Shooting at My House

At Ease · May 4, 2015

Howdy all,

I was shooting my pellet(air) gun behind my home and someone commented that discharging an air rifle in a "congested area" is illegal. I live in Sparks NV. Any thoughts?

OC Freedom · May 4, 2015

At Ease said:
Howdy all,

I was shooting my pellet(air) gun behind my home and someone commented that discharging an air rifle in a "congested area" is illegal. I live in Sparks NV. Any thoughts?

Start here:

http://www.washoesheriff.com/sub.php?page=congested-areafirearms-discharge-maps

If it is illegal find out what the penalty is and if its something you can live with then shoot away and have fun. You can do anything you want that's illegal as long as you're willing to pay the penalty if you get caught.
So, for example the penalty is a $50 fine and you are okay with paying that fine if you get caught, then go for it.

At Ease · May 4, 2015

If it is illegal find out what the penalty is and if its something you can live with then shoot away and have fun. You can do anything you want that's illegal as long as you're willing to pay the penalty if you get caught.
So, for example the penalty is a $50 fine and you are okay with paying that fine if you get caught, then go for it.[/QUOTE]

So your advice is to break the law? So much for "law abiding gun owner"...

Fallschirjmäger · May 4, 2015

So.... are you in one of the restricted areas, or not?

DON`T TREAD ON ME · May 4, 2015

At Ease said:
So your advice is to break the law? So much for "law abiding gun owner"...

I am aware of the rules on this forum, so I will try to tread lightly... (no pun)

Law abiding, and gun owner, are steadily becoming mutually exclusive terms, no longer belonging in the same sentence. I prefer the term "responsible gun owner" How can you be responsible for your own defense when your means of protection is "lawfully" disassembled, padlocked, and stowed in 3 different locations around your house, Chicago style.

Funny how we never think that the politicians and cops are breaking the law, when they prohibit you from defending yourself. Say for instance you are a truck driver, and your load delivers in Oakland California at 1:00 am. The idea that a few politicians backed by hired mercenaries can limit your access to self defense, is inhumane. Even deeper is the pride instilled in us as we go along with that crap, touting what "law abiding" folk we are.

The system that purports to work for you puts you in a bad dilemma. In many geographic locations, you either retain your ability to survive, risking imprisonment from the govt. or throw yourself at the mercy of the "bad guys." What is telling, is that most on here will bow to the threats and violence of the govt. and take their chances with the so called "Bad Guys" Since everything is risk assessment, it appears the biggest threat is govt. Why is it we follow the rules of our most likely aggressor so religiously?

I ask the moderators to consider an exception to the "advocating of law breaking" rule on this forum. Since laws can be chanmged for the better in courts, ands harm is a required element. I purpose a change that allows talk of lawbreaking in the context of showing harm, or changing law peacefully.

OC Freedom · May 4, 2015

At Ease said:
If it is illegal find out what the penalty is and if its something you can live with then shoot away and have fun. You can do anything you want that's illegal as long as you're willing to pay the penalty if you get caught.
So, for example the penalty is a $50 fine and you are okay with paying that fine if you get caught, then go for it.

So your advice is to break the law? So much for "law abiding gun owner"...[/QUOTE]

You missed my point, I understand that for some the world is black and white with firm bounderies. In your state of Nevada, you can open carry without a permit, but cross that made up state line and enter Kalifornia you will be arrested and prosecuted for it. So why is it okay to open carry 5 feet on your side of the line, but not 5 feet on the other side of the line. Laws are just created by men, some are just and some are not.

In 1992 I recieved a speeding ticket for doing 70mph on highway 395 between Kennewick and Ritzville, why? It was a 55mph zone. Today its 70mph at that same location. Law abiding is not violating others rights, this applies to people and governments. No victim, no crime.

solus · May 4, 2015

At Ease said:
Howdy all,
I was shooting my pellet(air) gun behind my home and someone commented that discharging an air rifle in a "congested area" is illegal. I live in Sparks NV. Any thoughts?

at ease, forgive this observations but:
1. define behind your home? back to back and side to side with minimal clearances or your home is set on a 2 ac plot?
2. whom was the someone who commented: neighbor? LE? LE friend? uh your partner? possibly your mother?
3. why is their comment important to you and your target practice?

At Ease said:
If it is illegal find out what the penalty is and if its something you can live with then shoot away and have fun. You can do anything you want that's illegal as long as you're willing to pay the penalty if you get caught.
So, for example the penalty is a $50 fine and you are okay with paying that fine if you get caught, then go for it.

So your advice is to break the law? So much for "law abiding gun owner"...[/QUOTE]

at ease, you receive a viable option to your query yet you apparently believe it's necessary to chastise the responder(s) to your vague query.

would you have be equally cranky if members told you ~ bad at ease! bad...now put your air soft gun away and shoot no more...

sorry if you do not like the response, why did you ask the question on a public forum?

ipse

SW40VE-OC · May 4, 2015

Check the map

Go to website as suggested. Click on the "live map" tab. You'll be able to zoom in to your homes location. If in the red, NO GO anymore. If in the Yellow, BB/ Air Rifles are on the "exception" list

I'm also in the Sparks area. A little driving into the nearby hills will get you to a clear zone for your shooting. Fell free to PM me if I can help more directly in your search.

At Ease · May 4, 2015

Thanks for the responses folks. By my back yard, I was refering to the typical sub-devision set up. Neigbors close on either side of me and a desert hill behind the house. I was shooting a pidgon on my property, not target practice but a friend at work tells me Sparks has an ordinance that forbids shooting a pellet gun within 1,000 ft. of a home. I couldn't find that info anywhere and thought I would ask.

Of course I will do what I want but my question was about what the City Ordinance read. There is no federal or state laws concerning the discharge of air guns and I failed to find it on the washoe county website too. I'm not sure how air guns are defined under the law. I suppose I will keep searching...

Grapeshot · May 4, 2015

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:
--snipped--

I ask the moderators to consider an exception to the "advocating of law breaking" rule on this forum. Since laws can be chanmged for the better in courts, ands harm is a required element. I purpose a change that allows talk of lawbreaking in the context of showing harm, or changing law peacefully.

Rule #15 even covers what you would seem to request:

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

Talk of change and how to accmplish that w/o actually advocating breaking the law.

Please note that the OP has not responded whether or not he actually lives in a zone that restricts shooting an air gun; therefore a march on the townhall might be premature

OTOH if the OP does determine that he lives in a restricted zone, he might be wise to request that this thread be deleted......and learn to not speak of such things except on the advice of his attorney.

SW40VE-OC · May 4, 2015

At Ease- by going to the Washoe County Sheriff website directly from the link provided above in post#2, the THIRD AND FOURTH bullet point items listed are directly related to what you ask about. "It is unlawful in the UNINCORPORATED....
,with the exception of.......,within 5000 feet of dwelling......" And
"It is unlawful...unincorporated....1000 feet of dwelling"

The suggestion to have this thread deleted after you read this is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. My guess is your neighbor in that particular subdivision in 15-20 feet away?

Grapeshot · May 4, 2015

At Ease said:
Thanks for the responses folks. By my back yard, I was refering to the typical sub-devision set up. Neigbors close on either side of me and a desert hill behind the house. I was shooting a pidgon on my property, not target practice but a friend at work tells me Sparks has an ordinance that forbids shooting a pellet gun within 1,000 ft. of a home. I couldn't find that info anywhere and thought I would ask.

Of course I will do what I want but my question was about what the City Ordinance read. There is no federal or state laws concerning the discharge of air guns and I failed to find it on the washoe county website too. I'm not sure how air guns are defined under the law. I suppose I will keep searching...

If you'd take the time to read it, the link in post#2 provided most of the answers.

Refer to Washoe County Code, Chapter 50, Reno Municipal Code, Sparks Municipal Code:

It is unlawful to discharge any gun, pistol, rifle, shotgun or other firearm within any congested area of the county.

It is unlawful to discharge any gun, pistol, rifle, shotgun or other firearm in, on or across any county road or highway.

It is unlawful to discharge in the unincorporated area of the county, any gun, pistol, rifle or other firearm, with the exception of shotguns, air rifles or B-B guns, within 5,000 feet of any dwelling occupied by another person or persons.

It is unlawful to discharge in the unincorporated area of the county any shotgun, air rifle or B-B gun within 1,000 feet of any dwelling occupied by another person or persons.

renoglock22 · May 10, 2015

This is from Sparks Municipal Code.

Section 9.66.010 - Discharging B-B guns.
It is unlawful for any person to discharge any B-B gun, air rifle, air pistol, pellet rifle, pellet pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in the city except by authority granted by the police department of the city.

(Ord. 769 § 1, 1969: 1962 Code § 25.072.5.)

The Big Guy · May 10, 2015

renoglock22 said:
This is from Sparks Municipal Code.

Section 9.66.010 - Discharging B-B guns.
It is unlawful for any person to discharge any B-B gun, air rifle, air pistol, pellet rifle, pellet pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in the city except by authority granted by the police department of the city.

(Ord. 769 § 1, 1969: 1962 Code § 25.072.5.)

hmmmmm

TBG

Grapeshot · May 11, 2015

renoglock22 said:
This is from Sparks Municipal Code.

Section 9.66.010 - Discharging B-B guns.
It is unlawful for any person to discharge any B-B gun, air rifle, air pistol, pellet rifle, pellet pistol or other weapon of a similar nature in the city except by authority granted by the police department of the city.

(Ord. 769 § 1, 1969: 1962 Code § 25.072.5.)

The Big Guy said:
hmmmmm

TBG

Impressive!

The have vested in themselves certain powers not otherwise legally obtainable.

DVC · May 11, 2015

Actually, it looks like they've inserted the opportunity to make exceptions to an outright ban.

DON`T TREAD ON ME · May 16, 2015

Grapeshot said:
Impressive!

The have vested in themselves certain powers not otherwise legally obtainable.

Is that not the entire premise of government? They can do things the average person cannot. Extort (tax) initiate aggression (make up laws backed by force.) In an effort to control people and their behavior.

MAC702 · May 16, 2015

"A government is a body of people, usually, notably, ungoverned." Shepherd Book

NewZealandAmerican · Jun 12, 2015

Legal is not nescessarily moral

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:
I am aware of the rules on this forum, so I will try to tread lightly... (no pun)

Law abiding, and gun owner, are steadily becoming mutually exclusive terms, no longer belonging in the same sentence. I prefer the term "responsible gun owner" How can you be responsible for your own defense when your means of protection is "lawfully" disassembled, padlocked, and stowed in 3 different locations around your house, Chicago style.

Funny how we never think that the politicians and cops are breaking the law, when they prohibit you from defending yourself. Say for instance you are a truck driver, and your load delivers in Oakland California at 1:00 am. The idea that a few politicians backed by hired mercenaries can limit your access to self defense, is inhumane. Even deeper is the pride instilled in us as we go along with that crap, touting what "law abiding" folk we are.

The system that purports to work for you puts you in a bad dilemma. In many geographic locations, you either retain your ability to survive, risking imprisonment from the govt. or throw yourself at the mercy of the "bad guys." What is telling, is that most on here will bow to the threats and violence of the govt. and take their chances with the so called "Bad Guys" Since everything is risk assessment, it appears the biggest threat is govt. Why is it we follow the rules of our most likely aggressor so religiously?

I ask the moderators to consider an exception to the "advocating of law breaking" rule on this forum. Since laws can be chanmged for the better in courts, ands harm is a required element. I purpose a change that allows talk of lawbreaking in the context of showing harm, or changing law peacefully.

good riddance to bad laws!

We-the-People · Jun 13, 2015

15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

This rule is problematic. While I understand it's intent, the reality is that it is impossible to abide by the rule.

In the 1980's the US Dept. of Justice set about determining how many federal crimes there were. At the end of two years of study, their answer was "we don't know". They did know is that there were "at least 4,000 but we don't have any idea how many more".

Now, add to this the 50 states, each with their own laws.

Now add the counties, cities, municipal corporations, etc.

There is absolutely no way ANYONE can know if what they are advocating is against the law. NONE, ZIP, ZILCH, NADA.

Now, we DO know that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land and that any law in violation of the Constitution is not valid, therefore is not the law. And, we should all understand that the Second Amendment is quite clear (regardless of how the anti's may want to play word games) in that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

ALL firearms restriction are therefore null and void and are NOT law.

Shooting at My House

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Active member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Attachments

Regular Member