Confiscation has begun in CT....

[shda5582]

How in the world is the law you just quoted providing any possibility of "getting everything thrown out"? He was clearly w/in 500 feet of any building, and you can bet all your worldly possessions that he did not obtain written permission to hunt with a firearm from all homeowners w/in 500 feet of where he shot the squirrel.

1. Prove that the neighbors are within 500 feet before you spout off.

2. He did it on his own property, around his own home that he owns. That technicality is what I was referring to. Much the same way I got off via a technicality in my youth when I was doing some urban exploring.

[Citadelgrad87]

1. Prove that the neighbors are within 500 feet before you spout off.

2. He did it on his own property, around his own home that he owns. That technicality is what I was referring to. Much the same way I got off via a technicality in my youth when I was doing some urban exploring.

The statute says any building. "Any building" means ANY building. You're trying to limit it to neighbors, but that's not what it says.

If he was within 500 feet of his house, he was within 500 feet of any building.

[desertjosh]

If one of my neighbors shoots a squirrel, he will have his guns confiscated. That is just plain dumb s*it behavior.

Why? I shoot squirrels all the time on my property. I hate those basturds

[shda5582]

The statute says any building. "Any building" means ANY building. You're trying to limit it to neighbors, but that's not what it says.

If he was within 500 feet of his house, he was within 500 feet of any building.

Correct.

However, reread the law I quoted. Since he's the property owner, he's exempt from it. Don't just stop at the beginning, you need to read the whole bit.

edit: don't bother, here it is:

500 Foot Zone - It is prohibited to hunt with, shoot, or carry a loaded firearm within 500 feet of any building occupied by people or domestic animals, or used for storage of flammable material, or within 250 feet of such buildings when waterfowl hunting in tidal areas from land shooting positions or from floating blinds anchored adjacent to land or from rock positions, unless written permission for lesser distances is obtained from the owner and carried. Landowners, their spouse, and lineal descendants are exempt from this restriction, providing any building involved is their own. The 500 foot zone does not apply to bowhunting.

So once again, provided IF his neighbors were outside the 500ft zone, he's in the clear.

[Citadelgrad87]

Correct.

However, reread the law I quoted. Since he's the property owner, he's exempt from it. Don't just stop at the beginning, you need to read the whole bit.

edit: don't bother, here it is:





So once again, provided IF his neighbors were outside the 500ft zone, he's in the clear.

Still doesn't excuse shooting in a residential area from things like backstop issues and safety. It's not carte Blanche.

I also would need to see, but don't care to research, any local restrictions, city codes, etc.

Edit, if the google street view is HIS house, the yard is about 50 feet wide. If he was within the area within the sidewalk, house, driveway to the left and right, and fired, he WAS within 500 feet of both houses adjacent to property

I'm not flying to ct to show you with a tape measure, but that's what a front yard is and that's a tiny front yard, even by Cali standards.

[calif 15-22]

So once again, provided IF his neighbors were outside the 500ft zone, he's in the clear.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/258+Housatonic+Dr/@41.191528,-73.108113,3a,90y,53h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9QouzyeaMiED61j5Puj6Hg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e80cc3ce2865c5:0x76bf66eaef9f61c4!6m1!1e1

The only point of reference(IF THIS IS HIS HOUSE) is the driveway at about 8ft across (I'm speculating). That would put his neighbor's house at about 20' maybe 24' away. Neighbors across the street at 120ft or so.

Well within the 500ft mark.

You could be right though if he owned all those houses he may be exempt based on you quote "Landowners, their spouse, and lineal descendants are exempt from this restriction, providing any building involved is their own"

[Bluesami]

I like all the people in here who justify confiscation.. exactly as planned.

[calif 15-22]

I like all the people in here who justify confiscation.. exactly as planned.

No one here is justifying anything . . . Squirrel Guy's activities brought about unwanted and unnecessary attention upon himself by his own actions.

Nice try though . . .

[Citadelgrad87]

I like all the people in here who justify confiscation.. exactly as planned.

I like the people pretending to channel the founding fathers. If you are incapable of accepting that shooting squirrels in that neighborhood is going to bring unwanted attention, you're a zealot, not an advocate.

[gwgn02]

Looks like confiscation to me.

[Thepug99]

Good now he won't be able to harm innocent squirrels.

[Rainbow Warrior]

How would you like to live across the street from this idiot while he's out shooting varmints in the front yard ?
Gun ownership should require a little common sense, something this guy lacks.

[shda5582]

https://www.google.com/maps/place/25...9f61c4!6m1!1e1

The only point of reference(IF THIS IS HIS HOUSE) is the driveway at about 8ft across (I'm speculating). That would put his neighbor's house at about 20' maybe 24' away. Neighbors across the street at 120ft or so.

Well within the 500ft mark.

You could be right though if he owned all those houses he may be exempt based on you quote "Landowners, their spouse, and lineal descendants are exempt from this restriction, providing any building involved is their own"

Then, that being the case, he was in the wrong for doing what he did. Legally, at least. My opinion is that he was an idiot AND in the wrong, but I try to separate my opinion vs. what's fact/legal.