This scares me about a move to Pa - can't shoot on your own property ? So says 3 judges !

[MaxVO2]

Didn’t your parents teach you not to pick on the handicapped?

****No. Only to not punch people in the face who are wearing glasses! All of this time and my parents never ever mentioned not picking on the handicapped!

Dunno if it was just an oversight on their part, or they hated the handicapped or what!

I was lucky in that my parents did mention not eating yellow snow, nor peeing into the wind - advice I have taken to heart and followed all of my life!

There should probably be a book on parenting. I see lots of parents that could clearly use some help as they turn out some pretty crappy kids that lie, cheat, steal, hurt other people up to and including the handicapped, etc..

I would think being a good parent would involve teaching your kids to not do bad things, not to mention being a role model themselves from which the children could learn proper comportment and behavior befitting a good citizen.

At this point I would settle for the kids to not become car jackers or violent thugs, robbers, looters, murderers, etc.. Anything above that would be just like icing on the cake and wonderful!

But yea, don't pick on the handicapped.

 

[RFBfromDE]

I was raised by wolves.

Handicapped----> <----Me

 

[alucard0822]

I think I know what you're talking about and, if correct, the property in question is not habitable and butts up against a "special" type of state-owned land (sanctuary of sorts?) in York County.
If it is what I'm thinking of, it was the law prior to him buying the land, yet he assumed he could do as he pleased once purchased.
NOTE- There are three caveats in my post above as to whether this is the case I am thinking of.

This is really close by in Hopewell township, Mike Beliveau is the owner that got fined. It is zoned conservation, so no building or improvements, and really limited on what can be done there. Of course the zoning officer is probably an A-hole, and a lot of the violations are ordinances that probably were enacted to apply to Hopewell F&G's range there. This is in a township and county that is OVERWHELMINGLY republican, pro-gun and conservative, and they are local ordinances, not state or even county law. Still there is a point to read the fine print when buying property, and probably 90% of the story on both sides is BS.

If the lesson is to research the local ordinances and property you intend to purchase then definitely. If it's attempting to show rural PA is anti gun in some way, then no, no it isn't. Thing is local ordinances and game laws tend to be worse in conservative areas, partially because power resides locally, and the state hasn't taken over daily life to the same degree as more populated and liberal areas. There are still a LOT of BS and unenforceable clauses that are cleared up before property sales up here, most are wildly racist or involve some petty dispute from the past. In both these situations it's more about a property owner that didn't do their research, or moves in an PO'es the locals, and likely a tin pot dictator with a part time job in local government that wants to F with them.

 

[Squaregrouper]

This is really close by in Hopewell township, Mike Beliveau is the owner that got fined. It is zoned conservation, so no building or improvements, and really limited on what can be done there. Of course the zoning officer is probably an A-hole, and a lot of the violations are ordinances that probably were enacted to apply to Hopewell F&G's range there. This is in a township and county that is OVERWHELMINGLY republics, pro-gun and conservative, and they are local ordinances, not state or even county law. Still there is a point to read the fine print when buying property, and probably 90% of the story on both sides is BS.

If the lesson is to research the local ordinances and property you intend to purchase then definitely. If it's attempting to show rural PA is anti gun in some way, then no, no it isn't. Thing is local ordinances and game laws tend to be worse in conservative areas, partially because power resides locally, and the state hasn't taken over daily life to the same degree as more populated and liberal areas. There are still a LOT of BS and unenforceable clauses that are cleared up before property sales up here, most are wildly racist or involve some petty dispute from the past. In both these situations it's more about a property owner that didn't do their research, or moves in an PO'es the locals, and likely a tin pot dictator with a part time job in local government that wants to F with them.

Thanks for confirming this is the case I was thinking of.

 

[adit]

There is a lot of FUDD in this thread.

If you can safely shoot on your property you should be able to, period. IMO Bruen does and should protect that as a right.

What happens when the county or locale regulates the existing shooting ranges out of business?

In HoCo you used to be allowed to shoot on your own property. Incrementalism is taking away your rights.

 

[RFBfromDE]

There is a lot of FUDD in this thread.

If you can safely shoot on your property you should be able to, period. IMO Bruen does and should protect that as a right.

What happens when the county or locale regulates the existing shooting ranges out of business?

In HoCo you used to be allowed to shoot on your own property. Incrementalism is taking away your rights.

Right.

What determines that?

Zoning.

Like building on your property.

Like putting a well on your property.

Like putting a septic system on your property.

Like putting a restaurant on your zoned residential property.

Bruen is about your right to keep and bear arms.

Not about where we train.

 

[adit]

Right.

What determines that?

Zoning.

Like building on your property.

Like putting a well on your property.

Like putting a septic system on your property.

Like putting a restaurant on your zoned residential property.

Bruen is about your right to keep and bear arms.

Not about where we train.

NO!

Bureaucrats don't get to dictate exercising your rights. Starting with the first gun law all the way until the Bruen decision, that is what was done. We fought the entire time. Now we can use Bruen to deal will all infringements.

HoCo "zoned" the entire county out. Baltimore County has/had the "Metropolitan District" forever and a day.

Compare it to MoCo laws and the States GSA of 2023 with carry. Can they "zone out" your carry rights?

If I can setup a safe backstop on my property I should be able to shoot at it.

 

[RFBfromDE]

Compare it to MoCo laws and the States GSA of 2023 with carry. Can they "zone out" your carry rights?

If carrying and building or shooting were the same thing, you would have a point.

But they aren’t, so you don’t.

That being said, it would be of interest to see if In 1789 there were any restrictive shooting laws.

Such as “Target shooting from your Philadelphia townhome is prohibited”

 

[Biggfoot44]

He did a couple videos explaining the case in much more detail - and I beleive you're correct that it's in York county.

Yes .

The gist of it is that the resident on the other side of the large hill/ small mountain visible in the videos is triggered by hearing gunfire in the distance. 1000 % safe .

His township openly admits that he would be totally legal doing everything that he does , if he had a residence on the property. But whiner on the other side of the hill has more clout with the township than Mike B .

Most people surrender when legal fees to fight it approach the value of the property. But Duelist 1954 has generous Patreon supporters .

 

[alucard0822]

Yes .

The gist of it is that the resident on the other side of the large hill/ small mountain visible in the videos is triggered by hearing gunfire in the distance. 1000 % safe .

His township openly admits that he would be totally legal doing everything that he does , if he had a residence on the property. But whiner on the other side of the hill has more clout with the township than Mike B .

Most people surrender when legal fees to fight it approach the value of the property. But Duelist 1954 has generous Patreon supporters .

Mikes case is kinda controversial up here among gun folk. There is so much BS around it, I have no idea who is in the right. The thing with the "residence on the property" was explained to me in a different context. Really a residence is not required, but it was explained to him by the zoning board that his property is zoned conservation, if it was residential, farm or practically anything else he could shoot there no problem. It isn't though, and he cannot build a residence, or other land "improvements" either, seemed more about them explaining the current zoning restrictions that applied to him than "you can't shoot unless you live there" or something else. AFAIK the guy on the other side of the property claimed Mike was shooting and bullets were striking his house or something, but I don't believe there was any proof or action taken from that, but did start the ball rolling for the code enforcement guy to look it up, and go to the zoning board about it.

 

[delaware_export]

Apologies to the OP for a tangent…

how are we coming with the dark screen bug where the text of some quoted look like the picture below. White text on white background. I guess the text bolded had different FG/BG colors and can be visible

 

[jef955]

Apologies to the OP for a tangent…

how are we coming with the dark screen bug where the text of some quoted look like the picture below. White text on white background. I guess the text bolded had different FG/BG colors and can be visible


View attachment 456175

LOL..no worries.. This is exactly the problem I had too.. I wonder if I tried posting it again from the light theme if it would look normal. I have had to switch between the two to see things before software glitch maybe ?

 

[lazarus]

****No. Only to not punch people in the face who are wearing glasses! All of this time and my parents never ever mentioned not picking on the handicapped!

Dunno if it was just an oversight on their part, or they hated the handicapped or what!

I was lucky in that my parents did mention not eating yellow snow, nor peeing into the wind - advice I have taken to heart and followed all of my life!

There should probably be a book on parenting. I see lots of parents that could clearly use some help as they turn out some pretty crappy kids that lie, cheat, steal, hurt other people up to and including the handicapped, etc..

I would think being a good parent would involve teaching your kids to not do bad things, not to mention being a role model themselves from which the children could learn proper comportment and behavior befitting a good citizen.

At this point I would settle for the kids to not become car jackers or violent thugs, robbers, looters, murderers, etc.. Anything above that would be just like icing on the cake and wonderful!

But yea, don't pick on the handicapped.

Peeing in to the wind is fine, so long as you shoot it slightly at an angle so it only sprays your buddy standing next to you.

 

[lazarus]

NO!

Bureaucrats don't get to dictate exercising your rights. Starting with the first gun law all the way until the Bruen decision, that is what was done. We fought the entire time. Now we can use Bruen to deal will all infringements.

HoCo "zoned" the entire county out. Baltimore County has/had the "Metropolitan District" forever and a day.

Compare it to MoCo laws and the States GSA of 2023 with carry. Can they "zone out" your carry rights?

If I can setup a safe backstop on my property I should be able to shoot at it.

Errr, you are correct. But governments DO get to enact laws and ordinances within the confines of the constitutions of the US and of the state. And the 2A protects keeping and bearing. Not discharging. Bureaucrats ARE empowered by the constitutions involved in enforcing and carrying out the laws as members of the executive branches of government.

Zoning ordinances are enacted as an extension of law. And there isn't much Chevron defense argument to be made even, as they are state based, so you'll need to make an argument that the state does not have a right to empower state or local legislative bodies the right to pass laws or ordinances for zoning and then you'd need to argue that the executive branch/departments of the state or localities do not then have the right to enforce said laws or ordinances.

That is a tall ass order.

One person's safe is another person's dangerous. Having or carrying a gun is, in general, a safe activity. You'd have to do something very negligent for it to be unsafe. Discharging a firearm IS unsafe, and only ensuring it is done in a manner to mitigate the risk to people and property around makes it acceptably safe.

There comes a point where "the common good" does outweigh individual rights. And this is one where an individual's rights are not specifically enshrined in anything, thus it is reasonable that the body politic gets to dictate what they think is reasonable.

Sure, it can absolutely suck like HoCo and its blanket ban on basically shooting anything in the county unless hunting. Or it can be pretty reasonable, like no target shooting within town limits.

I can absolutely setup a nice and safe shooting range on a half acre property putting in an earthen berm shooting lane with overhead baffles that are poured concrete centers with wood facing and you are shooting into a bullet trap. But that takes regulation by the state or locality as well as an enforcement officer to then ensure that the activity is actually safe. Or I could be an a-hole who dumped an F150 load of dirt behind their house and put some brake rotors against the little dirt pile and like shooting it with 357s and 22s on their half acre surrounded by houses.

One of those is safe. But, also, even with either of those, yeah the neighbors within a couple of hundred yards of me probably don't want to hear me shooting on my property either. Being a nuisance is also a practical matter. Small property, shooting on it is going to be damned loud. Big property, you might hear it, but meh.

 

[mpollan1]

You know why ordinances like this get passed? They get passed because people do things that are unreasonable.

Kind of like asking chat board members to come over and hunt deer on their 1/3 acre parcel in the city where 230 yards is all that separates their street from the street behind them, government owned land is behind them, a multiunit development is behind them, and at least 10 houses on their own street are within 150 yards of their backyard. Hey now, everybody come over and bow hunt these deer to non-existence.

My parents are on 2/3 an acre in MoCo with parkland behind them, and a school, and neighbors all around them and they have some large bucks there. Would not dream of hunting their property because of the possible pitfalls, but I am sure others would.

As you know Fabs I'm not too far from your folks and also back to parkland. I would not hesitate (if I legally could) from a safety perspective to take out a few deer with my bow or crossbow. Firearms? I would never consider it yet LE goes in there every year to cull the herd. Hopefully they don't set up next to an Oak tree or god forbid a Hickory or Walnut.

 

[JStoker]

Agreed.

Zoning is not an infringement.

Actually, in Pennsylvania it is. Sorry for being the new guy here, but this thread drew me in more than anything. Pennsylvania has a preemption law (title 18 §6120) that prohibits ANY government other than the state general assembly from passing any firearms-related laws. And that includes zoning law. My organization is currently suing Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, and Lower Merion Township over preemption violations. As soon as the complainant's attorney who stumbled on this one gets their appeal going, we will be filing an amicus brief joining in the lawsuit.

Ironically, the PA Supreme Court has ignored some of its previous rulings here, but the legal counsel in this one dropped the ball. I promise you, ours will not.

 

[RFBfromDE]

Actually, in Pennsylvania it is. Sorry for being the new guy here, but this thread drew me in more than anything. Pennsylvania has a preemption law (title 18 §6120) that prohibits ANY government other than the state general assembly from passing any firearms-related laws. And that includes zoning law. My organization is currently suing Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, and Lower Merion Township over preemption violations. As soon as the complainant's attorney who stumbled on this one gets their appeal going, we will be filing an amicus brief joining in the lawsuit.

Ironically, the PA Supreme Court has ignored some of its previous rulings here, but the legal counsel in this one dropped the ball. I promise you, ours will not.

That's interesting.

Are you aware if In 1789 there were any restrictive shooting laws.

Such as “Target shooting from your Philadelphia townhome is prohibited?"

PA has a habit of over-looking their own rules. I hope you are successful.

 

[JStoker]

That's interesting.

Are you aware if In 1789 there were any restrictive shooting laws.

Such as “Target shooting from your Philadelphia townhome is prohibited?"

PA has a habit of over-looking their own rules. I hope you are successful.

Unfortunately, Philly has a long history of doing what they want and forcing organizations like mine to sue them to get them back in compliance with the law. Two years ago, we had a bill strengthening preemption that would have allowed us to go after the legal expenses of doing so, but then-Gov. Wolf vetoed it. I don't believe Philly's history of gun control goes back that far, though, so we should be okay from the historical perspective. It won't matter regardless, as the preemption law supersedes any such law on the books and repeals it.

We've managed to use it to stop Pittsburgh's AR-15 ban and will continue to file these lawsuits as long as we can keep coming up with the funding to do so.

 

[RFBfromDE]

We've managed to use it to stop Pittsburgh's AR-15 ban and will continue to file these lawsuits as long as we can keep coming up with the funding to do so.

 

[jef955]

Unfortunately, Philly has a long history of doing what they want and forcing organizations like mine to sue them to get them back in compliance with the law. Two years ago, we had a bill strengthening preemption that would have allowed us to go after the legal expenses of doing so, but then-Gov. Wolf vetoed it. I don't believe Philly's history of gun control goes back that far, though, so we should be okay from the historical perspective. It won't matter regardless, as the preemption law supersedes any such law on the books and repeals it.

We've managed to use it to stop Pittsburgh's AR-15 ban and will continue to file these lawsuits as long as we can keep coming up with the funding to do so.

Who are you with - I'm interested cause I may very well end up in PA in a year ow two.. You can PM me if you like also.. Thanks