Bad idea??

[Gregmm6]

Part of my letter to the editor (And the public at large who care or not). Was published this week end, this is my censored version.

Let me be perfectly absolutely clear, I am an American. I am a free American. I do not need a law to allow me to speak freely, worship freely, and to pack a gun, any gun that I may choose. I do not need a 1st or 2nd Amendment or any other federal, state, county law the might “Allow” me the “Privilege” to exercise my rights. Period. In the 1930 we had the National Firearms Act, we had the 1968 act, we allowed Brady we shall not, will not allow a gun registration/confiscation act, not here not this time, this is our line in the sand. End of story. I just hope everyone remembers this, both enemies foreign and domestic for I shall not repeat this.

"I shall not repeat this."

Haha!

 

[S&W645]

The ACTUAL NEWS STORY AND THE COMMENTS OF THE RESPONDING POLICE TRUMP YOUR IMMATURE AND INCORRECT TO THE SITUATION GOOGLE SEARCH IDJIT

:wacko::haha: I would suggest you learn to read. What the public says and what the cops say do not trump what is written in the laws. Unless you believe what 0bama and the DHS/DOJ say is correct like with illegal immigrants. Let me explain how it works. State laws are at the top but it only covers the gun part. Next down is the county and it covers noise control. Below that is the city of St Pete. It also only controls noise. If the neighbors file a complaint about noise, they can do it with either the county or the city. Counties can go into cities to do things. It was said that he had not used the range yet. And because of that, the hands of the police were tied. Why do you think they said they were monitoring it? First use and a complaint by a neighbor about noise would change that. How did they find out about his "range" in the first place? Was he stupid and ran his mouth? Or did he already use it? Sad to say, it really would only take one neighbor to claim they heard a round go overhead, and he'd face the state law.

And by the way, whether we like it or not, the neighbors won. And now the City is going to try to change State law even for safe ranges.

 

[Buster04]

:wacko::haha: I would suggest you learn to read. What the public says and what the cops say do not trump what is written in the laws. Unless you believe what 0bama and the DHS/DOJ say is correct like with illegal immigrants. Let me explain how it works. State laws are at the top but it only covers the gun part. Next down is the county and it covers noise control. Below that is the city of St Pete. It also only controls noise. If the neighbors file a complaint about noise, they can do it with either the county or the city. Counties can go into cities to do things. It was said that he had not used the range yet. And because of that, the hands of the police were tied. Why do you think they said they were monitoring it? First use and a complaint by a neighbor about noise would change that. How did they find out about his "range" in the first place? Was he stupid and ran his mouth? Or did he already use it? Sad to say, it really would only take one neighbor to claim they heard a round go overhead, and he'd face the state law.

And by the way, whether we like it or not, the neighbors won. And now the City is going to try to change State law even for safe ranges.

What a bunch of bull crap the cops would have to actually see him fire a round over a dwelling or road right of way before they could do anything any very few hand guns would break the noise law

 

[S&W645]

By the way, I went back and checked the article again.

police say it is perfectly legal, according to Florida law, for Joseph Carannate to build a gun range in his front yard.

That sure is a lot different than saying it is safe for him to use it. Or that he can use it at all without a noise violation being issued. It just said he could build one.

 

[S&W645]

What a bunch of bull crap the cops would have to actually see him fire a round over a dwelling or road right of way before they could do anything any very few hand guns would break the noise law

Check the published results of some of the test of 9mm with and without a suppressor. I think you might be surprised. 160 dB at 10ft. 140 with suppressor.
Without.
10' 160dB
20' 154dB
40' 148dB
80' 142dB
160' 136dB

With
10' 140dB
20' 134dB
40' 128dB
80' 122dB
160' 116dB

Drop is figured at 6dB drop per doubling of distance from a point source. Why do you think you can hear gunshots from miles away. It doesn't drop off fast.

 

[Axeanda45]

By the way, I went back and checked the article again.

That sure is a lot different than saying it is safe for him to use it. Or that he can use it at all without a noise violation being issued. It just said he could build one.

Idjit... you finally went and read the article and you still didnt comprehend a single thing....

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app

 

[mappow]

The db rating is what most people fail to train for. I personally wear plugs and mouse ears at the range. Shooting at O'dark thirty, due a home invasion or break-in, will be without and will add additional stress if you're engaging at your home. You'll probably have tunnel vision to start with and now compound the noise and flash. Just some things to think about for those that care.

 

[S&W645]

Idjit... you finally went and read the article and you still didnt comprehend a single thing....

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app

I see you have a reading comprehension problem.

I went back and checked the article again.

What don't you understand about " w e n t b a c k" and " a g a i n " ? I guess the picture is you pointing at yourself in a mirror.
It was to pull an exact quote for you to disprove what you had said. Just because you are within the law to build something, it does not mean that you are legally able to use it as built. You could build a private jet that could do 1000 MPH but you legally cannot fly it over this house at 1000' ASL and that speed. And it better fly fairly quietly at any speed below Mach 1 or you'll be stuck on the ground from 2200 to 0700. The Concorde couldn't fly into or out of MIA during those times because of Federal Laws on noise pollution.

 

[Axeanda45]

I see you have a reading comprehension problem.



What don't you understand about " w e n t b a c k" and " a g a i n " ? I guess the picture is you pointing at yourself in a mirror.
It was to pull an exact quote for you to disprove what you had said. Just because you are within the law to build something, it does not mean that you are legally able to use it as built. You could build a private jet that could do 1000 MPH but you legally cannot fly it over this house at 1000' ASL and that speed. And it better fly fairly quietly at any speed below Mach 1 or you'll be stuck on the ground from 2200 to 0700. The Concorde couldn't fly into or out of MIA during those times because of Federal Laws on noise pollution.

YOU are the one that cannot comprehend what has been written idjit... YOU FINALLY went and read the article and other links, yet you still dont have an effing clue what that article and those links said... All you are writing about is the ignorant inaccurate lies YOU MADE UP IN YOUR HEAD....

 

[ET]

I think there is something called morals and ethics, that have to contribute to what is right and wrong. As photos show, houses, and property lines where children have a right to play without fear of a stray, or the noise that comes with shooting in a close knit community, is a matter of morality, which is , ( and should be ) a consideration by a community neighbor
Just because the law allows it doesn't mean that, at times, its moral or ethically proper.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

children have a right to play without fear of a stray (bullet?), or the noise that comes with shooting in a close knit community,

There is no "right" to not fear, dipstick.
What YOU'RE talking about is "Feelings, Emotions".Link Removed

 

[ET]

There is no "right" to not fear, dipstick.
What YOU'RE talking about is "Feelings, Emotions".Link Removed

It's more than obvious that you are neither moral or ethical.. Your one good quality you do posses is the fact that any sane person can see that you are nothing more than a typical internet ASSholel

 

[S&W645]

YOU are the one that cannot comprehend what has been written idjit... YOU FINALLY went and read the article and other links, yet you still dont have an effing clue what that article and those links said... All you are writing about is the ignorant inaccurate lies YOU MADE UP IN YOUR HEAD....

Tell you what. Post the Statutes, laws, codes, ordinances that you find that cover the area he lives in. You don't seem to want help understanding, so prove me wrong. I gave you the link to one of them. See if you can find the other. Navy gave you a third. So you should have an easy job proving me wrong, if you could. Provide links to your rebuttal so others can check. It never was about his rights, even though that is all you can seem to think about. It was about " Bad Idea?" and I've shown where it could have been a bad idea for him if he had persisted.

 

[Axeanda45]

Tell you what. Post the Statutes, laws, codes, ordinances that you find that cover the area he lives in. You don't seem to want help understanding, so prove me wrong. I gave you the link to one of them. See if you can find the other. Navy gave you a third. So you should have an easy job proving me wrong, if you could. Provide links to your rebuttal so others can check. It never was about his rights, even though that is all you can seem to think about. It was about " Bad Idea?" and I've shown where it could have been a bad idea for him if he had persisted.

Link RemovedIt has ALWAYS been about his RIGHTS and idjits like YOU who dont like the way he wanted to exercise them.....

 

[Gregmm6]

Link RemovedIt has ALWAYS been about his RIGHTS and idjits like YOU who dont like the way he wanted to exercise them.....

No, it has not "always" been about rights. Go back and try actually reading the thread. Hell, the title of the thread is about whether or not this is a "bad idea", nothing about rights.

 

[Axeanda45]

No, it has not "always" been about rights. Go back and try actually reading the thread. Hell, the title of the thread is about whether or not this is a "bad idea", nothing about rights.

No. the title of the thread was from a anti-gunner who hasnt a clue what RIGHTS are.... He was complaining about how someone else exercised his RIGHTS and how much he disapproved of it.... So, it has ALWAYS been about RIGHTS you idjit....

 

[Gregmm6]

No. the title of the thread was from a anti-gunner who hasnt a clue what RIGHTS are.... He was complaining about how someone else exercised his RIGHTS and how much he disapproved of it.... So, it has ALWAYS been about RIGHTS you idjit....

There is no reason to insult other community members. Please try to act like an adult.


Also, take a chance to look through the thread. There are numerous posts about things other than rights. This thread has not "ALWAYS been about RIGHTS."

 

[Axeanda45]

There is no reason to insult other community members. Please try to act like an adult.


Also, take a chance to look through the thread. There are numerous posts about things other than rights. This thread has not "ALWAYS been about RIGHTS."

STOP saying someone exercising his RIGHTS in a way you dont approve of as something that is wrong, and I will stop insulting your moronic ways and ideas.... Deal?

 

[Gregmm6]

STOP saying someone exercising his RIGHTS in a way you dont approve of as something that is wrong, and I will stop insulting your moronic ways and ideas.... Deal?

I'm not saying that "someone exercising his RIGHTS in a way you dont approve of" is wrong. I've never said such a thing. Try paying attention.

 

[Rich M]

Bad Idea?? YES
.
You can talk about HIS rights all day long, until a neighbor gets shot and all their rights disappear forever... POOF just like that. This is not an intelligent place to put a range. Period.
.
If my neighbor tried this, it wouldn't go over well.