Do you think it is a citizen's right to shoot in one's yard as much as one wants?

Property rights to do as you please are dependent on population density.

If you look at a lot of the new housing developments in the suburbs, the homes are packed together like sardines. Barely enough space to park a car in the driveway, and patio that consumes the majority of space in the tiny backyard.
No, in that situation you definitely do not have the right to shoot whatever you want.

Now if you have enough space on your property to race cars on a track you can start talking about rights. But even then there might be plenty of reasonable laws that apply for the safety of your neighbors and avoiding excessively disturbing the neighborhood. I saw a police officer show up to someone's property on television and told the property owner complaints had been made by a neighbor and that the property owner could not shoot at a metal storage drum because there was a danger the bullet might deflect off it. The officer said it was very dangerous, and that he would have to shoot through bails of straw with a backing.

 

do you know why suppressors were put on the unconstitutional 1934 NFA list of things they tried to ban with the idiotic (under the economics of the time) 200 dollar tax?

 

Just down the road for me where several of my friends live is a private little community that is all dirt roads.

Even though I live outside of the city limits I have fairly close neighbors next to me so I'm limited to air guns in my yard.

But in this little community I spoke of people shoot guns there all the time and sometimes I even hear fully automatic.

No one really cares as long as you're not shooting at stupid hours and your bullets stay on your own land.

But it will piss the neighbors off if you start poaching deer even though someone needs to because there are far too many.

 

I'm not sure. I'd love to know, what can you tell me?

 

back then, there was an alleged problem with poaching deer and sometimes cows. suppressors-were SOMETIMES used for that. Game wardens would arrest some guy for shooting a deer out of season and he would be tried where-the county court in front of his neighbors. lots of jury nullification. same with people shooting cows-lots of poor folk didn't feel too bad about a guy who was out of work whacking a cow to feed his family and the locally elected judges weren't keen to send someone to jail. but now, poor people couldn't pay 200 dollars for a 5 dollar suppressor tax. and if they had an unregistered suppressor the game warden could drag them to the big city where the federal district courts were located and the juries were usually no where near from the rural areas.

 

That's ridiculous but it makes sense. This air gun I just bought has a suppressor on the end of a threaded muzzle and also included with this air gun was a pistol barrel which also has a threaded muzzle with a cap over it. The cap can come off and the suppressor is also threaded to fit both muzzles, but due to stupid us laws about suppressors the suppressor is supposed to be permanently affixed to the muzzle with red thread lock.

If you buy this same exact air gun in Europe the suppressor easily comes off of the muzzle and is interchangeable.

Our suppressor laws are so idiotic that they even apply to air guns.

Needless to say most savvy poachers either disregard the law and use a suppressor or they use a bow or a crossbow.

Ironically I have heard it reported that this air gun suppressor would work perfectly on a 22 caliber firearm that had the appropriate threaded muzzle but of course you ought to have the appropriate license and pay the tax stamp or that would be highly illegal.

There is even a fitting that can turn an oil filter into an effective firearm suppressor but again that would be very much illegal without the proper permit and tax stamp

 

this is a topic I know a lot about. some use crossbows on extensive private lands but not on public lands or suburban areas because (having done this dozens of times) deer shot with arrows usually don't drop in their tracks and if you are poaching the last thing you want to do is to be walking around public areas with a crossbow looking for a deer that you shot illegally. MOST poaching involves jacklighting deer and shooting them in the head with a subsonic 22 rifle. almost impossible to track a single 22 shot unless you are within a 150 yards or so. I lived in Ithaca NY many years ago, and during sweet corn season, a friend of mine-a Tompkins County Deputy said they found lots of deer on the road-and many of them had 22 holes in their heads. farmers would whack the deer and make it look like road kill. the Sheriff's Dept, had a good system there-if the deputy found a fresh road kill (or shot) deer, he'd take it to the local butcher. The citizens could put their name on a list and if the venison was still good, the deer would be processed, the next guy on the list called, he'd paid (I think it was 25 bucks then) and get the deer. stuff a bit ripe would go to the pound for the dogs

 

Let's also remember some people do not even have the right to repair a car in their own driveway. Home Owner's Associations in some areas can be very tough.
Some cities even have this as an ordinance.

 

One time I was travelling far out away from the city. I knew I had reached a "rural area" when I saw a sign posted that read "Shooting Prohibited". The presence of the sign suggested that people needed to be told that shooting was not permitted, because otherwise they might feel it was okay.
For someone raised in the suburbs or the city, seeing such a sign can be bizarre.
There were still homes around but also a lot of big vacant properties of land and forested area. I've seen people out there do big burns to clear fallen debris on their property. Big piles of burning tree stumps and branches 7 feet high and 9 feet wide. Of course burns are not permitted during the dry time of the year.

 

I find a very ironic when people move into a homeowners association neighborhood and buy a house and then they complain when they are held to the standards that were on the contract before they bought the property.

I would never buy in an HOA.

 

All the signs out in the county here tend to look like Swiss cheese. Lol, but I don't know nothing about it

 

Sounds to me, like you need to get your "ears" checked, since this is not "whining," at all (assuming that you know the meaning of that word). I'd actually already summed up my point, at the end of that post: that this really showed Abbott's priorities. Since that was apparently not clear enough, for you, I will further simplify it.

My impression-- before I'd realized that the Uvalde families had actually let the Governor know that his presence was not wanted-- was that he had little sympathy for the actual people of his state, who were slaughtered with the weapons which he supports being easily accessible to nearly all, but cares much more about certain conservative ideals, and icons. I was not saying that, as a compliment. And this was not a whine-- it was an "appraisal." Do you require more clarification, to understand the difference between those two things?

 

Some city people may be surprised to know that in the rural areas in some states "Trespassers may be shot" signs are commonplace and posted around private property.

I mean where it seems like 50 percent of properties have that sign up.

 

The best sign I saw said.... "Warning trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again"... Of course you can't legally do that but you can legally put up that sign.

Second place runner up? " Hippity hoppity, hop your ass up off my property"

 

Texas is a "2d Amendment Sanctuary State". One of the provisions of that is that suppressors which are manufactured in Texas of wholly Texas parts, can be sold without complying with all the federal falderall of a Class III license, tax stamp, etc. Initially, FFL's were afraid to sell them for fear of losing their federallly issued FFL's. Now there are many companies selling suppressors that don't sell guns and are not afraid of losing their FFL.

TEXAS!!! WHERE FREEDOM LIVES!!!

 

what was the point of invoking Scalia?

 

I like=Forget the Dog, Beware of Owner or

those found here tonight will be found here tomorrow morning

 

No. If the law was enforced he would not be here. Second illegal entry is a felony. So is the third and the fourth.
If the law was enforced he would be in prison. If the border was secure, he would be in Mexico.

 

In California if you fire a warning shot you most likely will be charged with illegal discharge of a firearm depending on how "woke" the DA is.
So to cover your ass you have to shoot the poor perp instead of letting him ponder the error of his ways.

 

It depends on where you are. I'm relatively rural - "out in the county" as we say in my neck of the woods. I have a 6 acre parcel which includes my own shooting range; I use it regularly and there's never been any drama. Within the city limits you'll be cited, at the very least.

I had a friend (Steve) who purchased an AK47 during the 90s when it became clear Clinton was going to sign a ban on such weapons, figuring the gun would appreciate once Slick Willie signed the bill into law. He made a road trip out of it, purchased the weapon & spent the night at a friend's house in the Seattle area. It was a nice home overlooking Lake Washington. Late that night, Steve's host persuaded him to "take the AK for a spin." They each fired a single round over the lake. The lady of the house was none too amused; she came storming out onto the deck and screamed at them. Which meant the neighbors heard two gunshots, followed by a woman screaming. About 10 minutes later, Steve ran out to his car for his smokes. The instant he stepped off the porch he was blinded by spotlights, followed by "DON'T MOVE!! HANDS IN THE AIR!! FACE DOWN ON THE GROUND!!" thru a bullhorn. Steve spent the night in jail, paid a hefty fine & the AK was confiscated. Not much of an investment for him, as it turned out.

 

There was a liberal enclave in the early 2000s - Portland or Austin or someplace like that, where it became something of a fashion statement to post a sign in your yard proclaiming "This Home Is A Gun Free Zone." The fad didn't last long, after a number of those properties were targeted by enterprising members of the criminal element.

Some people are devoid of common sense until they get bitch-slapped by it.

 

Non sequitur. My post had been about the Governor's not offering condolences to the victims. Or is it your argument that it was right of him to act callously towards those victim's families, because the perpetrator shouldn't have been there?

If the dog didn't stop to poop, they say, he woulda caught the rabbit. Whatever didn't happen, does not change the facts of what did. People were murdered, randomly. Do you not understand the mere human decency, in acknowledging the tragedy, to those grieving over it?

 

Because the death of that person, who did not die tragically young, because of senseless gun violence, and who was not a resident of Abbott's state, did elicit the Governor's "condolences." Therefore, it shows that Abbott is not just clueless, as to the appropriate social expressions of sympathy; he apparently just chose to ignore them, for the victimized families of immigrants. As I said, this starkly showed Abbott's sentiments, as they indicated his overall personal disposition, and philosophical world view.

 

are you claiming Abbot did not show any sorrow over the shootings? I posted an article that shows he did. this is nothing more than petty hatred of a governor whose politics vexes the left.

 

Please stop assuming that you can read my thoughts, and thereby know my character. This was the information that I had heard: that the Governor had not offered any condolences to the families, not expressed any sympathy for their loss, but had only focused on the possibly illegal immigrant status of those involved. If I had heard wrong, you do not need to accuse me of "petty hatred." I hope this will not too greatly disillusion or disappoint you but, incredible as this may seem, I don't see, every single thing that you post. Therefore, your statement that you "posted an article that shows he did (show sorrow)," does not mean much. But here's a combination suggestion/request: how about providing me with a link to your post, if it doesn't interfere too much with your throwing baseless, personal insults at me?