100+ year old Gun Club vs 3 year old house...

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Minjin
This is like someone buying a house next to a freeway and then complaining to the government about the excessive noise. After all, to paraphrase the above posters, they should have bought enough land around the highway to "contain" the sound...

Well, most of the time the house was there and the government BUILT the fvcking highway there.

 

[Minjin]

We're seeing this happening with racetracks all over the place. People move in and start complaining and either the track limits its hours, puts new noise limiting rules in effect, or the track goes away. Doesn't matter that the track has been there for 40 years and that these people knowingly moved into the area...

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: Minjin
We're seeing this happening with racetracks all over the place. People move in and start complaining and either the track limits its hours, puts new noise limiting rules in effect, or the track goes away. Doesn't matter that the track has been there for 40 years and that these people knowingly moved into the area...

LOL it's funny you mention that, because the gun club I'm speaking of actually shares it's property with the local race track (which has also been there for a very long time).

 

[AaronB]

If you had said that this was a noise issue I would agree with you. Unfortunately he isn't saying it's too loud, he saying that his property, where presumably his family, friends, pets, etc may be walking about, is taking freakin incoming fire from the gun range.

That isn't something he or anyone else should be expected to accept. Regardless of how long the gun range has been there, the neighbor's property doesn't belong to them and they have no right to shoot onto it.

A gun range has a duty to insure that all projectiles fired on it's property, land there or in a safe area.

 

[Brutuskend]

Just a wild thought.
Maybe he's planning on putting in a garden and is worried about lead leaching into the soil?

 

[AaronB]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Just a wild thought.
Maybe he's planning on putting in a garden and is worried about lead leaching into the soil?

Even wilder thought.

Maybe he's worried about his kid getting shot while playing in the backyard?

 

[Lash444]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
People who buy houses next to golf courses get their homes hit by stray golf balls all the time, but you don't see them screaming to close down the golf course.

I don't get it... why is there a double standard here?

Ever wonder why people who live on golf courses pay membership dues? You think that the government automatically includes that in their taxes? Or, does it seem more reasonable that these charges are automatically included because the golf course owners provided the land to be sold, and that its a requirement to own the house.

Did the shooting range own the land previously, and have a contract stating that all subsequent owners must tolerate all pollution from their range?

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: AaronB

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Just a wild thought.
Maybe he's planning on putting in a garden and is worried about lead leaching into the soil?

Even wilder thought.

Maybe he's worried about his kid getting shot while playing in the backyard?

The shot used for trap shooting is pretty small. I would think you would more likely to be injured from hail stones falling than from #7 shot.

 

[AaronB]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

Originally posted by: AaronB

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Just a wild thought.
Maybe he's planning on putting in a garden and is worried about lead leaching into the soil?

Even wilder thought.

Maybe he's worried about his kid getting shot while playing in the backyard?

The shot used for trap shooting is pretty small. I would think you would more likely to be injured from hail stones falling than from #7 shot.

No reasonable person would say that the neighbor should stop complaining because he "isn't likely" to get seriously injured.

I had more I was going to type but really, that's all that needs to be said.

 

[preslove]

Considering that this previously undeveloped area has seen a rapid rise in new houses built, the land your 100+ year old gun club occupies would presumably be worth a good amount of money. If I were a part of its governing body I would propose the sale of its existing grounds to a real estate developer and the purchase of land further from town. The difference in price between the newly residential, existing land, and the further-in-the-boonies-land would allow for purchase of a larger plot that would be big enough for skeet shooting.

Shooting guns in the air (even if it's shot that wont kill people on its way down) and residential housing don't mix. Residences encroaching on leisure/sport land, however, brings a quick rise in value.

 

[BoomerD]

This is happening in many places. A bunch of people build a gun club several miles from town, then, as the community grows, it encroaches on the area where the gun club was built. At that point, the city/county leaders have to decide who has the larger right...shooters, or homeowners...Which group pays the larger amount of taxes for the area in question? Undoubtedly, homeowners do, when compared to the taxes paid by the gun club and undeveloped land.
The local community college had to close down their pistol range built for the students in the law enforcement classes there...Why? too much development in recent years.

The logical thing would be for the gun club to clean up the land they're on, PLUS the surrounding land that they've polluted with lead over the years, sell it to developers for a profit, and move...farther out, whre they can exist for another 25-50-100 years...

 

[BarneyFife]

Those damn secular progressives that don't say Merry Christmas!

 

[episodic]

I read about a little league park getting shut down because new owners took possesion of a house nearby and sued because of the noise and occasional fly balls.

 

[preslove]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
This is happening in many places. A bunch of people build a gun club several miles from town, then, as the community grows, it encroaches on the area where the gun club was built. At that point, the city/county leaders have to decide who has the larger right...shooters, or homeowners...Which group pays the larger amount of taxes for the area in question? Undoubtedly, homeowners do, when compared to the taxes paid by the gun club and undeveloped land.
The local community college had to close down their pistol range built for the students in the law enforcement classes there...Why? too much development in recent years.

The logical thing would be for the gun club to clean up the land they're on, PLUS the surrounding land that they've polluted with lead over the years, sell it to developers for a profit, and move...farther out, whre they can exist for another 25-50-100 years...

No, the logical thing to do from the point of view of the gun club is to sell the land to developers without spending $ on cleaning up the land. Only environmental legislation/enforcement can insure cleanup of poluted land.

Beyond that, yes it is logical to sell the land at a profit and move farther out of town.

 

[91TTZ]

The people did that to an airport near my house. The Naval base airport has been there for 50+ years, people bought cheap land next to the base (land is cheap because of the noise), and then petition to close the base down due to the noise it makes. Who would have thought that there are aircraft landing at an airport?

Also, the same issue is happening at some dragstrips. A dragstrip is built in a undeveloped area, people buy cheap land next to the dragstrip, then try to close the place down, the very reason that they were able to afford the land in the first place.

 

[TerryMathews]

Yes, but there is a mile of difference between noise and (potentially dangerous) litter.

The gun club is littering on another person's property. It doesn't matter if it was developed or not, someone owned it. If you wanted the range to extend to that property, you should've purchased it.

To put another spin on it, let's say I'm your neighbor. You'd be pissed if instead of putting my trash out for the trashman, I just dumped it into your backyard right? I mean not even in one spot, threw it everywhere. That's exactly what you're doing to this guy's property.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: TerryMathews
Yes, but there is a mile of difference between noise and (potentially dangerous) litter.

The gun club is littering on another person's property. It doesn't matter if it was developed or not, someone owned it. If you wanted the range to extend to that property, you should've purchased it.

To put another spin on it, let's say I'm your neighbor. You'd be pissed if instead of putting my trash out for the trashman, I just dumped it into your backyard right? I mean not even in one spot, threw it everywhere. That's exactly what you're doing to this guy's property.

I completely understand, and like I said in my OP, you guys are all probably right.