My position is that people should be safe with a firearm and that we as firearm owners should not turn the public into anti gunners by our actions. I own this. Can you understand this?And yet, you advocate MORE restrictions on people than we have NOW. You yourself said you would be campaigning against Tony shooting on his own property with his own home-built backstop in a direction AWAY from other homes. In a manner already well within Oklahoma state law, AND approved by his local law enforcement. By definition, by your own very words, you think he should be required to go to the significant expense and inconvenience to build a complete range with tall berms, also thus likely affecting his property in a negative way from an aesthetic standpoint.
Just come right out and freaking admit that you think anyone who wants to shoot on their own property should have more restrictions on them than are in place by state law right now. Thus... you are in FAVOR of MORE restriction and MORE regulation on the exercise of firearms practice.
Right? Just be clear about it. If that's your position, then just OWN it.
Would you like your kids or grandkids in those woods when someone starts shooting? As stated in earlier posts there has been no communications with the neighbor so they would have no way of knowing about the shooting is to start until it does. kids being kids. They might be in the woods? As a parent, I would find this unacceptable...… and would find a way to stop it. I think reasonable humans woiuld do the same. My kid's safety outweighs gun rights.
As the poster knows about safety …. Just wants a cheap backstop.... Whatdoes this say?
Where is common sense?