Gun and Game Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,251 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
A Superior Court judge has ruled that a group of local residents failed to show that the Metacon Gun Club poses a threat to the environment, eliminating the sole pending allegation of the three lawsuits the group filed four years ago.
"Based on the more credible evidence the court finds that the plaintiff has not met its burden of proof, and therefore finds for the defendant without costs," Superior Court Judge William T. Cremins said in his decision.

More...
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
34,394 Posts
And in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Connecticut, yet, we get a ruling for gun and property owner's rights.

I read the article and the comments readers have posted. The gun club (and the Connecticut State Police firing range adjoining it) have been around for 50 years or more. They long predate the houses that have gone in since around their 140 acres. What this was, pure and simple, was a blatant attempt by the yuppie douchebags who moved into the area to eliminate an activity they see as not politically correct. Instead of trying to use the usual threat-to-the-public-safety tactic the antigunners often try, they were a little more subtle and tried to go after the club on environmental grounds, alleging pollution. That didn't fly.

The judge dismissed three of the four counts the jackasses filed, and ruled against them on the fourth. I hope he also fined them for court costs. One of the letters suggested that the Metacon Gun Club should counterfile for malicious prosecution and nail the environmental group that was the beard for the yuppies right between the eyes. I hope they do. My gun club has had that tactic tried on them by the dimwits who built McMansions adjoining the club's property in the mid-90s. The case didn't even come to trial because we produced correspondence and NY State and NY City DEP records going back more than 10 years showing we'd been working hand in hand with the DEP to make sure we weren't polluting, because the club's land adjoins property belonging to the New York City watershed. The tests showed the water that comes off our property is cleaner and safer than what comes off the development where the plaintiffs live!

Score one for the Good Guys, this time. I hope other gun clubs take the lesson to heart and cooperate with their DEPs instead of fighting them. It may be the best way to preserve shooting ranges in the Northeast for future generations of shooters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,437 Posts
And in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Connecticut, yet, we get a ruling for gun and property owner's rights.

I read the article and the comments readers have posted. The gun club (and the Connecticut State Police firing range adjoining it) have been around for 50 years or more. They long predate the houses that have gone in since around their 140 acres. What this was, pure and simple, was a blatant attempt by the yuppie douchebags who moved into the area to eliminate an activity they see as not politically correct. Instead of trying to use the usual threat-to-the-public-safety tactic the antigunners often try, they were a little more subtle and tried to go after the club on environmental grounds, alleging pollution. That didn't fly.

The judge dismissed three of the four counts the jackasses filed, and ruled against them on the fourth. I hope he also fined them for court costs. One of the letters suggested that the Metacon Gun Club should counterfile for malicious prosecution and nail the environmental group that was the beard for the yuppies right between the eyes. I hope they do. My gun club has had that tactic tried on them by the dimwits who built McMansions adjoining the club's property in the mid-90s. The case didn't even come to trial because we produced correspondence and NY State and NY City DEP records going back more than 10 years showing we'd been working hand in hand with the DEP to make sure we weren't polluting, because the club's land adjoins property belonging to the New York City watershed. The tests showed the water that comes off our property is cleaner and safer than what comes off the development where the plaintiffs live!

Score one for the Good Guys, this time. I hope other gun clubs take the lesson to heart and cooperate with their DEPs instead of fighting them. It may be the best way to preserve shooting ranges in the Northeast for future generations of shooters.
Man, glad I moved out of Connecticut... even when I left in the early 90's, the "yuppies" i.e. Liberals were attempting to shut everything down relating to guns. Thank God (yep, I said it) there was a judge with a head on his shoulders instead of an inflated balloon of liberal ideals.

Ted Kennedy killed more people in Massachusetts with his car than I did with my gun in Connecticut. Apparently, some in Connecticut want to follow Taxachusetts in their anti-gun campaigns... thankfully, not all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
It's the NIMBY mentality with guns as a kicker. Just like people who move next to an airport, farm, or whatever, and then complain. Drives me crazy!!
 

·
Resident Curmudgeon
Joined
·
34,394 Posts
Too right, citylivin. Realtors are by law required to disclose that a property is under a flight path, or within so many feet of a former factory that might be a pollution site, or within X distance of a major highway, or within thus and so distance of a gun range or gun club. If the homeowner chooses to buy, they can't complain they didn't know the range was there after the fact and try to go to law to shut it down. It's an inherent hazard of the property, like casual water on a golf course.

Of course, the Me Generation and the Gen Xers now buying homes don't think rules apply to them and they can just have everything their way. So, with the 'I didn't know it was there' approach blocked, they have to try more creative things. Fortunately, in this case the judge didn't buy their happy horsecrap.

I wonder what the next legal wrinkle the antigunners will invent might turn out to be?
 

·
Gun Toting Boeing Driver
Joined
·
20,708 Posts
Too right, citylivin. Realtors are by law required to disclose that a property is under a flight path, or within so many feet of a former factory that might be a pollution site, or within X distance of a major highway, or within thus and so distance of a gun range or gun club. If the homeowner chooses to buy, they can't complain they didn't know the range was there after the fact and try to go to law to shut it down. It's an inherent hazard of the property, like casual water on a golf course.

Of course, the Me Generation and the Gen Xers now buying homes don't think rules apply to them and they can just have everything their way. So, with the 'I didn't know it was there' approach blocked, they have to try more creative things. Fortunately, in this case the judge didn't buy their happy horsecrap.

I wonder what the next legal wrinkle the antigunners will invent might turn out to be?
+1 and score 1 for the good guys.

The new legal wrinkle is already happening -- they're going after ammo. For lead content, microstamping, registering rounds, and all of the other horse**** that these oxygen thiefs can come up with.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top