Bad idea??

[michelle.yvonne.grove]

The county here says that me mowing after 2000 is a violation of their noise ordinance but loud music that can be heard 300 ft from the source isn't until after 2300. Why should you have to use ear plugs to peaceably enjoy your property? It comes down to being considerate at times.

I don't "have to" wear ear plugs, it would be my choice. Why should my neighbors "have to" adhere to some arbitrary noise schedule on their own property? What's considerate is for everyone to mind their own business.

 

[Axeanda45]

Rights certainly are a subject. But simply because someone is discussing range safety doesn't mean that they want to infringe on anyone's rights. Chill out.

How about we stay on topic idjit.... If you want to discuss range safety, start a new thread.....

 

[Gregmm6]

How about we stay on topic idjit.... If you want to discuss range safety, start a new thread.....

This thread is about a man whose home-built shooting range doesn't seem to be very safe. Range safety is, very much, on-topic in this thread.

Also, there is no reason to insult anyone. Please try to act like an adult.

 

[Axeanda45]

This thread is about a man whose home-built shooting range doesn't seem to be very safe. Range safety is, very much, on-topic in this thread.

Also, there is no reason to insult anyone. Please try to act like an adult.

The "safety" aspect that has been brought up by idjits like you are the OPINIONS of those who do not like how this person exercises his RIGHTS.......

I am very simply not allowing idits like yourself to get away with degrading someone for DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG/ILLEGAL/IMMORAL and something that is 100% within his RIGHTS to do.....

 

[Gregmm6]

The "safety" aspect that has been brought up by idjits like you are the OPINIONS of those who do not like how this person exercises his RIGHTS.......

Haha. No, cut the BS. Calm down.

Do you not think that firing ranges should be constructed in a safe manner?

 

[Axeanda45]

Haha. No, cut the BS. Calm down.

Do you not think that firing ranges should be constructed in a safe manner?

Doesnt effing matter what you or I think about range safety.... the object here is exercising RIGHTS........ NOT RANGE SAFETY, how many effing times do I have to say it before you comprehend it?

Start your own thread about range safety if you want, but STOP saying this person shouldnt do what he was doing....

 

[Gregmm6]

Doesnt effing matter what you or I think about range safety.... the object here is exercising RIGHTS..

Actually, the object here is that he had a range in a residential area that didn't seem sufficient to safely stop rounds flying into it.

Start your own thread about range safety if you want, but STOP saying this person shouldnt do what he was doing....

At no point did I say he shouldn't do anything. Try paying attention.

 

[Axeanda45]

Actually, the object here is that he had a range in a residential area that didn't seem sufficient to safely stop rounds flying into it.



At no point did I say he shouldn't do anything. Try paying attention.

Wow, you really are quite stupid arent you? You start saying he should do this or that, yet you say you arent saying he did anything wrong.... Which is it idjit? Do you support his RIGHTS? or do you say he was doing something wrong, and shouldnt be allowed to do it that way???? Cant have it both ways dummmmassssss

 

[Gregmm6]

Wow, you really are quite stupid arent you? You start saying he should do this or that, yet you say you arent saying he did anything wrong.... Which is it idjit? Do you support his RIGHTS? or do you say he was doing something wrong, and shouldnt be allowed to do it that way???? Cant have it both ways dummmmassssss

All I've said is that he should shoot in a safe manner. I've not said that he's done anything wrong.

Do you think that ranges should be constructed in a safe manner?

I've asked you that question multiple times now. Please stop deflecting. Just answer the question.

 

[Axeanda45]

All I've said is that he should shoot in a safe manner. I've not said that he's done anything wrong.

Do you think that ranges should be constructed in a safe manner?

I've asked you that question multiple times now. Please stop deflecting. Just answer the question.

So, you are talking out of your backside and accusing the guy of not "shooting in a safe manner" with ZERO EVIDENCE he has done any such thing... and at the SAME TIME claiming he hasnt done anything wrong?????? My but you are an idjit that doesnt even know what you yourself said 5 words ago, do you enjoy contradicting yourself in every post? The ONLY THING you have done is PROJECT your OWN FEARS onto him...... Get a clue idjit....

 

[Gregmm6]

So, you are talking out of your backside and accusing the guy of not "shooting in a safe manner" with ZERO EVIDENCE he has done any such thing..

You seem to be very confused. I've not confused the guy of anything. Try paying attention.

and at the SAME TIME claiming he hasnt done anything wrong??????

I have not made such a claim. You really don't know what you're talking about, huh?





Again, do you think that ranges should be constructed in a safe manner?

I've asked you that question multiple times now. Please stop deflecting. Just answer the question.

 

[Axeanda45]

You seem to be very confused. I've not confused the guy of anything. Try paying attention.


I have not made such a claim. You really don't know what you're talking about, huh?





Again, do you think that ranges should be constructed in a safe manner?

I've asked you that question multiple times now. Please stop deflecting. Just answer the question.

l already HAVE ANSWERED that question long ago, l also told you more than once that that isnt the subject in this thread... stay on topic or go away idjit...

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Gregmm6]

l already HAVE ANSWERED that question long ago, l also told you more than once that that isnt the subject in this thread... stay on topic or go away idjit...

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app

You still seem to be confused. The safety of his rage certainly is a subject of this thread. Try actually paying attention to what is posted. The topic of range safety is a part of this thread.

 

[S&W645]

How about THIS........ SHUT THE EFF UP ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE EXERCISING HIS RIGHTS AND NOT HARMING ANYONE..... Hold your bitchin UNTIL he actually infringes on someone elses RIGHTS....

How about this, why don't you try having a civilized conversation? Read my comment in the entirety. Note I said

But they can't do anything till he does use it recklessly. The city's hands are tied till then.

The state law is very clear on the matter. He can build a outdoor range and use it as long as it isn't recklessly or negligently used. But I'd bet a dime to a donut that a good lawyer could show that any use as currently built would be in a negligent or reckless manner. And as the saying goes, any round leaving his property will have a lawyer attached to it. Now which would you rather see him spend his money on, a safe range or a lawsuit? I will also tell you this, some of those complaining are not his next door neighbors. They live in the neighborhood but not right next to him.

PS: I took the time to look at the location and per state, county, and city laws, that is a residential area with the primary purpose being a residence. I'll repeat the Florida law again so you can understand it with the pertinent info in red.

790.15 Discharging firearm in public or on residential property.—
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) or subsection (3), any person who knowingly discharges a firearm in any public place or on the right-of-way of any paved public road, highway, or street, who knowingly discharges any firearm over the right-of-way of any paved public road, highway, or street or over any occupied premises, or who recklessly or negligently discharges a firearm outdoors on any property used primarily as the site of a dwelling as defined in s. 776.013 or zoned exclusively for residential use commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. This section does not apply to a person lawfully defending life or property or performing official duties requiring the discharge of a firearm or to a person discharging a firearm on public roads or properties expressly approved for hunting by the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission or Florida Forest Service.

Note, defensive use is legal.

Here is the info from the tax appraiser for use and lot size.

Single Family (01) 89x164.

In other words, a city lot size piece of property. That puts him clearly under the quoted statute. And to save you having to look up the 776.013 definition, it is:

(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

Those definitions were written in that section so as to provide the castle doctrine to the largest possible locations. It looks like the neighborhood is a near zero lot line property layout as the homes there are right next to the property lines to the side and rear of his property and his home is located right next to the rear and side lot lines. The fences you see in the video have houses right next to them. To the rear, he is shooting towards a home. To the front, he would be shooting towards a street and the home across from it.

 

[Axeanda45]

How about this, why don't you try having a civilized conversation? Read my comment in the entirety. Note I said The state law is very clear on the matter. He can build a outdoor range and use it as long as it isn't recklessly or negligently used. But I'd bet a dime to a donut that a good lawyer could show that any use as currently built would be in a negligent or reckless manner. And as the saying goes, any round leaving his property will have a lawyer attached to it. Now which would you rather see him spend his money on, a safe range or a lawsuit? I will also tell you this, some of those complaining are not his next door neighbors. They live in the neighborhood but not right next to him.

PS: I took the time to look at the location and per state, county, and city laws, that is a residential area with the primary purpose being a residence. I'll repeat the Florida law again so you can understand it with the pertinent info in red. Note, defensive use is legal.

Here is the info from the tax appraiser for use and lot size. In other words, a city lot size piece of property. That puts him clearly under the quoted statute. And to save you having to look up the 776.013 definition, it is: Those definitions were written in that section so as to provide the castle doctrine to the largest possible locations. It looks like the neighborhood is a near zero lot line property layout as the homes there are right next to the property lines to the side and rear of his property and his home is located right next to the rear and side lot lines. The fences you see in the video have houses right next to them. To the rear, he is shooting towards a home. To the front, he would be shooting towards a street and the home across from it.

The cops had already gone to the property in question, and inspected the range... They said it was legal (what he was doing) so go away and leave the real conversation to the big boys... NOTHING you have written has in any way contributed to this discussion, all you have done is contradict yourself time and time again... and ignored the actual subject...

 

[Gregmm6]

The cops had already gone to the property in question, and inspected the range... They said it was legal (what he was doing) so go away and leave the real conversation to the big boys... NOTHING you have written has in any way contributed to this discussion, all you have done is contradict yourself time and time again... and ignored the actual subject...

How has he contradicted himself?

Also, whether or not his actions are safe and/or legal certainly is a subject of this thread.

 

[BC1]

You still seem to be confused. The safety of his rage certainly is a subject of this thread. Try actually paying attention to what is posted. The topic of range safety is a part of this thread.

Greg, stop telling everyone to pay attention and answer your question. Gee, every single post. They're not your kids. You will only draw ire when you do this. Some of these people are very well educated.
.
A range need be built in accordance with the safety principals as taught in the NRA Range Safety Officer course. Now, if the law allows him to build a range in his front yard and places no statutes on it then he can do it. If the state or county believes a danger exists they should enact legislation to require ranges to meet certain criteria. Short of that? He's civilly and criminally responsible for every round fired on that range. If he wants the liability so be it. If there's an immediate danger (like shooting with your house in the backdrop) then the police will stop him. If the people want it regulated then pass a statutory requirement for the use of ranges. In NYS it mostly rests with the Department of Environmental Conservation in that one must have an appropriate buffer of 500 feet from dwellings (even your own house) and other structures.

 

[NavyLCDR]

How could any of the neighbors' rights have been infringed upon when not a single shot was ever fired?

 

[CharlesMorrison]

How could any of the neighbors' rights have been infringed upon when not a single shot was ever fired?

...that ,my friend, is the correct answer....

 

[mspt_99]

How could any of the neighbors' rights have been infringed upon when not a single shot was ever fired?[/QUOTE



Well that pretty much cut to the heart of the matter. well done.