us for review, he said. <br />Mr. Roberts said that one Commissioner has asked that the noise ordinance come back for a <br />work session review, but there has been no determination as to how or when that would happen. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that it has been an ongoing discussion with Michael Harvey over the <br />years. The only place it might relate to firearms is to consider the part ofthe Buncombe County <br />ordinance that talks about “unreasonably loud, disturbing, and unnecessary noise,” and the <br />associated definitions of those terms. For some people, that would related to ad hoc firing ranges <br />where shooting is taking place for sustained periods of time and is intrusiveto neighbors because <br />of the noise. That is the only thing I can think of that has come up in this context, he said. I am <br />impressed that the Buncombe ordinance has tried to address this, because that is one of the main <br />concerns we have ever heard in the last ten years, other than hunting deer with dogs across other <br />people’s property. So that is the only issue relating to firearms that might conceivably come up if <br />the Board has a noise ordinance work session, but even if that happens it is also likely to <br />generate discussion about whether the language in the Buncombe ordinance is too vague or too <br />broad and whether the firearms noise issue already has been addressed by this group. I guess we <br />will find out when we get there. <br />Ms. Conti said that if lifting the exemption from the noise ordinance would make it difficult or <br />impossible for any shooting to take place in Orange County then instead maybe some of the <br />language from the Buncombe County ordinance could be incorporated into the firearms safety <br />ordinance. She asked Mr. Roberts to consider incorporating some of the Buncombe language <br />into his second draft. Mr. Kirkland agreed. <br />Mr. Tesoro asked if the firearms safety ordinance could state that the firearms exemption will <br />remain in the general noise ordinance even if the safety ordinance has distance and/or time <br />restrictions to address noise. The existing noise ordinance does not apply to guns, said Mr. <br />Roberts, and it will not be affected by what we do here on the safety ordinance.In reply to a <br />follow-up question from Mr. Tesoro, Mr. Roberts said that if the firearms exemption were lifted <br />from the existing noise ordinance and, for example, the Buncombe County language were <br />incorporated into the firearms safety ordinance, then an enforcement officer would have two <br />avenues to approach a firearms noise complaint. Mr. Tilley called that “double jeopardy.” The <br />facilitator asked if the Committee could recommend that the firearms exemption not be removed <br />from the County noise ordinance while also recommending distance and/or Buncombe County- <br />like language dealing with firearms noise for the firearms safety ordinance. Mr. Tesoro, Mr. <br />Kirkland, and Ms. Conti said that they liked that option. <br />Mr. Tilley referenced the definition of “unreasonably loud” from the Chatham County noise <br />ordinance: “Noise which is substantially incompatible with the time and location where created