Got in trouble while shooting!!

[Ragnarok Forge]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am enjoying this thread immensely.  It is a great representation of the cross section of people in our sport.  Lots of I do it anyways, some are you nuts it's a law obey it, some cop frustration and some cop love.  I think we all agree that everyone who is shooting should do so safely and I would bet that 99% of us do. The wife accidentally fired a shot into the neighbors yard right after she got her first longbow.  He is my County Sherriff neighbor.  He came out and hollered over the fence, Hey that is dangerous. Then threw her arrow back. I apologized and explained what happened.  He laughed and life moved on.  Lessons learned. I have a great neighbor, and don't let the wife shoot her new longbow anywhere but at a range!  I have never missed the target in my yard and have a large backstop.  We both quit shooting in the yard. I moved the target into my garage and now shoot it for form in bad weather.  The only thing I will hit if I miss now is my tackle boxes.

You have to balance the good and the bad, calculate the risks and then decide for your self if the situation is safe.  For me,  shooting in the yard is totally safe.  By now it would be for the wife as well.  We just choose to go to the local archery shop or club range instead.

[Chris Shelton]

Originally posted by TimRadke:
I hesitate to write this and keep the thread going, but what is there to raise "holly" hell about?  An officer who gave a verbal warning instead of a citation and a confiscated bow?  Or a law (ordinance) created to protect people due to proximity?  If the ordinance should be changed then work to change it, and raising hell won't get that done.  

And I'm not certain I understand the point of your Maryland Warden story... Are you upset that the Warden wasn't 100% certain on the regulations, so he went to his truck and checked it out to make sure he did his job properly, and then acknowledged that you were right and left you alone without taking any enforcent action?  I'd think that's what we'd all want him to do if he wasn't positive about a regulation...

[Uncle Buck]

just my 2 cents: get involved in local government or move to someplace more agreeable. Sadly, I used to live in a town where by law, every homeowner is supposed to keep a firearm in their house, but I was warned about "brandishing a weapon"(shooting or even carrying my bow in the back yard) I was in a position to move to the next county and did. Its a shame thier arent more community ranges like they used to have 40 or so years ago.

[beaver#1]

easy fix.  move out of the city

[OkKeith]

Wow…

We are all still missing the point of why a lot of this thread is so hypocritical!

I’m sure Matthew will find out if it is OK for him to shoot in his yard or not. That’s not my concern. What still bothers me is how some folks still continue to have an “I’ll do what I want, even if it IS against the law” attitude.

It has nothing to do with questioning odd ordinances, personal property rights or living where life is freer. If we want to claim the moral high ground on things such as what kind of bows we shoot, how far we shoot them and how we hunt (all legal means even if we don’t like them) ; shouldn’t we stay away from the idea of violating laws, even if we don’t like them?

We choose to hunt with a tool that limits our effective range. We choose to hunt farther in, farther up or farther out because there are fewer people there. We use wood arrows or at least real feathers because of the greater challenge. We hunt on the ground or in a tree but get as close as we can because it is more difficult. As archers we hold ourselves to a “code”. We purposefully choose the more difficult path that is traditional archery.

Then we whine because we can’t practice without putting out any effort. We cry about having to follow the rules like everybody else. We decide we shouldn’t have to be held to the same minimum standards as other hunters. We tell guys to never mind the laws, they shouldn’t apply to us, we are better than all the others.

I’m gonna find me the fastest compound I can; shoot the lightest arrows in existence with the funkiest mechanical broad-head available; and kill a deer at 60 yards over a one ton pile of corn from a tree stand with air conditioning built in. I don’t want to hear a single word about ethics and all that crap because it is all legal. Unlike shooting a bow in the city limits where I live.

OkKeith

[Chris Shelton]

TO me this is really a simple matter!  Laid out in front of our eyes a simple statement is made within one of the greatest documents known to man.  The Declaration of Independence says everyman is created equal.  We each were born with civil rights or liberties, one of those liberties and probably the most important one is the "pursuit of happiness".  From a legal standpoint, this innocent teacher from Wisconsin is just shooting his traditional bow in his backyard.  Something I would assume brings great joy to his life . . .

   I swear I should be a lawyer, lol.  Got a bit carried away.  HOWEVER in all seriousness, isn't it our civil duties to make sure the federal and state governments are not treating us unjustly. What type of country is this if a guy can't shoot a bow in his backyard as long as it is done in a safe and reasonable manner.  Last time I checked the founding fathers granted us the right to bear arms, probably due to the way the British acted after the battle of Lexington(the searched for the militias arms storage, to disarm the opposing forces).  I really don't want to get all second amendmenty on you guys, but really the second amendment is set in place for American citizens to keep themselves in practice in case the time comes that this country should have to defend itself against opposition.  So the real question is this, do you guys think the colonists said to themselves, "you know what, I probably shouldn't be dumping this tea into the harbor?"  No they just did it.  I know, I know its only a bow, but all restrictions upon our freedoms start somewhere, and it sure ain't gonna start big, its gonna start small, with a school teacher who likes to shoot in his backyard.  

{insert flag waving gremlin here(lol)}

[OkKeith]

Why is it, that when someone wants to make a point that their personal view should be shared by everyone else, they invoke the Declaration of Independence? My personal point of view is that doing this cheapens a monumental effort to throw off the weight of despotism and the effort to create a new kind of life for individuals that fought every day just to live.

What the document says is that there are,
 “…certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

It doesn’t say that every time we don’t like a law we wave the document around in an effort to get our way.

It goes on to say,
“That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

 Most people don’t shoot bows in their yard. Most people want to feel safe in their homes. I think it would be great to shoot bows in my yard; I would LOVE to shoot my guns in the yard. Should I be able to do that just because the Declaration of Independence says I have a right to be happy? Does my right to be happy trump all my neighbor’s rights to be happy and feel safe?

Here is another quote from the document that seems to be wielded like a club so often,
“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;”

Maybe I’m getting too wound up in this. The poor guy was simply perplexed about what the deal was with being able to shoot in his yard one day, but not the next. I’m just disappointed in the direction this post has gone and only wanted folks to recognize the dichotomy in what has been said before and is being said now. Those that get it, get it; those that don’t won’t.

OkKeith

[Chris Shelton]

Originally posted by OkKeith:

What the document says is that there are,
 “…certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

It doesn’t say that every time we don’t like a law we wave the document around in an effort to get our way.

Actually thats kinda funny, the Declaration says almost exactly that-

. . ." while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

I already know why I am fired up, been watching "America the story of us", lol

[OkKeith]

Chris,

I don't want this to devolve into one of those threads that gets pulled and everyone is ashamed to have been a part of.

Do you really think not being able to shoot a bow in the city limits is "...absolute Despotism," really?

The point I was trying to make was that there are lots of posts on this site claiming that one thing or another is "unethical", even if it is legal. But, it seems to be OK to break the law, or at least claim ignorance of it, when it doesn't suit us. It has nothing to do with righteous civil disobedience or railing against tyranny.  To imply that it does, cheapens the real issues, but that’s just my own opinion.

The world is full of people looking out for their own happiness at the cost of everyone else’s. When these people are in positions of power, THAT is despotism. You are free to pursue your happiness, but if attaining that happiness puts others at risk or is simply in violation of the law, you’re out of luck. You are also free to pursue the changing of laws, but when it doesn’t go your way (and in this issue, I’m betting it won’t) throwing a fit and waving the Declaration or the Constitution like a club is not only unseemly, it makes the rest of us look bad. Then again, that’s just more of my opinion.

OkKeith

I just found out that if I go all the way to my neighbors swing set I can get a point on distance to my target, that is 54 yards. As long as I am not shooting on or across city property and my neighbor doesn't mind my trespassing, it is perfectly legal.  Is it safe? Not if he drags his bow out and wants to shoot with me. Even though my back stop is a tall two stall garage he could get a funny deflection if he lands ten yards short of the target. Actually the only person I have ever seen shooting without a good back stop is our local head police officer.  I heard that he actually lost an arrow in his neighbors grass. As always it is not so much the act as to just how one is doing it. Throwing a blanket over everyone just because of one person that gets reckless, is socialistic tyranny.
   Last night a twenty foot chunk from the top of one my poplars broke off. It may have hit my other neighbors garage and landed in the middle of the drive, thirty feet away from the tree. There is no damage, but what does that say about the reckless use of trees.

[FrankM]

I think that we should all use common sense here. If it could be unsafe, we shouldn't do it. If it seems safe, discuss it with the city, and act accordingly. If they're insistent on their position, have to find a range. No reason to start a Revolution over it.  

[Keefer]

Got the answer here,
 Wait till Wife leaves to go shopping ,open all doors throughout the house then set up targets and have all the fun you want...Make sure you keep wall patch,extra light switchs and cover plates and paint to match each room just in case you miss the target....Oh almost forgot one important thing here...Men make sure wife calls home at least 10 min. before she returns so you can have all the toys put away before she comes in the door...  

[Chris Shelton]

Originally posted by OkKeith:
The world is full of people looking out for their own happiness at the cost of everyone else’s. When these people are in positions of power, THAT is despotism.

Here is where it gets interesting.  Whomever made this ordinance probably didn't do it for the well being of everyone else, it was probably for their own happiness. Despotism?  that is a reach, it would be the same exact thing in the opposite direction.  Such as the Maryland proposal to make the maximum yardage from a structure to be 300 yards instead of 150!  Who does that make happy?  

To me a simple solution would be for the state of Wisconsin to make a shooter qualification type deal, like a gun registration, and then anyone with that safety card would be able to shoot in their backyard.  But for everyone to just not be allowed, thats bull!

Lawmakers I tell ya, they never think outside the box, it seems that there is no gray area.  It is always you can or can not do something.  Drives me crazy

[OkKeith]

Keith,

Yeoow! I'm not sure I could clean my mess up that fast. I have bad visions of alum. arrows in wall sockets. Her finding me passed out, laying on the carpet, my hair smoking and the melted plastic nock dripping on the floor.

Sounds like it might work though.

OkKeith

[rastaman]

Tonight I was out shooting my recurve and the village cop stops me and tells me I have to quit and that I can not shoot anymore due to village rules.  
  What would you do?
Go ask respectfully to see the "village rules". If they have changed, see what can be done, using the system, to change them to where you can shoot.
If that doesn't work, take over the village and make your own rules!  Just kidding, of course, on the last sentence.    
Good posts and good debate!

[Ssamac]

I can shoot in my yard. I can even hunt there. Cops never bothered me. In fact one of them stops and takes a few shots. He's a wheelbow shooter and gets a kick out of shooting trad. He also stinks at it btw. LOL.

Sometimes if there is an ordinance, it is not enforced until someone complains. Not necessarily a neighbor, btw, but could be somewhere else in town. Then the ordinance becomes a fairness issue and if they enforce it on first street they also have to enforce it on 10th street. Or maybe they had a problem, someone shooting outside of his property. Or maybe the cop's boss came down on him for not enforcing some other statute like burning and now he has to be careful to enforce them all. If there is a valid statute, just because you were lucky and it was not enforced, at some point it will be. Which is why I like living outside of the town proper.

Suggestion made to set up a range in your garage or basement is a great one. In the winter or on a rainy day it's awfully nice to pick up the bow and fling a few in your slippers. The fence idea is also good, but you can hear arrows hit the target so that may be a lot of trouble for nothing. Also you are now deliberately trying to avoid the law. Another possibility is shooting thru an open window, (which I have to confess I have done - desperation), but you have the noise issue there too. I used an old lazy boy on a roller and it was pretty quiet however. I'd wheel it outside and shoot. Weird some things we do isn't it?

I had an old trailer in town once which I used to reload and shoot in. I took down the bedroom partition and shot one end to the other. 66' range. Not bad. Straw bales up the wall for a backstop.

Gets weirder the longer you go. The more laws they pass the weirder people get.

You could also go to town and see if you can get permission or a change to the statute. Get other shooters together and try. Where do they shoot? Bet one has a range.

Good luck
Sad day I would say.

sam

[Bonebuster]

Unfortunately, "common sense" is becoming less common everyday.

I am fortunate that I am able to shoot firearms and bows in my yard.(a bow and a firearm are classified the same) The law requires 150 yards
(450') from an occupied dwelling. This distance was doubled from 150' about ten years ago. Whats to say, that suddenly "someone" decides that this minimum distance is no longer safe? Suddenly, the law says I must be 500 yards away to be safe. Nothing has changed, except the law...for WHATEVER reason. Do I just accept the fact, that I can no longer step into my yard and shoot at dandelions with my bow? Suddenly it is ILLEGAL for me to shoot at my 3-D deer from my deck? I have done NOTHING wrong, but now part of my lifestyle has become illegal. With all due respect to law enforcement, I`m gonna keep shooting dandelions.

Question some laws?...you bet!!!

Chances are, wisconsinteacher is going to find that it is indeed, illegal, for him to shoot his bow, safely, quietly, and happily in his backyard.  

[Mr.Vic]

  some of the replies.. I bet our forefathers are laughing their hair (PC word) off.

[Ragnarok Forge]

Heres some food for thought.  We have so many laws that even the police selectively enforce them.  Perhaps we need less laws!  The level of beauraucracy we live under is pendulous and ridiculous!  The government is trying to save everyone from themselves.  How about instead we just hold everyone accountable for their actions instead.  

It is every citizens right to choose to disobey the law.  It is the right of a law enforcement office to site you for it, and the judge and two attorneys to help decide who is right. That is how the system works.

Anyone here drive?  Anyone of you wants to tell me you have never driven faster than the speed limit? We all have!  We all selectively break laws when we find them inconvenient. To me there is no difference between speeding which kills way more people than all weapons combined in this country and shooting a bow in your back yard when the law says you can't. With the exception that your speeding is way more dangerous to you and a lot more people than shooting your bow.  

When enough people break a law often enough, they eventually become useless and either go away or become totally unenforced.  For example the speed limit in Washington State is now 70 mph on major highways.  Used to be 55 mph.  Guess what.  Everyone didn't give a rats *** about that law and the state looked at it and decided it was better to raise the speed limit and enhance traffic movement while reducing the lawsuits and complaints from the citizens.

Passive disobedience is quite simply the singly most American act a citizen can perform with voting, and military service a very close second and, nonpassive disobedience close behind that.  Note : Boston Tea Party and the Revolutionary War are good examples of non-passive disobedience to a sovereign government.  They are why we exist as a nation  

Some folks toe the line, others don't.  You may not like it, but if they are not damaging others then they have the right to do so.  Each individual chooses what is ethical for them and no one else can force their views on them.  Welcome to living in a free country.  You don't have to like it, but you do have to accept it. Doing otherwise is forcing your views on others and taking away their rights.  That way leads to despotism and in this world communism. Having seen both a close range on the back side of a gun.  Neither one is a good option for people in general.

I can break the law, it is my right.  The government has the right to punish me when caught violating those laws.  It it part and parcel of being American.  I tend to obey the law.  I also tend to forget and speed once in a while.  I am not a horrible citizen, but also not a perfect one. Just like freedom of speech includes the right to speak, freedom to keep and bear arms includes the rightful use and practice with those arms.  If you don't like hearing the constitution then move to a communist country they don't have one.  It is the basis of every law, rule, and regulation we have.  Without it we would be just like the rest of the world and having seen a lot of it personally, I can comfortably sat that would suck!

Americans seem to have forgotten that a law being enacted without a vote of the full people is only a law if the people choose to obey it.  Government agencys make all sorts of "laws" without a vote.  They are called ordinances, statutes, etc... Guess what, a good lawyer can beat all or most of them depending on the municipality.  You know why.  They are not laws!  They were not enacted by the people, but by bureucrats who do not have the publics best interest in mind. I have quite a bit of experience in this having worked for a City for several years now.  We have a Pot Bellied Pig law.  No one had a pot bellied pig, no one has a pot bellied pig, no records of their every being a pot bellied pig here.  Yet for no apparent reason we have a pot bellied pig law.  We just implimented a chicken and no roosters ordinance.  It is causing great amusement among the citizens and city hall employees and is very hard to explain with a straight face.  Stupid law?  Yep, silly? Yep, implimented by bearucrats? yep.

[Bonebuster]

Ragnarok Forge...A LONG,LOUD,...AMEN!!!