Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Shooting range rules move ahead

April 16, 2014

SALEM — City council held second reading on four ordinances related to proposed indoor shooting ranges, with at least two of the ordinances now headed to the city Planning Commission for further......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(42)

RickDrummond

Apr-17-14 12:04 PM

Had the Ordinance said Indoor Ranges were permitted at 123 Anytown Street, or that Mr. John Doe is the only person exempt from the laws addressing discharging firearms in the City, then yes, this change would have been done for a specific entity. That's not the case here. Watchdog is correct, anyone prepared to abide by the proposed ordinance can benefit from these changes. As for inspections, initial approvals and inspections will be done by qualified individuals (perhaps the State, but not anyone working for the City) at the applicants cost.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Apr-17-14 9:09 AM

rpm, BINGO.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Apr-17-14 9:08 AM

Alright, ladybug, so hypothetically if there were an ordinance in Salem that says a building can't be taller than 200 feet, and Donald Trump came in and wanted to erect a 1,000 foot building in Salem, the council should ignore that because there aren't 10 people who want to build 1,000 foot buildings?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

KsBug79

Apr-17-14 8:24 AM

Who will monitor the private indoor range to be sure it is built and mantained to code? State & local? Anyone seen that said anywhere?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rpmwwe

Apr-17-14 2:49 AM

I think the root of the problem here has nothing to do with gun phobias or the operation of our local government. Whoever takes advantage of any exemptions made for a residential indoor range will pour more money into the construction of such an added luxury than most people in this city have paid for their entire homes. I think the root of the problem is the resentment of seeing someone who can afford the luxury obtain the luxury.

Personally, I can't afford an indoor range but I wouldn't want other people telling me I can't have something I can afford just because it is something they can't afford themselves.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:48 PM

Good God, here I am actually doing cartwheels that council is finally legislating and not controlling by their own personal views and taking into consideration the entire community and then you come popping in play this dumb game.

Ladybug, I am for commercial indoor shooting ranges but am very hesitate because of residential indoor ranges. My personal view doesn't offer enough to deny those that wish to have one. I am relying on the fact the council will legislate a compliance that will offer fairness to those that want them and for those who do not through protections.

Just because I may not like something personally it doesn't mean I should have the right to deny another who does if I can't give a bad side of it.

IF THE GOOD OUTWEIGHS THE BAD and the legislation address both sides then what is the problem?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:38 PM

Ladybug, one more time, please read rpmwwe comment. It is crystal clear.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:36 PM

"Why have zoning or rules ??"

Ladybug, I asked you this before. Are you saying that once zoning and rules are in place they should be permanent and NEVER be changed again?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:36 PM

In that case look out .

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:35 PM

Yes it will now. But again will they do the same thing next on a different request . Why have zoning or rules ??

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:34 PM

Ladybug, READ rpmwwe comment. Are you missing that?

Council can not deny anyone, anything because they simply want to. That is not how the law works that govern authority of council.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:33 PM

Beer time !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:33 PM

"You also changed something in the zoning code. For one person "

NO they did not. The zoning code will be effective for the entire community.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:32 PM

"You just changed the rule involving discharging of a fire arm with in the city limits."

NO they did not. They are permitting an exemption to the rule. The main law is still in effect.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:31 PM

It's not a concern until someone gets denied and decides to make a big issue out of it .

Oh you did that for him but !

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:29 PM

You just changed the rule involving discharging of a fire arm with in the city limits.

You also changed something in the zoning code. For one person

Know the point again will they do the same thing if one person comes along and makes a special request for ( ? ) down the road ...

Now lets everyone go take a nap now,

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:25 PM

Ladybug, you gave no opinion, you pumped out one line quips with no reasonable meaning behind it.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:25 PM

"Mr.D call it what it is a political back scratch."

Ladybug, how is that a concern? And if it is to you then define why you are seeing it that way.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:23 PM

Calm down !

I state an opinion and you 2 get bent out of shape.

Forget it my god.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:22 PM

No you didn't ladybug. You threw out a one line quip that offered no reasonable argument for council to even consider.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:21 PM

Grant is right and I will add this. Now having said that, to be fair to council, council should not be a sideshow of those that wish to address their concerns face to face. Meaning you better have a “legitimate concern” when you do choose to address council. Or you are just wasting council’s time. Meaning, those one line quips you pumped out is not opposition and have no argument value. Council members are not mind readers.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 2:21 PM

Never said that. Did I ?

Again I just stated an opinion with which both of you missed the point .

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WatchDog

Apr-16-14 2:20 PM

Ladybug, calm down, you don't have to attend a city council meeting to express your concerns. You don't even have to defend whether or not you go or don't go. Attending council meetings are not an order of mandatory demand if you have a concern or wish to voice your concern. Council meetings are video taped and available online or by that neat little technology we have called a "television". That is a benefit for those that do not have the same hours of council. This is 2014. 2014! You can contact our council by telephone or emails. You can voice your concerns on websites, newspapers or blogs. Council monitor those as well, thus, as Councilman Drummond just did.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Apr-16-14 2:12 PM

Has nothing to do with stating your opinion ladybug, you're missing the point. You claim that the government can't act on the desires of one person--which is asinine, of course they can. The point is, this was public knowledge long before a decision was made. If I felt as strongly about something as you seem to about this, who are you to say I wouldn't attend a council meeting to voice my concerns? If they're willing to go through with it for one person, why would you think they wouldn't listen to the concerns of another citizen? If you aren't there to voice those concerns, then how can they hear them? Like someone else said, no one has been able to provide a good reason for council NOT to go through with this legislation anyways.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Apr-16-14 1:41 PM

If everyone on here attended council meetings who expressed an opinion they would be standing out in the hall way.

And when I did live in Salem I attended many meetings, So !!!

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 42 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web