Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
14 <br />we just let people shoot whenever they want and where ever they want then we have failed. <br />Shoot at the right place at the right time. Night time is not the right time, unless it is at the right <br />place: if you got access to 18 acres on which you can shoot in the middle of the night then go <br />ahead. As long as you are not bothering your neighbors.If “loud” is problematic to the <br />Committee then let’s take it out, but if shooting is disturbing to one’s neighbors then that <br />shooting is wrong, and should not be allowed. The first thing that happens when a gungoes off is <br />that the non-shooters start worrying. Responsible shooters also worry if another person’s <br />shooting is at the wrong time in the wrong place. We worrymore than the non-shooters do. <br />So, (g) needs to stay, said Dr. Arvik. I would propose that the definition of disturbing become (g) <br />(1) and that portions of (1) be incorporated into the definition of disturbing: “consider or find <br />substantially incompatible with the time and location to the extent…”. I want to get time and <br />location in there, he said.If you are shooting at the wrong time and the wrong place you are <br />violating the regulation. Citizens cannot determine what that is. Law enforcement can make the <br />determination. And law enforcement needs to be trained to be able to do that. The Chief Deputy <br />says that we don’t have a training program for that. Then let’s talk to the BOCC to direct them to <br />begin that training, and give them the resources to do it. <br />Ms. Barksdale said that she does not want to discount that some people are alarmed by loud <br />gunfire. Maybe the word to use in the ordinance is “alarming.” To discount the people who are <br />alarmed by loud gunfire and do not want to be around it is as discounting as discounting the <br />people who want to be around it. There needs to be an investigation if somebody is alarmed. And <br />I like having the two civilians and the one law enforcement officerall involved in establishing <br />what is alarming. <br />Chief Deputy Sykes said that if somebody calls and says they are alarmed by their neighbor’s <br />shooting because they do not what is going on, then certainly we can respond and investigate <br />what type of shooting is occurring. If it violated (a) through (f), and we could not come to a <br />conclusion using conflict resolution between the neighbors, then we would have teeth to charge <br />the shooter. Ms. Barksdale said that she cares about the ordinance being enforceable, and if it is <br />enforceable without (g) –even though the three-person provision is in (g) --then she could <br />support an ordinance that excluded (g). Yes, said the ChiefDeputy, if we find a violation under <br />(a) –(f) then we can enforce under those provisions. <br />Dr. Arvik says that nothing under (a) –(f) would allow the Sheriff’s Office to enforce against a <br />person shooting in the wrong place or at the wrong time. If we could pull those concepts from (g) <br />somewhere into (a) –(f) then we would be giving the deputies the tools they need to address <br />disturbing or alarming shooting. Reasonably intelligent and prudent people who are bothered by <br />shooting –not because it is loud, but because it is occurring at the wrong place or the wrong time