Neighbors sue over Doctor's private firing range

[jimpeel]

My kinda neighbor.

If his neighbors want to sue someone they should sue the developers for not telling them that there is a firing range next door. If they did know they should shut up or move away. They complain that their property values are depressed but that is more likely the fault of the current occupant of the White House. Your property values cannot be depressed if your house is not for sale.

These are the same types of people who move in next to an airport and then complain that airplanes fly over their house.

I hope the court tells them where to go and how to get there.

SOURCE

[mete]

I remember the property next to our range registered a complaint .We found the property was just put up for sale !
All too often the 'grandfather' laws are ignored .

[Pilot]

I hope he wins. We have the same problem with small aiports. They've been there forever, then a developer builds McMansions right next to it and the Nanny State Soccer Moms complain about the noise and the "danger" from the airplanes.

What a crock. These people need to get a life. I am sure the doctor does not shoot after dark as noise ordinances would be in effect. These people have more to fear from their bathtub than this guy shooting at his range.

[Double Naught Spy]

If his neighbors want to sue someone they should sue the developers for not telling them that there is a firing range next door.

Well that rather sounds like replacing one stupid act with another. It isn't the developer's responsibility to divulge the activities being conducted on surrounding properties.

As for the surrounding property owners suing for loss of value of their properties, I find that rather amusing. If the neighbors are like most, they fight their annual property taxes to keep the tax assessment value as low as possible which is often below the resale value of their properties. If compensated, they should not be compensated for resale values as they probably aren't paying resale value taxes.

It is also the buyer's responsibility to check out the area where they buy a house.

It sounds like the doctor has the minimum height berms suggested by the NRA. He would be well suited to increase the height of his berms substantially if he wins this case. If the neighbor's lose, they will undoubtedly sue with fervor if a stray round leaves the range and causes damage or injury and more than likely, the good doctor does have stray rounds leaving his range on occasion.

[Pilot]

Yep, neighbors fault, not the developers. I wasn't insinuating it was the developers fault, but understand how you could have thought that.

[Aguila Blanca]

State law generally prohibits the use of fully automatic weapons, except among soldiers, law enforcement officers and merchants who need them for "the purpose of defending their business." The plaintiffs contend Land doesn't qualify for any of the exceptions.

I'm not liking that law. The Feds make you jump through hoops and pay a special tax to own an automatic weapon ... and then the state won't let you shoot it? That ain't right.

Even if they stop the machine guns, though, I can't see that they have any grounds to completely shut down the range, and that's what they want.

[armoredman]

Are you kidding? I'd LOVE to have a neighbor with a private range! I'd be bringing over steaks every weekend if he'd let me shoot there!

[NJgunowner]

Sounds like a selling point to me. I'd be budding up with him

[gc70]

This is a very long-running legal battle. Here is the Doctor's own discussion, starting in 2009, from a local forum. There is good news - the lawsuit in the OP was dismissed a few days after the above article was written (see post #63). The Charlotte Disturber thoroughly covered the complaints, but don't look for a follow-up acknowledging the Doctor's victory.

[Fishing_Cabin]

gc70, I am glad to know the lawsuit was dropped.

This particular Doctor must be a magnet for lawsuits though over the range. Its become so common of an occurance when I read it is Wesley Chappel or Dr Land again, I stop reading there. I've lost count, perhaps another knows how many lawsuits he has had against him or been threatened with.

[pgdion]

I agree, dang these whiners for building on those lots. They should have left them open for others who would want to live next to this guy. There are folks who would pay a premium for a lot next to a fellow shooter with a range. If they don't like it, then they shouldn't have built there.

When I was looking for some land up north, while out checking on properties we were looking at the piece of land that we ended up buying. We heard a lot of shooting while there. Turns out the guy across the road is an avid shooter and has his own personal range. Hmmmmm .... sold!

[gc70]

Yep, the neighbors keep coming up with different complaints for new lawsuits. Earlier lawsuits were about the typical complaints of noise, danger, etc. The latest lawsuit was about the technicality of whether the doctor was eligible to own machine guns under state law. Hopefully, the neighbors have run out of causes for legal action.

The transplants in their MacMansions sure have funny ideas about 'country living' and are upset when their idyllic expectations don't pan out. Maybe they didn't watch Green Acres carefully enough to realize that things didn't turn out like the city guy expected.

[drcook]

City folks do the same thing to farmers. Here in Ohio, designated agriculture lands have to be declared, otherwise, the same thing happens. A farm has been there for 100/200 years in a family. The neighbor farmer sells his land to a developer. The new city folk that bought the houses in the development can't stand the smell of animals, fertilizer, tractors being run around the clock in planting season, etc etc etc and go file nuisance lawsuits.

I realize it is sarcastic, but I think of folks like that as being Biff and Bambi, you know what I mean. There is now 1 or more generations (in some cases more, due to their families being in the cities) of folks who are so far removed from anything that they just don't have a clue. In fact (and I realize it is not gun related, but is related to this phenomena) when my wife was on the Farm Bureau Education Committee (MK actually grew up in the burbs, and I in the semi-countryish burbs) that she actually dealt with people that didn't relate that steak in the styrofoam, plastic wrap package, with those critters we call "cows".

These are all symptoms of what is happening in our country.

[kraigwy]

When I bought my retirement home I looked for some place I could build a range. Found a possible spot, spent two days in the court house researching convenient and zoning. There was none.

Then talked to a lawyer who thought I was kidding, when he realized I was serous he said go for it, buy the place and build your range, if zoning changes, you'll be grandfathered in.

I then talked to the neighbors, they had no problem, most of them shot on their property.

Fast forward about 15 years. Neighbor sells and new neighbor called the sheriff about my son's shooting. Deputy didn't even talk to me about it. He just told the neighbor I've been shooting a long time, if it bothers her, she needs to move back to town.

I'm 10 miles from town, with a huge range between me and town. I'll be long gone before zoning gets this far out. Wyoming is pretty good about Grandfathering in such doings.

[Fishing_Cabin]

This guy built his range in 1991.

The sport shooting range protection act here in NC was passed in 1997.

It basically states that any range built and in use before it was signed is exempt from future noise complaints etc.

here is the excerpt:

(d) A person who acquires title to real property adversely affected by the use of property with a permanently located and improved sport shooting range constructed and initially operated prior to the time the person acquires title shall not maintain a nuisance action on the basis of noise or noise pollution against the person who owns the range to restrain, enjoin, or impede the use of the range. If there is a substantial change in use of the range after the person acquires title, the person may maintain a nuisance action if the action is brought within one year of the date of a substantial change in use. This section does not prohibit actions for negligence or recklessness in the operation of the range or by a person using the range.

(e) A sport shooting range that is operated and is not in violation of existing law at the time of the enactment of an ordinance and was in existence at least three years prior to the effective date of this Article, shall be permitted to continue in operation even if the operation of the sport shooting range at a later date does not conform to the new ordinance or an amendment to an existing ordinance, provided there has been no substantial change in use. (1997‑465, s. 1.)

Link to the law:

http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislat...ticle_53C.html

While I am not in the same boat. The range I have used since high school, which was in use well before this law was passed had its first complaint the other day. Not noise. But the smoke from burning the brush and brambles we were cleaning up on our range day, since we are working on putting in a proper berm (maybe a small one though depending on money), and perhaps some shooting benches for rifles later also.

Oh, the property here is a little over 100 acres, and the backstop that has been used for years was a cut out spot in an 80 foot tall dirt back. Since we are making minor changes to be safer, we are being careful not to go astray of this law, since it mentions a "substantial change."

[ripnbst]

While I agree this lawsuit is bunk the following statement is just plain incorrect:

"Your property values cannot be depressed if your house is not for sale."

That is just flat wrong.

[oneounceload]

Well that rather sounds like replacing one stupid act with another. It isn't the developer's responsibility to divulge the activities being conducted on surrounding properties.

In many states it IS the responsibility of them to alert you of things like an airport, mining operation or similar. We had a developer build a new subdivision out West on top of an old gun club. He had to disclose that in case future issues with lead contamination arose

[Double Naught Spy]

In many states it IS the responsibility of them to alert you of things like an airport, mining operation or similar. We had a developer build a new subdivision out West on top of an old gun club. He had to disclose that in case future issues with lead contamination arose

Ah, but the gun range is NOT a commerical operation. It is the doctor's little shooting spot in his six acre yard. It would be like notifying all prospective buyers that a neighbor on the street had boys and road their motorcycles sometimes or cooking a lot of BBQ that produced smoke or had pool parties. It isn't like he has a commerical motocross track, a BBQ eatery, or public swimming pool.

[Patriot86]

Some people mow their lawns, some people have a loud backup generator, some people rev their muscle car's engines and some people shoot. DEAL with it. Unless this guy is shooting before 8am or after dark I can't see a legal basis to fight this. People just need to learn to live with each other, we have forgotten way to much as a society how to resolve conflict without litigation. its things like this that lead to communities trying to ban backup generators and leaf blowers.


@ kraigwy: We have that same problem at our families place in Wisconsin, the old neighbors never cared when we shot before. Over the years we did a lot of target shooting and took out something like 20 woodchucks. There are no laws whatsoever that we are in violation of when we shoot, but every time we shoot if it is more than a round or two our one crazy neighbor always thinks we are trying to shoot his horses. The cops pretty much ignore him now. The other neighbor is a yuppie who has enough cars in his football field sized garage to equip the Daytona 500(I really mean that, his garage is about 100 yards long, I scaled it off of Google maps). He calls the cops and they usually come, the officers typically have some vague threat but can't really tell us what laws if any we are supposedly breaking. I think the problem there is even though we are in an unincorporated area, the police department responsible area(because it is sandwiched between two incorporated areas) comes from a nearby town. In the city limits of that town what we are doing would be considered illegal, but we are not in the town limits and it is not illegal.

It all comes down to where you live and moreso the people who live around you and the officers in your community.

[Standing Wolf]

I'd rather listen to people shooting than people driving around in cars with 5,000-watt stereos blasting away at all hours of the night.

[Mr. James]

I bought a house due south of Dulles International Airport, which is in Loudoun County, Virginia. At the time, remarkably few flights out of Dulles passed over my house. Now, they roar by starting at 0600 on weekdays and 0700 on Sundays.

Too effing bad. It never occurred to me to even be upset, let alone to sue. Don't like it? Move.

ETA: Agreed with Standing Wolf

[jimpeel]

Originally Posted by ripnbst

While I agree this lawsuit is bunk the following statement is just plain incorrect:

"Your property values cannot be depressed if your house is not for sale."

That is just flat wrong.

If the property is not for sale the value is static. Any gain or loss is simply paper profit/loss based upon speculation. Until the property is for sale, the price cannot be negotiated.

If properties were depressed by simple causes, such as having a shooting range or airport next door, the property would never have sold at the price is was sold at originally. That price would have been depressed.

The city/county/state does not lower property values for assessment purposes due to noise, or other, complaints. The argument is specious until one tries to sell the property. At that time, and that time only, does blight come to play. Until then, the property is merely lived in as is regardless of value, assessed or otherwise.

[KyJim]

If the property is not for sale the value is static. Any gain or loss is simply paper profit/loss based upon speculation. Until the property is for sale, the price cannot be negotiated.

So, what if you want to mortgage it? What if you need to list personal assets to secure a business loan?

[jimpeel]

Off topic but I will answer.

Mortgage values are determined by recent sales of similar property, taxable assessment, and by professional appraisal. The same goes for business loans.

Back on topic:

Judge dismisses neighbors' lawsuit against owner of machine gun range
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at 3:42 PM

A judge has dismissed a lawsuit by Union County residents who contend that a doctor has no legal right to fire machine guns on a homemade firing range near their properties.

The story was reprinted verbatim the next day as well.

Union County machine gun shooting range suit dismissed
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 12:00 AM

A judge has dismissed a lawsuit by Union County residents who contend that a doctor has no legal right to fire machine guns on a homemade firing range near their properties.

The neighbors have stated that they will appeal.

They should, however, take their case to the developer who, over the months it took to build the Stonegate tract, should have known about these activities. If they were not apprised of this prior to buying they might have a case for failure to disclose the deficiencies.

When I bought my house in Colorado Springs several years ago, I had to sign a form that I was apprised of the fact that there were aircraft which would fly over the property from the military air base. On the day I closed, we walked outside and four Warthogs in a diamond formation flew over the house. The realtor said "They do that fairly often." to which I said "That's the sound of freedom."

Same goes for this doctor.

I loved that house but had to sell. Got 100% of my asking price.

[Double Naught Spy]

They should, however, take their case to the developer who, over the months it took to build the Stonegate tract, should have known about these activities. If they were not apprised of this prior to buying they might have a case for failure to disclose the deficiencies.

Once again, I don't believe this is the case anymore than the developer should have warned residents that some rode motocross on their property in the area or had a riding lawn mower. The doctor's range isn't a commerical operation or part of some federal facility as in your case. I don't believe the developer is able to be held liable for people's legal hobbies that aren't otherwise violating the law. Maybe you can find some examples where it has happened, but so far, I have not.