Meeting Notes 082316 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

14 happen, he said, but I would suggest that if theCommittee recommended a revision of the County noise ordinance along the lines of the Buncombe or Chatham ordinances that it also recommend explicitly that no other revisions to the noise ordinance be made that would restrict the use of firearms. The recommendation would not bind the Commissioners, but it will show this group’s intent to preserve the firearms exemption from the decibel provisions while also addressing firearms noise. Paragraph (g) Mr. Hunnell asked that afourth provision be added to paragraph (g): that nothing in the firearms safety ordinance be construed to prohibit the discharge of a firearm “When used pursuant to the State of North Carolina definition of a gun shooting range.” Mr. Roberts said he understood the proposaland would look into it. In reply to a question from Dr. Arvik, Mr. Roberts said “in defense of person” under (g) 2 comes from North Carolina law. To me, that says defending yourself or someone else in your household or someone else that you are related to; but I can’t give you a specific definition, he said. Dr. Arvik asked if a specific definition could be provided, because some individuals with concealed carry permits are interested in being able to protect other people beyond the three categories suggested by Mr. Roberts. Mr. Roberts said that he was not sure he could do that. Dr. Arvik asked if Mr. Roberts could provide follow-up information related only to using a firearm to defend other persons. Mr. Tilley asked if the Committee had agreed earlier to revising (g) 1. The facilitator recalled that Mr. Roberts agreed to provide language in a second draft to accommodate Officer Orr’s suggestion that the ordinance have a more expansive hunting exemption. Discussion Wrap Up The facilitator reminded the group that its next meeting will be on Monday, October 17. Prior to the meeting Mr. Roberts will distribute a second draft ordinance. At the meeting, the Committee will evaluate the second draft as the Committee did tonight with the first draft. We might be able to wrap up our work by October 25, the meeting we have scheduled for after the 17th, he said. The facilitator noted that the Committee also should allow itself some time to discuss guidelines and training for law enforcement, and any other non-ordinance recommendations the Committee might want to make. Comments from Observers Riley Rusky –Has read all of the meeting minutes and sees that the Committee has done a lot of work. Believes in “keeping it simple.” The proposed ordinance really only has two categories. Theeffort to expand it to four is an effort to vindictively increase the fines and penalties for