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

[BlancoNino]

So the gun club I shoot at a couple times of year (not really a regular, but I enjoy going about 5-10 times a year) has been there for well over a hundred years. It's way up on a hill and has been operated by it's members for years and years. There are skeet and trap ranges, pistol ranges, and rifle ranges.

Well, usually I trap shoot, but I've always loved skeet shooting (both use shotguns, BTW), so I really got mad when I found out we couldn't shoot skeet there anymore. Apparently, some guy had built a house up on a hill near the gun club (lots of new houses around there) and complained that he was finding shot (the stuff that shotguns spray) in his back yard from the skeet shooters. Next thing you know, we aren't allowed to shoot skeet anymore.

Why does the guy with the 3 year old house get his way? Isn't it his fault for building his house there?

Update: You guys are probably mostly right...I just think it's odd that it's just never an issue until somebody built a house there. If the gun club was doing something wrong by not covering enough land...why didn't the county bring attention to the club members?

 

[tasmanian]

When he applied for his building to the city he should of known the risks of being downhill to a shooting range.

 

[pulse8]

Yes. The shotgun remains that you shoot into the property that he lawfully purchased are his fault.

 

[notfred]

I'm going to assume that his house isn't built on shooting range property, but his own property adjacent to the range. Do you really think the people at the gun club have the right to shoot onto other people's property without permission? Apparently they didn't make the range long enough in the first place, if they're shooting past the end of it.

 

[mugs]

Doesn't matter if there's a house there or not, it's irresponsible to be shooting onto someone else's property. If they want to have a gun range there, they ought to purchase enough property that this situation would not come up.

 

[TerryMathews]

Exactly. The shooting range has the responsibility to ensure that all of the 'activities' are contained within their property. Including spent casings and shot.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: notfred
I'm going to assume that his house isn't built on shooting range property, but his own property adjacent to the range. Do you really think the people at the gun club have the right to shoot onto other people's property without permission? Apparently they didn't make the range long enough in the first place, if they're shooting past the end of it.

True, but that's how a lot of ranges were/are.

 

[dartworth]

All in the name of progress...

maybe you should start up a bowling alley/gun range...hmmm

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: TerryMathews
Exactly. The shooting range has the responsibility to ensure that all of the 'activities' are contained within their property. Including spent casings and shot.

Well it's never been a problem until now. Most ranges I've been to have a certain amount "range" property that ends into a whole bunch of semi-desert land (sage brush, sand, hills, basically nothing). That's how this club was until some guy built a house there.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: dartworth
All in the name of progress...

maybe you should start up a bowling alley/gun range...hmmm

now that could be fun.

 

[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?

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: TerryMathews
Exactly. The shooting range has the responsibility to ensure that all of the 'activities' are contained within their property. Including spent casings and shot.

Well it's never been a problem until now. Most ranges I've been to have a certain amount "range" property that ends into a whole bunch of semi-desert land (sage brush, sand, hills, basically nothing). That's how this club was until some guy built a house there.

All the members of the range should have pitched in and bought that land so no one could build a house there.

 

[BlancoNino]

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?

I think because the houses that are being built in this area are by a bunch of elitist progressives from California/Seattle that think guns are barbaric.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

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?

I think because the houses that are being built in this area are by a bunch of elitist progressives from California/Seattle that think guns are barbaric.

Easy, no one from Seattle will admit to being from California, at least in public.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Be happy some real estate developers didn't come in and take that gun range à la eminent domain. How ironic would that be though...

 

[mugs]

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?

Golf balls don't kill people. BlancoNino kills people.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Gun club should've bought the land...

 

[d3n]

Well, just thank your local politicians. Most cities are so concerned about getting tax revenue they pretty much disregard responsible development.

 

[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...

 

[FoBoT]

gun club didn't buy enough land, they lose

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: mugs

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?

Golf balls don't kill people. BlancoNino kills people.

You're more likely to get killed by a golfball being driven than shot falling.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
So the gun club I shoot at a couple times of year (not really a regular, but I enjoy going about 5-10 times a year) has been there for well over a hundred years. It's way up on a hill and has been operated by it's members for years and years. There are skeet and trap ranges, pistol ranges, and rifle ranges.

Well, usually I trap shoot, but I've always loved skeet shooting (both use shotguns, BTW), so I really got mad when I found out we couldn't shoot skeet there anymore. Apparently, some guy had built a house up on a hill near the gun club (lots of new houses around there) and complained that he was finding shot (the stuff that shotguns spray) in his back yard from the skeet shooters. Next thing you know, we aren't allowed to shoot skeet anymore.

Why does the guy with the 3 year old house get his way? Isn't it his fault for building his house there?

Umm because you're depositing trash on his property? Buy more property for the gun club so you don't litter other people's

 

[halik]

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...

No actually that would be analogous to the guy complaining about the gun noise on his property.... or conversely, the guy living next to a highway complaining about truck tires appearing in his back yard.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: halik

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...

No actually that would be analogous to the guy complaining about the gun noise on his property.... or conversely, the guy living next to a highway complaining about truck tires appearing in his back yard.

I still like my golf ball analogy better

 

[Fenixgoon]

they'll shoot someone's eye out!

</christmas story>