GOA- Cabarrus County Commissioners Private Property Shooting Ban

[Get Off My Lawn]

NC: There is a War Being Raged Against Your Rights
Andy Stevens, Gun Owners of America
ToAndy Duncan
Reply ToAndy Stevens, Gun Owners of America
4:04 PM

0

Stop the Private Property Shooting Ban!​ Are “Property Use Ordinances” the New Way to Terminate Your Rights?​ Take action: Immediately contact the Cabarrus County Commissioners (details below) and ask them to oppose the private property shooting ban proposed for discussion on August 16. Be sure to attend the Public Hearing scheduled for 6:30 pm on Monday, August 16th in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room at the Cabarrus County Government Center, 65 Church Street SE, Concord, NC. We Need Your Help to Fight the Private Property Shooting Ban!​ Two weeks ago, Gun Owners of America learned of Guilford County Democrats’ insidious scheme that uses the mantra of “Gun Safety” to terminate the rights of property owners and focuses on turning law-abiding citizens into criminals using an onerous firearms discharge ordinance. GOA warned gun owners to unite immediately to STOP this new form of assault on the rights of private property and gun owners, or it would surely snowball across the state. You responded, and the Guilford County Commissioners received hundreds of emails telling them to put an immediate stop to their plans. Scores of you attended the public hearing, overflowing the Commissioners’ chamber. GOA’s Jordan Stein and I also spoke out condemning the proposal. The result: Guilford County rescinded action on their ordinance while pleading they never intended to take away the rights of gun owners. However, this demonstration of resolve has not stopped the assault on property rights and the desire of politicians to prohibit the USE of arms by all except the wealthy few. Now Cabarrus County Commissioners, who unanimously declared their County a Second Amendment Sanctuary mere months ago, have jumped on the “Discharge Ban” bandwagon. Their proposed Ordinance will require "set back" requirements of 500 feet making properties of less than 23 acres in size off limits for the discharge of firearms, including defensive handguns. The only exceptions will be for property owners that obtain SIGNED permission slips from the surrounding neighbors. Imagine that. Your neighbors can determine your property rights usage! Why must this ordinance be fought tooth and nail? Simply put, it and those similar in nature are designed to terminate the rights of property owners and are deviously designed to prevent gun owners from discharging their firearms for training and recreation. Worse, these Ordinances are inherently discriminatory in nature, as the first groups of people denied their rights are minorities, the young, and those not wealthy enough to acquire the large acreage necessary to comply with the arbitrarily-imposed conditions of compliance. Why are these conditions of compliance arbitrarily imposed? Precisely because, by design, they are established to prohibit ALL lawful forms of firearms discharge for training and recreation. These ordinances set punishing distances of so-called setbacks from occupied

 

[Get Off My Lawn]

structures (in some cases including your own) and/or property lines, and they create a nightmare of conditions to wade through that only those with very large properties can hope to satisfy.
Natural topography and the use of natural and manmade barriers are rarely considered as exceptions for reduction of the “distance from occupied structures” stipulations. These stipulations are often measured in increments of hundreds of yards!
This is effectively a ban on private property shooting for all but the most wealthy.

Gun Owners Must Take Action Again!​

First and foremost, attend in person the Public Hearing scheduled for 6:30 pm on Monday, August 16th in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room at the Cabarrus County Government Center, 65 Church Street SE, Concord, NC. Sign up to speak at the Public Hearing against efforts to impose new restrictions on the lawful discharge of firearms in Cabarrus County.
Next, call the commissioners using the following phone numbers.

Steve Morris, Chairman 704 920-2214 Diane Honeycutt, Vice Chair 704 920-2211 Barbara Strang, Commissioner 980 680-5471 Blake Kiger, Commissioner 704 920-2210 Lynn Shue, Commissioner 704 920-2213

Give this message:

“Commissioner, I urge you not to impose arbitrary and onerous distance setback conditions that will prohibit the recreational and training use of firearms for all but the wealthiest landowners in Cabarrus County. These 500-foot setbacks will require a minimum acreage of 23 acres or more to comply. Further, the right to use one’s property, regardless of size, ought not be burdened by the requirement to obtain and retain signed 'permission slips' from neighbors. The Commission is flirting with a dangerous concept that infringes on both precious property rights and Second Amendment Rights".

Finally, Email the Commissioners using these “cut and paste” email addresses:

Steve Morris <[email protected]>


Diane Honeycutt <[email protected]>


Barbara Strang <[email protected]>


Lynn Shue <[email protected]>


Blake Kiger <[email protected]>

Please cut and paste the suggested text below our PS line and send to all of your County Commissioners as soon as possible.
Thank you for speaking up and taking action!
In liberty,
Andy Stevens
North Carolina State Director
Gun Owners of America

PS: Immediately contact all Cabarrus County Commissioners to oppose the private property shooting ban. Attend in person the Public Hearing scheduled for 6:30 pm on Monday, August 16th in the Commissioners’ Meeting Room at the Cabarrus County Government Center, 65 Church Street SE, Concord, NC.

---

Suggested Subject for Letter:
Stop the Private Property Shooting Ban
Suggested Message:
Dear Commissioner:
I cannot comprehend why Cabarrus County would even consider severe limitations on the discharge of firearms on citizens' privately owned property. I remind you that this Board, by unanimous resolution, recently declared Cabarrus County to be a Second Amendment Sanctuary. What changed?
I urge you not to impose these arbitrary and onerous distance setback conditions that will prohibit the recreational and training use of firearms for all but the wealthiest landowners in Cabarrus County. These 500-foot setbacks will require a minimum acreage of 23 acres or more to comply. Further, the right to use one’s property, regardless of size, ought not be burdened by the requirement to obtain and retain signed “permission slips” from neighbors.
I will be following this matter via Gun Owners of America Alerts.
Respectfully,
[YOUR NAME]

 

[Jerzsubbie]

I’ve been following this issue since Barbara Strang posted a “clarification” in a local 2A fb group. She claims this is simply a clarification of the existing ordinance, and that may be, however by clarifying, it now allows it to be enforced. It needs to be repealed.

 

[gc70]

FIRST: I would be interested in knowing: (a) from whom the proposed ordinance was obtained and; (b) who originally wrote the proposed ordinance. The proposed ordinance appears to be a "model" ordinance that is being broadly promoted to counties by some unknown source.

SECOND: The summary of the proposed ordinance (page 133 of PDF) is inaccurate.

BRIEF SUMMARY:
Under current law, no person may discharge a firearm or air compression gun of any kind within 500 yards of any occupied building, as well as any residence, business, house of worship, educational facility, park facility, or any other public gathering facility, regardless of whether these places are occupied business.

The above claim in bold is not what is included in the current ordinance 46-2; the proposed ordinance substantially expands the coverage of the ordinance from "districts" (higher density areas) to a bucket list of individual buildings and "facilities" (which are not defined).

Sec. 46-2. - Use of Firearms.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to use and discharge any firearm, BB gun, or air compression gun of any kind, nature, make, or description within a distance of 500 yards of any business or residential district in the county situated outside the corporate limits of any and all municipalities in the county.
(b) A business or residential district within the meaning of this section shall be that territory continuous to a street or highway where 75 percent or more of the frontage thereon for a distance of 300 feet or more is mainly occupied by dwellings or by dwellings and buildings in use for business purposes.

Trying to make a significant change to the scope of the ordinance needs to be acknowledged, explained, and discussed rather than sneaking the change in by mistating the current ordinance.

THIRD:

(1) proposed section (d)(1) based the scope of the ordinance on individual buildings should be eliminated in favor of retaining current sections (a) and (b) that base the scope on "districts."
see above

(2) proposed section (d)(3)(E)(iii) requiring a neighbor's permission for what is in essence a private range should be eliminated.
people who are being safe and have adequate backstops do not need a neighbor's permission

Of course, the best solution would be as @Jerzsubbie suggested - ditch the proposed ordinance AND repeal existing ordinance 46-2.

 

[Timfoilhat]

@gc70
If you want to know where a specific idea originated the thing to do is write the county and file a FOIA. In that, request email of every commissioner with reference to the ordinance # or the words firearm(s), gun(s), discharge, range.

 

[gc70]

@gc70
If you want to know where a specific idea originated the thing to do is write the county and file a FOIA. In that, request email of every commissioner with reference to the ordinance # or the words firearm(s), gun(s), discharge, range.

That is a great approach that I will pursue. Unfortunately, it will not produce results before Monday night when the proposed ordinance is being considered.

 

[COTTON]

Sounds like a proposal from one of our immigrants that migrated from north of the Mason Dixon .

 

[DrScaryGuy]

Sounds like a proposal from one of our immigrants that migrated from north of the Mason Dixon .

hey now
some of us moved south specifically for the lax approach to shooting on your own land down here
and when we met the neighbors on our "let's see this house we may buy" trip and they said "oh yeah, just shoot into the woods over there, nobody's gonna care" my wife was like "well, i guess this is where we'll be living now..."
2 years in so far, and at least one or two of the neighbors has credited my gun blasting with reducing crime in the area.

 

[Jeppo]

Was watering plants when a car drove up to the house. Out pops a woman and introduces herself as our new neighbor. They’ve just moved into a house that was built on a lot adjoining the far corner of our property.

She wanted to discuss some work they planned at the property line and we quickly found an equitable solution. I told her I hoped our shooting didn’t bother her and her family. She said, “Why else would you live in the country?”.

 

[rdinatal]

Hey, don't worry about this. The way the .gov is going with Covid mandates, spending, and taxation you'll be shooting most anywhere you want.

 

[COTTON]

Several years ago there was almost a running battle over shooting ranges across the river, haven't heard much lately. The local reloader in our community had a family move in next to him and the first thing they did was complain about him testing his reloads. He has lived there for about 40yrs. I reckon it is about my time to be bent over.

 

[Jerzsubbie]

Finally shot off my email. Not sure if I’ll be able to make it tonight though.

Bumping for those who haven’t emailed yet.

 

[jimmyjames8]

If I was a Cabarrus Co land owner I would sure be there. I 'm heir to 167acres in Surry Co. and I think they already have some onerous firearm discharge laws on the books.