unckeyherb
Footballguy
I don't think the 500 yards of clearance for an outdoor range is overly prohibitive at all. I''m also not sure that that bill was a priority issue for any of the folks that were protesting.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Virginia 2nd amendment rally 1/20/20 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter matttyl
- Start date
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Depends what you mean by "few hundred", but if they're within 500 yards I would imagine they're subject to the bill except that every range I see photos of appears to be compliant with the necessary design criteria I'm aware of - with the possible except of the skeet/trap areas. I'm not terribly familiar with how those setups are supposed to work.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Exactly. If you own 500 yards in every direction, great. If you don't, you have to put up baffles and blocking material so you don't shoot anyone accidentally. What's the problem?
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
I just showed you one that wasn't. Here is an arial of the Hartford Gun Club. Hartford
From a rough calculation, that residential property is within 500 yards of the club.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
I missed this can you point to this language? If that is the case I agree no big deal.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Yes, but it can be within 500 yards IF it's compliant with Range Design Criteria
What I'm saying is that every range they have photos of on that property (with the possible exception of the skeet/trap areas) appears to already be in compliance with those range design criteria, meaning they can exist within 500 yards of residential property.
Last edited by a moderator:
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
The bill, as written, is apparently asking me to put 500 yards between the firearm and zones residential areas, in every direction. I'm fine with, and think it's a good idea to have 500 yards "down range", but I'd also have to have 500 yards "behind us" as well as to each side of us just to be compliant and be able to do a little target shooting with my son. I think that's a bit much, personally, for my example. Especially for anyone who has a sporting clays course in their yard where the shot can't travel anywhere close to 500 yards. Again, 500 yards in every direction from just a single point is 785k sq. yards, or 162 acres. Or I must find a way in which to become compliant with a 58 page document?
Yes, of course he's an "untrained minor", so were all of us when we were learning to drive cars - I'd like to change that "untrained" part, that's the entire point. I'm also not making any argument that a .22 isn't lethal (which you touched on in a later post) - but I'm also not going to hand him some .30-06 weapon to learn with, just as I'm sure we weren't taught how to drive with a 500hp supercar with manual paddle shifters.
The bill, as written (and as I understand it) will make many current shooting ranges illegal, and make it nearly impossible for anyone to fire their own personally and legally owned weapon on their own private property.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I'd have a hard time believing a place that had baffles and range blockers installed hasn't taken into account the possibility that shotgun pellets can fall on neighbors if the range is too close to them, so I would bet the trap areas fit necessary design criteria, too.
I'm not sure what the big deal is about the 500 yards. That's just over a quarter mile in any direction, and Virginia has a lot of open real estate that fits that bill. Honestly, I've been to indoor and outdoor ranges, both here in FL and elsewhere, and I prefer the outdoors, and who is upset about responsible use of a weapon? Some of those guns have ranges measured in miles. It makes more sense to have ranges away from people in case something does go wrong.
matttyl
Footballguy
Not really. We're talking, at least, about a circle roughly a mile in diameter, where nothing is zoned as residential, no matter if a house is actually on it or not. If you live in Loudoun Co., where I believe the author of the bill lives, you might be driving an hour away. I'm perfectly fine with 500 (or more) yards "down range", but needing it in every direction seems a bit much to me.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Yes, if you can't reasonably assure your neighbors you aren't going to accidentally shoot them, this will stop you from firing your gun on your property.
Untrained people accidentally shoot in the wrong direction with some regularity. It's how people get shot at shooting ranges and why there are dividers between shooting positions at most. Hell, people get hit with bowling balls that go in the wrong direction at bowling alleys.
I have no doubt that you're a responsible gun owner and user and will teach your child to shoot properly. It's a good idea to do that at a professional gun range, to start, so he doesn't accidentally shoot one of your neighbors.
Just as an aside, the "official" travel distance of 00 buck shot is apparently 656 yards, according to the DOE. That's likely where the "500 yards" bit came into play in the first place.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
Ok I see the disconnect. We are talking ranges where folks pay a fee or are dues paying members. Matt and I would no longer be able to shoot in our backyard even with a berm 100 yards downrange and an additional 5000 yards of private property beyond that because we have a neighbor across the street. That seems a bit of a reach.
matttyl
Footballguy
dgreen
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I think design criteria don't require 500 yards of shooting space for a clay target shoot.
Either way, here's the maximum projectile range of shotgun loads:
https://www.hunter-ed.com/michigan/studyGuide/Maximum-Projectile-Range-Shotgun/201023_700042735/
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I'm aware you guys are concerned about that. It doesn't seem like a reach at all to me.
If you want to target shoot, either set up a properly designed target shooting area or don't shoot where people live. That seems pretty simple. And reasonable.
That's still a lot of open space. Ranges don't have to be in crowded areas, because even with indoor safety regulations, some idiot with a caliber way too high for the range is going to come in and punch through it all, sending that round off God knows where. Why is this the hill other gun owners apparently want to fight on? Drive a little bit, it isn't going to hurt.
unckeyherb
Footballguy
Right. Seems like an example of a decent regulation that is very easy to satisfy, one way or another.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I also hope you guys on your property in rural areas are at least using steel shot in your target loads. That's a whole other way of killing your neighbors to be concerned about.
matttyl
Footballguy
Yes, again, if we're talking about a single point. Shooting ranges aren't just a single dot of land. If we have a little range of 100 yards (in a circle for easy math), and we need a buffer of 500 yards in every direction from it, now we have 1100 yards as the diameter of the circle. Getting pretty close to a mile.
matttyl
Footballguy
Shooting lead over water is illegal. I've heard it also illegal just to have lead shells on you when hunting around water. So I only purchase steel so as not to get caught with the wrong stuff.
msommer
Footballguy
Wasn't that one of the Obama era regulations Trump wanted to roll back? There's been so many...
matttyl
Footballguy
Shooting lead over water has been illegal for as long as I can remember. Even in high school (which was well before Obama).
matttyl
Footballguy
Lots of discussion if the "500 yards bill" would actually apply to private landowners or not. Language is very vague:
That the Code of Virginia is amended by adding in Article 3 of Chapter 12 of Title 18.2 a section numbered 18.2-511.2 as follows:
§ 18.2-511.2. Outdoor shooting ranges; prohibited adjacent to residential areas; exceptions; civil penalty.
A. As used in this section, "outdoor shooting range" means any partially enclosed or unenclosed area or facility designed for the use of rifles, shotguns, pistols, silhouettes, skeet, trap, black powder, or any other similar sport shooting.
B. It is unlawful to operate an outdoor shooting range within 500 yards of any property zoned for residential use unless the Range Design Criteria developed by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Health, Safety and Security have been met.
C. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is subject to a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 nor more than $100,000 for the initial violation and $5,000 per day for each day of violation thereafter.
Defenders of the bill say it's intended for the commercial gun ranges, not people's back yards. Intended or not, the wording leaves lots of room for interpretation. I asked Henry above, and he seems to believe it would apply to me on privately owned land.
That the Code of Virginia is amended by adding in Article 3 of Chapter 12 of Title 18.2 a section numbered 18.2-511.2 as follows:
§ 18.2-511.2. Outdoor shooting ranges; prohibited adjacent to residential areas; exceptions; civil penalty.
A. As used in this section, "outdoor shooting range" means any partially enclosed or unenclosed area or facility designed for the use of rifles, shotguns, pistols, silhouettes, skeet, trap, black powder, or any other similar sport shooting.
B. It is unlawful to operate an outdoor shooting range within 500 yards of any property zoned for residential use unless the Range Design Criteria developed by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Health, Safety and Security have been met.
C. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is subject to a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 nor more than $100,000 for the initial violation and $5,000 per day for each day of violation thereafter.
Defenders of the bill say it's intended for the commercial gun ranges, not people's back yards. Intended or not, the wording leaves lots of room for interpretation. I asked Henry above, and he seems to believe it would apply to me on privately owned land.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
If the bill would apply to people on their own private land (as it is believed to be here), wouldn't the bolded pretty much make your own residential zoned land at odds with the law? "Any" property zoned for residential doesn't leave much room for interpretation.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
I don't believe our legislators should pass laws to potentially prevent something that "might" happen. Especially when they infringe on both private property rights and constitutional rights. We can agree to disagree. Have a good one and thanks for the chat.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
You too. I'm confused, though. We have established this law was introduced to deal with something that did happen. People's houses were shot from private property shooting ranges. In the sense you seem to mean it, every law is therefore about something that "might" happen. We have to pass them that way.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
You're not confused. It is a weak law that penalizes a majority of folks for the actions of a few. They charged them with a crime didnt they? So the current law worked just fine. The scenario I laid out on my families property would never happen unless I ran through the front door and started shooting across the street.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
matttyl
Footballguy
So if this bill was because of those incidents, and would potentially apply to them - you don't see this as being a huge infringement on both private property rights as well as constitutional rights?
Unlawful to have a "shooting range" in your backyard if it's within 500 yards in every direction of any residential zones (including your own)? I looked through the "Range Design Criteria" mentioned in the bill and linked here over lunch, and some of the items listed are simply impossible for your average landowner - "The secondary danger area is that area paralleling, and 100 yards outside of, the outermost limits of the ricochet area and extending downrange to the maximum range of any ammunition to be used on the range....When there is insufficient distance to lay out a new range with the required SDZ or utilize other ammunition with a maximum range that does not exceed the SDZ, engineered or administrative controls can be used to control firing on that range. Permission to deviate from established SDZ requirements must be granted by the DOE cognizant security authority and supported by a safety risk analysis." The criteria doesn't talk about clay bird shooting at all, only mentioning "riot OO buckshot" for it's range from a 12 gauge. Doesn't mention a 20 gauge (what I learned to shoot with), a 28 gauge, or a .410 (what my sister learned to shoot with). That document simply doesn't apply for that.
I'm all for safe gun ownership and use, of course. I just feel this bill is a huge overreach, and by making target shooting in your own yard illegal, should be deemed unconstitutional.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
It also doesn't mention by name a Walther PPK, but I think it's covered by the range design criteria. It still applies if it doesn't specifically list your gun's ammo range.
What would you like to do to stop the actual incidents that happened here? What law should be passed to restrict actions so that people don't have bullets hitting their homes ten feet from their kids?
dgreen
Footballguy
I've seen you mention this concern about your own property being counted as a residential zone being within 500 yards and that disqualifying you from shooting on your own property. Has that been confirmed that the law would count your own property in such a way? The law isn't worded in a way to make it clear that it's talking about adjacent properties?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Even if it didn't, what happens then? Someone buys and builds next to him and he argues "I've been doing this for ten years, even with this law! Now someone builds a house so I have to stop shooting a gun in my yard?!"
matttyl
Footballguy
That's exactly the fear of this bill with commercial ranges. If some town/county suddenly zones a piece of property 490 yards from an existing range as residential, even before someone actually builds/lives there, now the existing business is breaking the law - and their options might be very limited (maybe can't afford to go through the process of getting permission "granted by the DOE cognizant security authority and supported by a safety risk analysis") and the landscape simply can't be manipulated in such a way as to get into compliance.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I would recommend you not spend time at commercial ranges that aren't built to DOE safety specifications. They're not exactly onerous.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
@matttyl and @Philo Beddoe I'm very serious with this question. What law should be passed so that people can't do what they were doing that shot up some families' houses that would satisfy you?
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
What am I missing Henry?
Charge Filed After Woman Hit by Target Shooters
"The Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office has obtained a criminal charge for reckless handling of a firearm after another target shooting incident in which errant
rounds caused damage on nearby properties. This time, a woman was injured.
On Sunday afternoon, deputies were called to a scene were a woman had been struck by a bullet outside her home. They determined the shots were fired from a nearby property on Gable Farm Lane east of Hamilton where residents were target shooting on private property.
The bullet, which is estimated to have been shot from 1,800 to 2,000 feet away, grazed the woman’s shoulder and may have then ricocheted off the victim’s house. She was treated at the scene and did not require further medical treatment.
According to the Sheriff’s Office, two adult males and two adult females were shooting into a natural berm. One person has been charged, but as of Tuesday afternoon, the Sheriff’s Office had not released their names pending service of the charge.
The Sheriff’s Office has custody of all the firearms that were in use at the private shooting range."
dgreen
Footballguy
I feel like it should already be illegal to shoot someone's house regardless of how far away you are when you fire your gun.
matttyl
Footballguy
I was mentioning different gauges of gun (20, 28, .410), you're mentioning a Walther PPK (Bond's gun of choice) which is a .38 cal., which is in fact specifically listed in the guidelines.
The incidents in question are very interesting ones. First off, they should obviously have been charged with something (and I believe they may have been, or at least others have been). Loudoun co (which I don't live in, but very near and travel through all the time) is an interesting mix of both urban and rural, and they often slam right up against each other (as is specifically the case in Aldie, where the incident you linked occurred). You could have very large farms right up against subdivisions where there is a house every 50 feet. This bill, the way it's written and I (and apparently you) understand it would make any target practice on private land in that county illegal or legitimately impossible for your average landowner given the complexities of the rules to get into compliance listed in the "Range design criteria". I fear this will make legitimate gun ranges harder to operate (where safety is of the upmost importance), and thus will have to close down - but these "back-county" yokels will still have their AKs (or other weapons) and thus will still want to use them. Now without a legit range to go to, you'll see more of these types of incidents from people shooting in their own backyards, not fewer.
I think we'd want laws that wouldn't hinder legal and legit (and SAFE) gun ranges (both indoor and out) from operation, but that seems to be exactly what this particular bill does. Don't we want safe places for people to use their guns? Also, I think we should be a bit more reasonable with that 500 yard distance, specifically if we're talking about my once in a blue moon hobby of sporting clays where the shot can't travel anywhere close to that distance. If we're talking about an M26 or some other military style rifle, sure. The link above talks about some newer county ordinances that were voted on just last month - including one that I think makes a lot of sense (so much so that I don't think it needs to be a law, just common sense), that your bullets need to remain on your property. Can't we have it be as simple as that?
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
I think application/inspection/approval from the County Sheriff is sufficient. They can decide whether it is safe or not.
matttyl
Footballguy
Different incident. Same county, but maybe 5 miles away....and a year or so later.
matttyl
Footballguy
It is. The incident they had I believe in the case Henry linked to is that they didn't know exactly who fired the shot that hit the house. If 10 people are out shooting, how do you know which one fired the shot that went errant?
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
matttyl
Footballguy
But that brings up Henry's point - these incidents are happening more and more there. It's the case of urban sprawl heading further and further west in that county. Growing up I'd drive up towards Leesburg and it was farms the whole way. Now it's subdivision after subdivision, right up against huge farms that go back generations.
The only plus is that breweries have been popping up as much as houses have. The "Loco (Loudoun County) Ale Trail" is now up to 34 different breweries (with additional cideries and distilleries).
dgreen
Footballguy
matttyl
Footballguy
That's one approach that's been discussed. Another has been to hold all shooters liable. Discussed a bit in the article I linked about some new laws being discussed last month there in Loudoun.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
Sure I get it. I don't want idiots firing bullets in my direction either. I live in rural Massachusetts so it is not dissimilar (Socio Economic and Political ideology) Richmond/Boston vs. the Western parts of the States. As soon as it passes there it will be coopted by the folks here. I would hope for common sense gun laws instead of feel good blanket indictments. Let the local Sheriff or Chief of Police decide.
