PDA

View Full Version : New Proposed San Diego County Shooting Ordinance Email


viras
04-04-2009, 7:23 PM
Hey Guys,

I just got an e-mail from Gussler's Santee about some disturbing changes proposed to local law regarding my favorite hobby. I just thought I'd share it with everyone. I apologize if this is a dupe; I searched.

This email has been sent to all members who maintain an email address with the club.



This is to inform you that the county is currently in the process of redoing the county ordinance with respect to shooting in the county. This will have a major impact on all of us. A committee was formed last fall to work with the county to make sure the shooters, hunters etc get fair and reasonable ordnance.



This web page has been set up to cover this issue with the county. You should be able to click on the link below and it should go to the web page. If not open your web page viewer and type it into the address bar.



www.lgrgc.info



We need to post the petition any place shooters gather. Completed petitions can be mailed to the clubs PO Box as listed in the newsletter.

Thanks

Don



Vice President

This was the most disturbing thing: Word Doc of Proposed Changes (http://www.lgrgc.info/Baseline.doc)

Here's a sample - they have it laid out for what appears to be every BLM shooting area in San Diego County:

SEC. 33.106. DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS PROHIBITED.

Other than in the defense of person or property or at a shooting facility operated pursuant to permit issued by the Sheriff, it shall be unlawful for a person to discharge a firearm in any of the following unincorporated areas of the County: (All references to sections, townships and ranges are based on the San Bernardino Base and Meridian):


PARCEL R-3--AREA OF THE COUNTY
SOUTH OF U.S. HIGHWAY INTERSTATE 8

That portion of the unincorporated area of the County of San Diego lying southerly of the center line of U.S. Highway Interstate 8 and its westerly prolongation to the Pacific Ocean lying northerly of the southerly boundary of the County of San Diego (International Boundary between the United States and Mexico) and lying westerly of the following described line:

BEGINNING at a point on the southerly boundary of the County of San Diego, that point being the southeast corner of Section 6, Township 19 South, Range 1 East; thence northerly along the east line of Section 6, Township 19 South, Range 1 East, and along the east line of Sections 31 and 30, Township 18 South, Range 1 East, to the northeast corner of Section 30, Township 18 South, Range 1 East; thence northwesterly in a straight line to the southwesterly end of the "Savage Dam" at the southerly end of the Lower Otay Reservoir; thence westerly and northerly along the westerly shore line of the Lower Otay Reservoir, i.e., along a contour line at elevation 500 feet above mean sea level, to and across Otay Reservoir; thence continuing northerly along that dam and the westerly shoreline of the Upper Otay Reservoir, i.e., along a contour line at elevation 550 feet above mean sea level, to a point 600 feet southerly of the center line of Proctor Valley Road; thence northeasterly and easterly along a line 600 feet southeasterly and southerly of and parallel with the center line of Proctor Valley Road to a point 600 feet south of the intersection of Proctor Valley Road and Melody Road; thence easterly along a line 600 feet southerly of and parallel with the center line of Melody Road to a point 600 feet west of the center line of State Highway Route 94 (Campo Road); thence southeasterly along a line 600 feet southwesterly of and parallel with the center line of State Highway Route 94, a distance of 12,000 feet; thence northeasterly along a straight line 4,000 feet more or less to the south 1/4 corner of Section 11; Township 17 South, Range 1 East; thence due east 2,600 feet more or less to the southeast corner of Section 11; thence due north along the east line of Section 11 and 2, 10,600 feet more or less to the intersection of that line with a line 600 feet southerly of and parallel to Lyons Valley Road (that intersection being approximately the northeast corner of Section 2, Township 17 South, Range 1 East); thence easterly along a line 600 feet south of and parallel to Lyons Valley Road and Lawson Valley Road; thence northerly along a line 600 feet easterly of and parallel with Lawson Valley Road to a point 600 feet northeast of the intersection of Lawson Valley Road and Beaver Hollow Road; thence northwesterly and northeasterly along a line 600 feet northeasterly and southeasterly of and parallel with Beaver Hollow Road until that line intersects the easterly boundary of Section 23, Township 16 South, Range 1 East; thence northerly 2,600 feet more or less along the east line of Section 23 to the southwest corner of Section 13, Township 16 South, Range 1 East, and Section 13 being the Sycuan Indian Reservation; thence continuing northerly along the west boundary of Section 13 and Section 12, Township 16 South, Range 1 East a distance of 6,000 feet more or less to a point 600 feet south of the center line of Dehesa Road; thence easterly along a line 600 feet southerly of and parallel with Dehesa Road and the easterly prolongation of that line to a point 600 feet east of the intersection of that line and the southerly projection of the center line of Tavern Road; thence northwesterly and northeasterly along a line that is 600 feet northeasterly and southeasterly of and parallel with Tavern Road to a point 600 feet southeasterly of the center line of South Grade Road; thence easterly and northerly along a line that is 600 feet southerly and easterly of and parallel with the center line of South Grade Road and the northerly projection of that center line to the intersection of that parallel line with the center line of U.S. Highway Interstate 8.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM all of those portions of the County of San Diego described and designated Parcels N-8, N-9, N-10 and N-16 in section 33.106 of this code.


It looks like the guys at www.lgrgc.info have a bunch of proposed changes (http://www.lgrgc.info/Bridge.doc) to this, as well as a complete re-write (http://www.lgrgc.info/Rewrite.pdf), and have started petitioning (http://www.lgrgc.info/Petition.doc) as well...

Just wanted to share the news.

So to all you guys who speak legalese, does this mean that the gun-grabbers are trying to shut down the BLM shooting spots like Carrizo Creek and "BrokeBack Mountain"? That's how I read it - I wanted your feedback...

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-04-2009, 11:48 PM
It is much worse than just 33.106. If you look at the proposal, they are looking to micromanage shooting ranges out of existence and make it impossible for a new range to open. The County Board knows about this and has asked local gun ranges and orgs to work with the Sheriff’s Department to improve the proposal. The Sheriff’s Department has not been responsive. In fact they have been highly resistant to any changes.

If you look at the website: www.lgrgc.info it shows 4 items:

1) The existing regs that is a group of antiquated laws that amounts to years of everyone throwing in their best idea about shooting over time.
2) The proposal by the Sheriff’s Department to the County Board which amounts to a list of ways to stop shooting and shut down ranges in San Diego.
3) A critique of their proposal with some recommendations.
4) A complete, fresh rewrite of how this section of the code should read which is a comprehensive shooting policy that spells out the rights and responsibilities of shooters, ranges, and law enforcement when target shooting, defensive shooting, or hunting on private land or ranges.

-Michael

joe4702
04-05-2009, 7:29 AM
BUMP

CitaDeL
04-05-2009, 8:28 AM
Aside from bringing unregulated shooting areas under the sheriffs control, it is a ban on loaded open carry in all those places, under the scope of 12031.

Piper
04-05-2009, 8:31 AM
It is much worse than just 33.106. If you look at the proposal, they are looking to micromanage shooting ranges out of existence and make it impossible for a new range to open. The County Board knows about this and has asked local gun ranges and orgs to work with the Sheriff’s Department to improve the proposal. The Sheriff’s Department has not been responsive. In fact they have been highly resistant to any changes.

If you look at the website: www.lgrgc.info (http://www.lgrgc.info) it shows 4 items:

1) The existing regs that is a group of antiquated laws that amounts to years of everyone throwing in their best idea about shooting over time.
2) The proposal by the Sheriff’s Department to the County Board which amounts to a list of ways to stop shooting and shut down ranges in San Diego.
3) A critique of their proposal with some recommendations.
4) A complete, fresh rewrite of how this section of the code should read which is a comprehensive shooting policy that spells out the rights and responsibilities of shooters, ranges, and law enforcement when target shooting, defensive shooting, or hunting on private land or ranges.

-Michael

So, since the second amendment really is an individual right, and it would be unconstitutional to ban all firearms, making it unlawful to shoot in prime areas that are the safest areas is the next best thing to effectively ban firearms. In other words, if conditions exist that make it impossible to take your gun out of the house, law abiding citizens have very limited choices.

How many ranges are in San Diego county?

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-05-2009, 10:44 AM
1) Lemon Grove Rod and Gun
2) South Bay Rod and Gun
3) Project 2000
4) Escondido Fish and Game
5) Lakeside
6) Rainbow
7) American Shooting Center
8) Discount Gun Mart
9) Iron Sights

I am sure I have missed a couple more.

But the proposal goes farther than that. There is no difference between a range (like the ones I have listed) and someone's private land. Also, notice how specific the rules are in 33.115...you have to wear ear protection 25 feet from the fiiring line, etc. If someone dooesn't comply just once...then according to 33.113 the Sheriff's Department can shut down the entire range for 3 months. This would kill the range.

The committee's rewrite of this chapter only requires that the ranges have an set of operating procedures so that eachh range can continue to manage their range according to their own needs. It also differentiates a Shooting Range Complex from someone teaching the grandson how to shoot a .22 in their back 40.


-Michael

CmpsdNoMore
04-05-2009, 11:56 AM
What a bunch of fascists.

I've never been involved with something like this, what do we need to do to fight it?

jnojr
04-05-2009, 2:56 PM
1) Lemon Grove Rod and Gun
2) South Bay Rod and Gun
3) Project 2000
4) Escondido Fish and Game
5) Lakeside
6) Rainbow
7) American Shooting Center
8) Discount Gun Mart
9) Iron Sights

I am sure I have missed a couple more.

http://shooting.forsandiego.com/Ranges.html

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-05-2009, 3:39 PM
to fight it:
1) Spend some time reading the Sheriff's proposal and find specific things you do not like.
2) Spend some time reading the committee's re-write. (All you need to do is read the first two and last two pages. Everything inbetween is just descriptions of urban areas where you cannot shoot)
3) Join a shooting range, attend the NRA Members' Council meetings (for more info www.sdnra.com), join NRA, sign the petition on the website and get others to do the same.
4) Write a letter, make a phone call, send an e-mail, send a fax to every County Supervisor's office respectfully and intelligently letting them know you do not like the Sheriff's proposal, but you do like the committee's proposal.
5) Tell everyone you know about this.

Everything I just described might take an hour of your time and not even all at once, but it would do a WORLD of good. Well...technically going to a Members' Council meeting is one hour long, but you get my drift.

E-mail me if you have any questions.

-Michael

KylaGWolf
04-05-2009, 4:35 PM
And yes to answer your question they are trying to shut down anywhere that is legal to shoot within the county if I am reading this correctly. Is this still in the planning stages or is this actually up for a vote?

I had heard rumors on this but figured it was another of those rumors that would end up going no where. unfortunately I don't have access to word on the computer I am using so I cannot open the document although I might be able to do so later tonight. I will definitely look at the document and read the whole thing to see what is said in it.

mike_schwartz@mail.com
04-05-2009, 6:04 PM
This was almost voted on in January as a part of a bigger group of changes. It would have passed. The Board of Supervisors have been great about all of this. Supervisor Jacob took a tour of the Lemon Grove Rod and Gun and sat down to talk about this with reps from the committee. Ron Roberts office has been very responsive to this as well.

This is not up for a vote yet, but it will be soon. Let the County Board know you are thankful for their support of shooters and that YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THIS CHANGE.

This is not a drill...this will go in front of the Board for a vote eventually. Maybe they will take the advice of the shooters in San Diego...maybe they won't. It will depend on how much noise we make.

-Michael

Liberty1
04-05-2009, 8:45 PM
Looks like this will disarm (make them unload open carry only) Minutemen patroling the Ca. Boarder with Mex. Not the place to be caught unloaded.:(

Gator Monroe
04-05-2009, 8:48 PM
What a bunch of fascists.

I've never been involved with something like this, what do we need to do to fight it?

Vote out the Democrats ?:eek:

Axewound
04-05-2009, 9:58 PM
totally lame