Complaint filed against gun club

zwire.com ^ | February 04, 2004 | Kelly Smith

[TaxPayer2000]

City of Delafield ­- The Plan Commission will be asked to consider revoking the conditional use permit for the Hartland Sportsman's Club, according to city officials.

The Common Council was presented with a petition from 54 city and town of Delafield residents asking the city to revoke the permit.

The petition was presented to the council Monday night by town resident Charles Winter and city resident Richard Dallen.

The petition alleges that operations of the gun club are denying neighbors "peaceful occupancy" of their homes.

Carlson said the petition would be referred to the Plan Commission. The commission is responsible for making recommendations to the Common Council regarding whether city zoning codes and permits have been violated.

City Administrator Matt Carlson said the commission might hold a public hearing on the issue before making its recommendations to the council.

"The petition raises some interesting legal issues on the local, state and federal levels," said Carlson.

"One of the questions is if the conditional use permit is revoked, can the gun club continue to operate," he said.

City codes require city approval for the gun club to operate. However, Carlson points out that state law and the federal Constitution might limit the city's ability to prohibit the operation of the gun club.

During the mid-1990s, operators of the club requested annexation into the city because they did not want to meet conditions that would have been imposed by the town of Delafield as a use permit issued by the town.

[rarestia]

I'm wondering if these citizens that are not able to "peacably occupy" their homes are truly disturbed by the noise or if they're Demo wolves in sheep clothing. I'd have no problem saying that their mantra is, "Making it as hard as pulling teeth for you to shoot your guns." Bastards! I've lived in close proximity to a shooting range. Very rarely did I ever hear noise except the occasional .50 BMG firing out there. I think this is garbage!

[Born Conservative]

What state is this in?

[brbethke]

Wisconsin. This is why we need to pass the Minnesota Range Protection Act.

[Texan5]

Who was there first, the gun club or the homeowners? Logic would seem to dictate that the first occupant(s) of the area should be the ones who are catered to.

[Militiaman7]

There is a police range near me. They make all kinds of noise from early in the morning to evening and some weekends (Saturdays) too.

Can I make them go away? I didn't think so....

[brbethke]

Specifically it's in the Kettle Moraine area, which as I remember is north and west of Milwaukee.

Any Minnnesotans who read this, the Range Protection Act is HF327. It's just passed out of committee and onto the House floor. If you live in Minnesota and care at all about the 2nd Amendment, call your state rep and tell 'em to get behind it.

[billorites]

"Logic would seem to dictate that the first occupant(s) of the area should be the ones who are catered to."

Sadly, that's rarely the case.

People move in next to rifle ranges or airports and discover they don't like the noise. Homeowners are taxpayers and get listened to.

[brbethke]

Sadly, it never works that way. Forty years ago we built Oakdale Gun Club way out in Outer Boondockia, but now we're surrounded by growing suburbia.

More sadly, the morning paper carried a big article about some yutzes who are trying to get public hunting areas closed because the seasonal shooting makes them nervous.

[SevenDaysInMay]

I have heard from the lips of 2nd Amendment fearing people that they want the maximun range of rifle's bullets to be the controlling factor in "permitting" shooting ranges to operate, with child-proof fencing around such perimeters.

A 5 or 6 mile radius, 120 miles of berms and unclimbable 9' fences with manned and recording security cameras 24/7? Yes. Plus serial, full environmental impact studies, such as lead and copper ground water studies before another shot may be fired, pursuant to court orders.

According to the Clintonazis' parsing, shooting is no part of "keep" and "bear", and civilians have no right to any of this. Blackrobes have so proclaimed.

Enemies of our RATIFIED CONSTITUION are acting under color of law, sedition of the worst kind.

[Boundless]

> Logic would seem to dictate that the first occupant(s)
> of the area should be the ones who are catered to.

That used to be the case, but is no longer, as airports,
farms, music venues and other enterprises are discovering.

One [early] solution is for the noisy enterprise to take
loans and buy up surrounding undeveloped properties, then
immediately re-offer them with a deed restriction
containing a "noise easement" on the sold parcel. Could
be quite helpful down the road.

As existing developed properties come on the market,
do the same.

[TaxPayer2000]

Who was there first, the gun club or the homeowners? Logic would seem to dictate that the first occupant(s) of the area should be the ones who are catered to.

If the guns are fired for practice and never in anger, do they still make a sound?

[Condor51]

The same nonsense is happening in Naperville, IL. A once remote outdoor range and Gun Club is now surrounded by housing.

And the typical idiot mini-van driving soccer mom is always quoted with junk like, "well yes, we knew it was there when we bought our house RIGHT NEXT TO IT, but we didn't think it would be so noisy or dangerous, blah, blah, blah. It must be closed."

[brbethke]

Guns offend just by existing, didn't you know that? That's why they passed a law banning mere possession of a gun within a quarter-mile of a school. Couldn't risk having some gun stored in a closet somewhere suddenly coming to life and going on a killing rampage.

[brbethke]

We had a running problem with a series of complaints being filed against us. It eventually turned out that it was just one woman, and a few of her friends, and she didn't even live near us, she just drove past the entrance to our club a couple of times a week and was offended by our mere existence.

[Gunrunner2]

>>If the guns are fired for practice and never in anger, do they still make a sound?<

or

"If the guns are fired for practice and never in anger, do they still expend a round?"

I know. I know. Not good, but I am trying.

[Texan5]

In the city we used to live in, and most of the surrounding counties out here where we live now, if you were there first, you are "grandfathered", and no one can make you go away because of noise, etc. There was even a case of a developer building a subdivision next to a golf club that had been in the same location for 30 years. The owner put up netting and a fence, but stray balls still struck windows, roofs, etc on the new houses on occassion, and the residents also whined about the outdoor lights. They were basically told by the city to shove it-you don't like it, move. Some moved, but most shut up and faced reality.

Same thing happened with a fancy-schmancy new neighborhood of custom homes on acre lots in the county where we live, which was developed near a shooting range. The homeowners' complaints were brutally silenced in a county commissioners' meeting, where the commissioners made the homeowners look like total idiots for having a house built next to a range, then bitching about the noise and "safety". They went away chastised, and there has been no more of that nonsense since.

[brbethke]

Well, that's one of the many differences between Texas and Minnesota. Here we've discovered that "grandfather" clauses aren't worth the paper they're written on. If someone is offended by something, all they have to do is keep complaining and going back to court, and eventually they'll find a judge who's willing to rule that the original grandfather clause was illegal, unconstitutional, immoral, or otherwise void.

[JoeFromSidney]

I live not 200 yards from the police outdoor firing range. Throughout the summer the cops are banging away. I don't mind it. In fact I'm glad they're practicing. I just wish I could use their range.

[Nebr FAL owner]

Possibility of filing suit against the broad for harassment & malicious persicution filing false reports?