|
Post by TagTeamHunter on Apr 9, 2007 19:10:55 GMT -5
Been reading the comments posted on the Indy Star website. Man if only 10% of the people that posted show up ... they're ban gunfire in the City County Bldg.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Apr 10, 2007 9:21:54 GMT -5
The solution is very simple, we need to adopt laws like those in Pennsylvania, stating that wildlife management supersedes local anti-discharge ordinances. Basically anyone engaged in legal hunting activities is exempt from anti-discharge ordinances anywhere in the state. It would make a lot more sense than fighting these little battles over and over and I bet their are at least a couple of pro-gun state representatives that might be willing to draft such a bill. That would also be a much better use of the NRA's time and effort also. It's time to start lobbying our state representatives for such a bill. On other issues brought up in this thread, I have to say that I find the timing of this attack on gun rights very suspicious and given the efforts of certain individuals, I doubt it is a coincidence. I also doubt that acting member of the three revolving presidents of the IDHA goes that far out on a limb on this issue without the tacit support of the other two. Given the situation, the snide swipes taken at the NRA, seem curious and out of place as well. Seconded on both counts. Here's the important PA info: (MAN I wish we could see this here...) In Pennsylvania, only the Pennsylvania Game Commission has been empowered to regulate hunting and trapping in the Commonwealth. And, while municipalities have the authority to limit the discharge of firearms and bows as part of target practice, shooting ranges or other non-hunting related activities within the their municipalities’ limits, local officials do not have the authority to impact this activity when it is being done as part of lawful hunting or trapping. There is court precedent on this point. Specifically, in Duff v. Township of Northampton, the Commonwealth Court held that the Game Law (now the Game and Wildlife Code, Title 34) preempts the authority of municipalities to regulate activities governed by that statute, particularly hunting, and was affirmed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Therefore, any local ordinance prohibiting hunting is invalid. Needless to say, deliberate attempts to enforce laws that are known to be invalid could have a wide variety of repercussions including civil liability. And, if the municipality has an ordinance prohibiting hunting, we would suggest that they amend the ordinance to make an exception for lawful hunting or repeal the ordinance. We realize that much of some municipalities may not be “huntable” because of safety zones. Statewide, the safety zone for firearms hunters is 150 yards from any house, residence or other building. The statewide archery and crossbow safety zone is 50 yards. Also, the safety zone for all hunters – both firearms and archery -- is 150 yards from any playground, school, nursery school or day-care center. However, safety zone limitations and permission from landowners are what guide hunters’ decision on where they may hunt and not local municipal ordinances. Specifically, here is Section 322 (Powers and duties of commission) from Title 34 (Game and Wildlife Code), which outlines the agency's authority to govern, among other things, hunting/trapping seasons and bag limits: Sec. 322. Powers and duties of commission. (a) Duties. - It shall be the duty of the commission to protect, propagate, manage and preserve the game or wildlife of this Commonwealth and to enforce, by proper actions and proceedings, the laws of this Commonwealth relating thereto. (b) General powers and duties. - The commission has the power and duty to take all actions necessary for the administration and enforcement of this title. (c) Specific powers and duties. - In order to administrate and enforce this title, the commission through proper action shall: (1) Subject to section 2102(b) (relating to seasons, possession, bag limits and devices), fix seasons, daily shooting or taking hours, and any modification thereof, and daily, season and possession limits for any species of game or wildlife. (2) Remove protection, declare an open season or increase, reduce or close a season. (3) Increase or reduce bag limits or possession limits. (4) Define geographic limitations or restrictions. (5) Fix the type and number of devices which may be used to take game or wildlife. (6) Limit the number of hunters or furtakers in any designated area and prescribe the lawful methods of hunting or taking furbearers in these areas. (7) Govern the use of recorded calls or sounds or amplified calls or sounds of any description for taking or hunting game or wildlife. (8) Add to or change the classification of any wild bird or wild animal. (9) Prohibit the possession, importation, exportation or release of any species of birds or animals which may be considered dangerous or injurious to the general public or to the wildlife of this Commonwealth. (10) Manage and develop its lands and waters and other government or private lands and waters under agreement with the owners as it considers advisable and, by proper action and proceedings, enact and enforce regulations to insure the prudent and proper use of these lands. (11) Collect, classify and preserve such statistics, data and information as in its judgment will tend to promote the object of this title and take charge of and keep all reports, books, papers and documents which shall, in the discharge of its duties, come into its possession or under its control. (12) Take any necessary action to accomplish and assure the purposes of this title. (13) Serve the interest of sportsmen by preserving and promoting our special heritage of recreational hunting and furtaking by providing adequate opportunity to hunt and trap the wildlife resources of this Commonwealth. ------------------------------------------------- Gosh. How terrible. Letting DNR and realistic Safety Zones control where people can hunt, not whiny Yuppies and agenda driven Cranks...
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Apr 10, 2007 13:11:26 GMT -5
Marion County councilor Lincoln Plowman (R) issued a press release today to the media firing back at the shooting ban proposal (Proposal 174). He stated that after an attorney reviewed the language, the proposal is so arbitrary and restrictive that it actually DOES ban ALL shooting, even for SELF DEFENSE, unless done at a shooting range. Under the proposal, unless you own more than 15 acres AND have permission from the sheriff (after you pay $100 into his pocket) it will forever be ILLEGAL to: Shoot a coyote after your pets/farm animals/children, shoot for target practice (regardless of the safety precautions taken), hunt on your property, shoot a BB gun, pellet gun, or sling shot, and finally practice archery in your back yard.
Plowman urges hunters to show up to the City-County building, room 260, on April 17th and let the council know that we do not need proposal 174! Even if you don't live in Marion county, you are welcome to attend!!!!!
It would be my suggestion to dress appropriately, but perhaps wear a blaze orange hat so the councilors know what side you are on in this battle. People all blend in together unless wearing something so your position is known.......I suggest a blaze orange hat, or camo.
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on Apr 10, 2007 14:26:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 15, 2007 16:43:21 GMT -5
The proposal as amended...
CITY COUNTY COUNCIL PROPOSAL NO. , 2007
CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS-MARION COUNTY, INDIANA_______________________________
INTRODUCED: /2007
REFERRED TO: Rules and Public Policy Committee
SPONSOR: Councillors Mansfield, Gray, Nytes, Pryor and Bateman
DIGEST: A proposal for a General Ordinance amending Chapter 451, Weapons, of the Revised Code of the Consolidated City and County ____________________________________________________________________________
SOURCE: Initiated by: Councillor Mansfield
Drafted by: Aaron E. Haith, General Counsel
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADOPTION: POPOSED EFFECTIVE DATE: Subject to approval or veto by Mayor Adoption and approvals
GENERAL COUNSEL APPROVAL: _____________________ Date: March 2, 2007
CITY-COUNTY GENERAL ORDINANCE NO. , 2007
A PROPOSAL FOR A GENERAL ORDINANCE amending the “Revised Code of the Consolidated City and County,” Chapter 451, Weapons and adding new sections restricting the use and discharge of weapons in the Consolidated City.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS AND OF MARION COUNTY, INDIANA:
SECTION 1. Chapter 451 of the “Revised Code of the Consolidated City and County,” is hereby amended by adding the words and figures that are underlined and by striking the language that is stricken through, as follows: and by adding new sections thereto, specifically, Sec. 451-7 and Sec. 451-8, as follows:
Sec. 451-2. Firearms generally. (a) Except as provided in this section and in Sec. 7 of this Chapter, Wwithin the police special service district Consolidated City and County, it shall be unlawful for any person to fire off, shoot at another person or otherwise use any dangerous weapon for any purpose other than in defense of his life or the life of another person, or the protection of his property or property entrusted to him by another person, that property being lawful to possess, or for practice at a range under the supervision and operation of a governmental entity, or without the prior written approval of the department of public safety Sheriff. (b) This section shall not apply to the United States Army, Navy or other a Armed f Forces, the National Guard, or to any duly constituted and authorized law enforcement and peace officer of any governmental unit, or to manufacturers and to repair facilities for testing purposes within a private firing range. (c) This section shall not apply to a properly zoned indoor firing range or a properly zoned retail gun dealer store. (d) This section shall not apply to a conservation club organized and in existence as of January 1, 2007 whose mission includes education of safe firearms practices. (e) This section shall not apply to activities on property that is at least five (5) acres and zoned for agriculture provided that the activities do not pose a danger to person, animal or property outside to the property's boundaries. (f) This section shall not apply to private ranges which are restricted to the property owner's use or his or her immediate family and/or friends, for indoor use of air, spring, or otherwise activated implements, except anything activated by an explosive charge. However, the use of private property for such purpose may violate other Chapters of the Revised Code of the City and County.
Sec. 451-3. Discharge of weapons across public ways and in public places. (a) It shall be unlawful to shoot across or upon any public street or place, or toward a public way from any private or public premises, any bullet, pellet, missile or object impelled from any gun, pistol, rifle or weapon operated by means of any explosive charge, or by springs, air pressure or other means, or impelled from a slingshot, or any other device having force directed by the user thereof. (b) It shall be unlawful to discharge into the air from any location, except at an authorized firing range while shooting at trap or skeet and then with shot not solid projectiles, any of the weapons described in this section. (b) This section shall not apply to activities in city-owned parks that are authorized by the department of parks.
SECTION 2. Chapter 451 of the “Revised Code of the Consolidated City and County,” is hereby amended by adding new sections thereto, specifically, Sec. 451-7 and Sec. 451-8, as follows:
Sec. 451-7. Shooting ranges. (a) Not withstanding Sec. 2 of this Chapter and IC 14-22-31.5, it shall be unlawful to shoot any bullet, pellet, missile, or object propelled by an explosive charge within the consolidated city and county except at a shooting range as defined by this Chapter.
(b) A "shooting range" for purposes of this Chapter means an area designated and operated for the purpose of the use of rifles, shotguns, pistols, muskets or similar firearms that are fired at silhouettes, skeet, trap, paper, still board, or other similar targets, which shooting range: (1) does not constitute a danger to persons passing by or residing near the shooting range or to those using the shooting range facility; (2) is structurally sound or designed so as to prevent stray missiles, bullets, arrows or other object impelled from a gun, pistol, or any type of weapon from escaping from the boundary or walls of the shooting range; and (3) has passed a safety inspection.
(c) The sheriff shall develop "safety inspection" standards for and conduct such inspections to: (1) determine if a shooting range is structurally sound and able to withstand the impact of any type of ammunition or other impelled object and to contain the same to the premises or within the walls of the shooting range; (2) determine whether the conduct of shooting range activity on the site presents a danger to any person or property outside of the perimeter walls of the facility; (3) the standards developed and enforced by the sheriff shall not be unduly rigorous and must be approved by the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee of the Council; and (4) the sheriff or his designee shall inspect each such shooting range (a) annually and (b) before it is opened to the public, if new, newly re-modeled or expanded.
(d) Any shooting range that does not pass inspection shall be deemed an environmental public nuisance and shall be subject to abatement pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 575 of the Revised Code of the City and County.
(e) Private ranges which are, restricted to the property owner’s use or his or her immediate, family and/or friends, for indoor use of air, spring, or otherwise activated implements, except anything activated by an explosive charge, does not constitute a shooting range under this ordinance. However, the use of private property for such purpose may violate other Chapters of the Revised Code of the City and County.
Sec. 451-8. Written Approval by the Sheriff for Private Shooting Purposes. (a) A person may apply to the sheriff for written approval to shoot firearms on his/her property if his/her property is at least 15 acres for a limited period of time not to exceed one year. The application must contain the following: (1) Name of the person who owns the property; (2) Names of any other persons that the owner is permitting to shoot on his/her property; (3) Address including boundaries of where the person proposes to shoot; (4) Time period requested to shoot; and (5) Purpose of the request to shoot.
(b) The Sheriff in his sole discretion shall determine if the shooting activity on the property presents a danger to any person, animal or property outside the boundaries of the property.
(c) The Sheriff may revoke the written approval prior to the expiration of the time permitted for shooting if the sheriff subsequently determines that the shooting activity presents a danger to any person, animal or property outside the boundaries of the property or is in violation section of this code, or of any applicable state or federal law.
(d). The sheriff may collect a fee of $100 from the applicant. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and compliance with I.C. 36-3-4-14.
The foregoing was passed by the City-County Council this day of , 2007 at : .m.
ATTEST: _____________________________ Monroe Gray President, City-County Council ____________________________________ Jean Ann Milharcic Clerk, City-County Council
Presented by me to the Mayor this _____ day of ____________, 2007, at ___:___ a.m.
______________________________ Jean Ann Milharcic Clerk, City-County Council
Approved and signed by me this _____ day of ____________, 2007
______________________________ Bart Peterson, Mayor
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on Apr 15, 2007 18:15:41 GMT -5
So it now boils down to. . . SO, as simply as possible because I am not seeing it at all. . . . what part of this revision is currently legal? I mean, what is it actually making illegal that was legal before? What problem is this actually addressing?
|
|