ordinance against discharging firearms 500' from ANY residence LET'S HAVE THIS FIXED!

[GunRelated]

Long story short, a friend of mine has neighbors that complain and call the law every time he shoots. There has been multiple LEO's called out to his house for complaints against him from this neighbor. However, this neighbor has no dog in this fight as he is too far from my friends home (we are outside of city limits if this means anything), and the police have made this clear on multiple occasions.

Now here's the question:

The last LEO (Livingston Parish) that was called out, told my friend that he is to close to another neighbor, a neighbor that also shoots and is friends with my friend. The LEO said that there was an "80 year old law that was reinstated" that requires you to be 300 ft from a neighboring dwelling. However, like I said, the dwelling in question is a friend of his, and he has no problem with the shooting, and the shots are not directed at his home, and are in fact directed into a dirt pile.

Where does my friend stand here, legally? Can he shoot, with consent of the neighbor whom is "by law" preventing him from shooting;

 

[carlosd321]

I thought it was 500'

 

[GunRelated]

It may be, I am not 100% sure abut the distance. But the question remains, if the owner of the neighboring residence in question, says it is perfectly fine with him, then does the law still prevent my friend from shooting. Keep in mind, the complainer is not within the minimum distance to even make a complaint, but the LPSO must respond to all calls and if he claims that my friend is shooting, then would he be legally detained for shooting too close to a residence, even though the home in question has given consent to shoot away because he shoots a lot himself.

 

[kenny]

It's 500', and it's horseshit. I'm not sure who's idea it was to start enforcing this law, but we need to vote them out of office, and have it amended or repealed.

Sec. 11-3. - Hunting, discharge of firearms on roads or highways.

(a)
Hunting or the discharge of firearms on roads or highways is hereby prohibited, except by law enforcement officers in performance of their official duties.
(b)
The illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities is the intentional, criminally negligent, discharging of any firearm, or the throwing, placing or other use of any article, liquid, or substance, where it is foreseeable that it may result in death or great bodily harm to humans.
(c)
If the use or discharge of the weapons is within one hundred (100) feet of any parish road, state or public road, or within five hundred (500) feet of any residence, it is presumptive evidence of foreseeable death or that great bodily harm exists.
(d)
Whoever shall violate this section shall be fined no more than five hundred dollars ($500.00), or imprisoned for not more than thirty (30) days, or both.
(Ord. of 10-9-84)
Editor's note—

At the discretion of the editor, an ordinance adopted Oct. 9, 1984, being nonamendatory of the Code, has been included herein as § 11-3

 

[GunRelated]

It's 500', and it's horseshit. I'm not sure who's idea it was to start enforcing this law, but we need to vote them out of office, and have it amended or repealed.

When was this law enforced? Is this a state or parish law?

Also, I am still wondering if it would be legel if the owner of the residence gave his written consent for his allowing of his neighbor (my friend) to shoot if he pleases.

 

[kenny]

I never heard anything of it until six or seven years ago. It's a Parish Ordinance. The State Law is 14:94

PART VI. OFFENSES AFFECTING THE

PUBLIC GENERALLY

SUBPART A. OFFENSES AFFECTING THE PUBLIC SAFETY

1. ILLEGAL CARRYING AND DISCHARGE OF WEAPONS

§94. Illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities

A. Illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities is the intentional or criminally negligent discharging of any firearm, or the throwing, placing, or other use of any article, liquid, or substance, where it is foreseeable that it may result in death or great bodily harm to a human being.

B. Except as provided in Subsection E, whoever commits the crime of illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars, or imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than two years, or both.

C. Except as provided in Subsection E, on a second or subsequent conviction, the offender shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than five years nor more than seven years, without benefit of probation or suspension of sentence.

D. The enhanced penalty upon second and subsequent convictions provided for in Subsection C of this Section shall not be applicable in cases where more than five years have elapsed since the expiration of the maximum sentence, or sentences, of the previous conviction or convictions, and the time of the commission of the last offense for which he has been convicted. The sentence to be imposed in such event shall be the same as may be imposed upon a first conviction.

E. Whoever commits the crime of illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities by discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle located upon a public street or highway, where the intent is to injure, harm, or frighten another human being, shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than five nor more than ten years without benefit of probation or suspension of sentence.

F. Whoever commits the crime of illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities by discharging a firearm while committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or soliciting, coercing, or intimidating another person to commit a crime of violence or violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law, shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less then ten years nor more than twenty years, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. If the firearm used in violation of this Subsection is a machine gun or is equipped with a firearm silencer or muffler, as defined by R.S. 40:1751 and R.S. 40:1781, respectively, the offender shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than twenty years nor more than thirty years, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. Upon a second or subsequent conviction, under this Subsection, such offender shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than twenty years. If the violation of this Subsection, upon second or subsequent conviction, involves the use of a machine gun or a firearm equipped with a firearm silencer or muffler, such offender shall be sentenced to imprisonment for life without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

Amended by Acts 1958, No. 379, §§1, 3; Acts 1960, No. 550, §1; Acts 1966, No. 58, §1; Acts 1968, No. 647, §1; Acts 1972, No. 650, §1; Acts 1991, No. 904, §1; Acts 1992, No. 1015, §1; Acts 1995, No. 748, §1.

 

[GunRelated]

'Preciate the legal statutes, that's definitely a start. This situation hits home for me because I went through a similar situation. I want to help clarify this situation for my friend and make sure that he is or is not legally in the wrong for shooting on his own property without endangering or bothering anyone other than a pesky neighbor that just likes to stir the pot.

Here's another question I forgot to ask. If he is not legally able to shoot on his property, can he shoot his muzzle loader, being that it is not considered a firearm.

 

[kenny]

I'm not an attorney, but it would be my presumption that anything that goes bang will be enough to get the chrome bracelet award. It would greatly depend on the responding officer, and your friend's demeanor.

If you notice the parish ordinance says, "or within five hundred (500) feet of any residence", that would include his own house. It's also a misdemeanor, so guilt would be decided by the judge, like a traffic ticket, if I am not mistaken.

I do not know anyone personally who has been arrested, but I know quite a few who have been accosted.

 

[dantheman]

Long story short , your friend is probably going to lose this battle and it could end up costing him money . Find somewhere else to shoot .

 

[GunRelated]

Well, I shoot in my back yard, and he live right around the corner, so he has a place to shoot anytime he wants. It just burns my ass to know that the little bastard who kept calling the SO out for him shooting has won a battle that he had NO REASON to be a part of in the first place. And I suspect the main reason he called on him, because this is what happened to me, is because he doesn't want my friend to shoot because he thinks he is scaring the deer and other animals away.

 

[carlosd321]

I agree, permission by the neighbor wont matter because its a law and if the officer chooses to enforce it you would lose. I have no doubt that it is a safety issue and thats why they would enforce it, you know how they are about those.

 

[GunRelated]

Looks like I am going to have to get him to talk to an attorney on this one. Can anyone reccomend a good attorney that would know how to handle this?

This has gotten to the point to where it is pissing me off just as much as it is my buddy, out of principle. I can't stand dealing with ignorant people who just cannot mind there own damn business.

My buddy has lived where he is at for as long as I can remember. He has never had an issue with this up until about a year or 2 ago when the pesky neighbor started calling the law on him. He is an easy going guy, doesn't like confrontation, but he is also like myself in the sense of the fact that he is a man of principles, and values. I just hate to see him lose this battle, because I know how it feels when you have people that have nothing else to do but mess with you and call the cops when you shoot your guns. Hell, the ones who called them on me where my own cousins. What the hell is wrong with people these days???

 

[GunRelated]

I agree, permission by the neighbor wont matter because its a law and if the officer chooses to enforce it you would lose. I have no doubt that it is a safety issue and thats why they would enforce it, you know how they are about those.

The LEO's that have come out, all agree with my friend. The last one that came out told him about the 500' law and shut him down. The direction he is shooting is nothing but woods for a LONG WAYS. So, there is no safety concern, especially if the neighbor signs a written consent.

 

[kenny]

I agree, permission by the neighbor wont matter because its a law and if the officer chooses to enforce it you would lose. I have no doubt that it is a safety issue and thats why they would enforce it, you know how they are about those.

It's not a safety issue, it a nuisance issue. We used to shoot from the rear deck of friend's house down into a creek bank. The creek is about a 100' drop over about 75 yards, and the creek bank made a perfect backstop. All of a sudden someone began to complain. The local PD came out and told the property owner no more shooting on his property. This man is in his 70's, and has been shooting on his property for decades.

It came down to complaints, no one was injured, no one had holes in their house, they just complained until the local PD didn't want to deal with it anymore.

I'm not talking about neighborhoods, subdivisions, or trailer parks, I'm talking about people who live on rural acreages.

The ordinance is redundant, and section C is nonsense. If I have my back to a residence, and I'm firing away from it, how is it is presumptive evidence of foreseeable death or that great bodily harm exists?

 

[kenny]

The LEO's that have come out, all agree with my friend. The last one that came out told him about the 500' law and shut him down. The direction he is shooting is nothing but woods for a LONG WAYS. So, there is no safety concern, especially if the neighbor signs a written consent.

I wish you best of luck, but as the ordinance stands, I don't think your friend has much of a chance having anything done.

It would be a great idea to put something together to challenge the ordinance, and put it before the parish council to have it rescinded. The state law is worded so that the intent of the law can be enforced.

 

[carlosd321]

Safety issue or not its all about perception and how the officer chooses to handle it. As you mentioned once they get tired of coming out they will write you if for no other reason to let the court decide. My opinion of course

 

[charlie12]

I don't think the neighbor's ok has anything do do with it. He can't give him the ok to break the law.
Just be glad you don't want to shoot in EBR

 

[GunRelated]

I don't think the neighbor's ok has anything do do with it. He can't give him the ok to break the law.
Just be glad you don't want to shoot in EBR

I would NEVER live in EBR, no offense.

 

[GunRelated]

Safety issue or not its all about perception and how the officer chooses to handle it. As you mentioned once they get tired of coming out they will write you if for no other reason to let the court decide. My opinion of course

This is exactly what has happened. Which is why I am trying to find out the legality aspect of the situation, to make sure he wouldn't be ruled against in court should it ever go there. The LEO's didn't want to make him stop, but they were basically kinda forced to because they kept getting called out for NO REASON.

 

[GunRelated]

I wish you best of luck, but as the ordinance stands, I don't think your friend has much of a chance having anything done.

It would be a great idea to put something together to challenge the ordinance, and put it before the parish council to have it rescinded. The state law is worded so that the intent of the law can be enforced.

I'm all in for something to be done about this. It is very ridiculous.