Meeting Notes 082316 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3 is pointed.A hunter in a tree stand is pointing down and so even a high caliber bullet is unlikely to go very far, he said. Ms. Conti said that a property must be big enough to contain the projectile for the caliber that is being used. Mr. Tilley said that he agreed with Ms. Conti’s point regarding the need to contain the projectile on the property for whatever caliber is being used. My house sits on 12-acres, he said, and I can shoot any caliber from my front porch straight out towards Highway 54 without that bullet leaving my property because the land slopes upward and will capture the projectile before it gets to the boundary. We would not need a constructed backstop to keep the projectile on my property because of the topography, he said. Chief Deputy Sykes said that it is problematic for law enforcement to evaluate a bermor backstop. He said that the revision proposed earlier in the meeting to delete the first sentence from paragraph (c) sufficiently assigns responsibility for keeping a projectile on a shooter’s property. Mr. Hunnell asked that a provision be added allowing a projectile to cross a property line when a shooter has permission from the adjacent property owner. Ms. Barksdale proposed that language in paragraph (c) reflect the language in paragraph (d) so that it simply would say, “It is unlawful for any person to discharge a firearm carelessly or heedlessly in wanton disregard for the safety of others.” Mr. Tilley, Mr. Tesoro, and Mr. Hunnell said that they liked that. In reply to a question fromCommissioner Jacobs, Mr. Roberts explained that “wanton disregard” means a reckless or careless manner. Commissioner Jacobs asked if under the draft language a shooter can discharge a firearm in disregard for the safety of others as long as they do not doso wantonly. Mr. Roberts said that “wonton” can be removed if the Committee gives that direction. Ms. Conti said the draft language is so vague as to be unconstitutional. What is careless, heedless, and wanton disregard, she asked? What’s needed is a standard for making that determination, she said, such as “in the discretion of a law enforcement officer.” Mr. Roberts said that there is plenty of case law to support the constitutionality of the wording in the first draft. Motor vehicle statutes use careless and reckless and those laws are enforced successfully and upheld by courts every week all across the state thousands of times, he said. The analogy from motor vehicles to firearms is validin that we can discern what the careless and reckless use is of any tool. I don’t have any position on whether the Committee changes this language, he added, but I am comfortable with it as it is.The phrase “careless and reckless” is already defined in North Carolina law.