Judge shuts down North Attleboro Gun Club Until Improvements Made

[safetyfirst2125]

What would that do?

Let's say they find out John Smith owns the gun, now what?

If there are cameras they can see if the guy was being a moron or if it was an honest mistake. It happens to most of us, almost everyone here at some point shot over the berm or hit the ground.

There still seems to be debate about whether or not the bullet came from the club.

It could answer this question definitively.

If it did not come from the club, which the bullet entry shape and height strongly suggest, the club is in the clear.

If it did come from some moron at the club the club can deal with him.

 

[crazymjb]

This all hinges on whether or not the bullet came from the club. I love clubs, wish I lived closer to one, as I’m sure many here do. If stray rounds were coming through my windows I’d pretty upset, as I’m sure anyone would.

 

[Dadstoys]

1. It is easily possible for a .45 ACP round to carry 1000 yards. So, we cannot argue that it is impossible based on distance.
2. Just because it is possible for a .45 ACP round to carry the required distance, it doesn't mean that the geometry at the range allows for it from the firing line. Given that the distance is substantially less than 1000 yards, a "skip" might present possibilities that a direct shot would not.
3. Even if the residents are trustworthy, it is plausible that people could have been shooting in the woods between the range and the neighborhood. It's one thing to take your best guess at something, another to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt when plausible explanations are hanging out there unaddressed.
4. The residents might not be trustworthy.

Or someone might have taken a wrist rocket and a bullet .
Since no evidence is required it actually came from the club, volia no more range .
Easy peasy .
They learned they needed a better bullshit job after the hammered brass into the siding deal.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Or someone might have taken a wrist rocket and a bullet .
Since no evidence is required it actually came from the club, volia no more range .
Easy peasy .
They learned they needed a better bullshit job after the hammered brass into the siding deal.

Which is why I say find out if it came from a moron at the club or not, definitively.

 

[Dadstoys]

Which is why I say find out if it came from a moron at the club or not, definitively.

That might not ever be possible to determine.
Even here on a gun board you have conflicting theories on whether or not it's even possible.
It's going to come down to "Feels" in court.
"Your honor , our whole neighborhood lives in terror every day that one of the maniacs at the gun club is going to kill us at any second."
"We don't sleep at night. " We keep our children in the basement for fear of them getting hit by a bullet from the evil range at any moment."

 

[safetyfirst2125]

That might not ever be possible to determine.
Even here on a gun board you have conflicting theories on whether or not it's even possible.
It's going to come down to "Feels" in court.
"Your honor , our whole neighborhood lives in terror every day that one of the maniacs at the gun club is going to kill us at any second."
"We don't sleep at night. " We keep our children in the basement for fear of them getting hit by a bullet from the evil range at any moment."

See if the club management would agree to provide attendance records for the narrow day/ time of shooting. The cops could start there, get a warrant, ballistics check on guns on those handful of people. If they’ve traded / sold 45 cal guns since the incident then trace down the new owners and run ballistics.

Again, if club in the clear, great. If some moron had a ND let the club deal with him. If it was purposeful reckless behavior there could be other consequences but the club by taking action could demonstrate it does not tolerate rule breaking of morons. And it should keep operating.

 

[42!]

There still seems to be debate about whether or not the bullet came from the club.

It could answer this question definitively.

If it did not come from the club, which the bullet entry shape and height strongly suggest, the club is in the clear.

If it did come from some moron at the club the club can deal with him.

This all hinges on whether or not the bullet came from the club. I love clubs, wish I lived closer to one, as I’m sure many here do. If stray rounds were coming through my windows I’d pretty upset, as I’m sure anyone would.

Reality is that absent a confession from the shooter we will never know with absolute certainty. As @Rob Boudrie pointed out, no professional is going to give you an absolute answer. This isn't a criminal thing, it's civil, and the standards of proof and evidence are not as high. So even testimony that there is only a "minimal" posability it came from the club, and minimal is the zero line on the scale, will still be seen as a possibility by the judge.
They are going to need a confession from someone that it was them that either fired the round outside the club or they faked the whole thing.

Absent that confession they are better off taking the same approach, there is no definitive evidence (see this works in both directions) that the bullet came from the club, BUT they understand the concerns of the community and will have their current safety systems and protocols, which are extensive, professionally evaluated and put together a plan to enhance them further.

On hot button topics judges like a solution where neither side can bitch. The club does something about safety without admitting fault, and the plaintiffs get what they say they want, more safety, even if it isn't what they were after, closing the club.

 

[42!]

See if the club management would agree to provide attendance records for the narrow day/ time of shooting. The cops could start there, get a warrant, ballistics check on guns on those handful of people. If they’ve traded / sold 45 cal guns since the incident then trace down the new owners and run ballistics.

Again, if club in the clear, great. If some moron had a ND let the club deal with him. If it was purposeful reckless behavior there could be other consequences but the club by taking action could demonstrate it does not tolerate rule breaking of morons. And it should keep operating.

How exactly do you see this going down. They don't have a narrow time range so the number of people will likely be more than a few. And you can't expect this to work if you just trust that the person didn't fire a 45 that day, or that the 45 they hand over was the one they used. It's been said that this is a fudd club, so 45 is going to be very common. The only way to be sure would be to search and confiscate for testing every home/business/storage of the identified members. Remember, this has no meaning unless you can be 100% certain.

Think this way. You are one of the identified. You have 2 1911s to you name in the MA non-registry, you also have your grandfather's take home wwII 1911 which there has never been any paperwork on. You were shooting 22lr that day. How will you feel about having you home searched and those 3 guns confiscated "for testing". And don't kid yourself, guns go missing while in police custody all the time, particularly when there is little paperwork to support ownership. Now how do you feel about this idea.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

How exactly do you see this going down. They don't have a narrow time range so the number of people will likely be more than a few. And you can't expect this to work if you just trust that the person didn't fire a 45 that day, or that the 45 they hand over was the one they used. It's been said that this is a fudd club, so 45 is going to be very common. The only way to be sure would be to search and confiscate for testing every home/business/storage of the identified members. Remember, this has no meaning unless you can be 100% certain.

Think this way. You are one of the identified. You have 2 1911s to you name in the MA non-registry, you also have your grandfather's take home wwII 1911 which there has never been any paperwork on. You were shooting 22lr that day. How will you feel about having you home searched and those 3 guns confiscated "for testing". And don't kid yourself, guns go missing while in police custody all the time, particularly when there is little paperwork to support ownership. Now how do you feel about this idea.

How would it have gone down if the bullet had killed someone?

 

[Toast]

How would it have gone down if the bullet had killed someone?

Answer 1: It didn't, so who gives a **** about unbounded hypotheticals?

Answer 2: Then it would be a criminal case, so all the rules would be different. Insert answer 1 here.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Answer 1: It didn't, so who gives a **** about unbounded hypotheticals?

Answer 2: Then it would be a criminal case, so all the rules would be different. Insert answer 1 here.

Why isn’t it a criminal case now? If I shot at someone’s house with kids inside, that’s criminal is it not?

I can think of a half dozen charges I’d be facing if I did this.

 

[42!]

How would it have gone down if the bullet had killed someone?

Answer 1: It didn't, so who gives a **** about unbounded hypotheticals?

Answer 2: Then it would be a criminal case, so all the rules would be different. Insert answer 1 here.

Exactly, it would be a criminal case. And they still would not be able to blanket search everyone, no judge is going to sign a search warrant for a dozen people in the hope of finding one specific gun.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Exactly, it would be a criminal case. And they still would not be able to blanket search everyone, no judge is going to sign a search warrant for a dozen people in the hope of finding one specific gun.

It’s MA bro.

 

[42!]

Why isn’t it a criminal case now? If I shot at someone’s house with kids inside, that’s criminal is it not?

I can think of a half dozen charges I’d be facing if I did this.

So far, no criminal complaint has been filed, so it isn't.

And it would only be criminal if they intended to shoot at the house, pretty hard to prove given the situation.

 

[42!]

It’s MA bro.

MA is bad, I know first hand. But even MA Judges have limits. The ACLU would be all over this.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

So far, no criminal complaint has been filed, so it isn't.

And it would only be criminal if they intended to shoot at the house, pretty hard to prove given the situation.

Kinda fishy this isn’t a criminal case.

If I wake up a find a bullet hole in my house there will be a criminal complaint.

 

[Toast]

Why isn’t it a criminal case now? If I shot at someone’s house with kids inside, that’s criminal is it not?

I can think of a half dozen charges I’d be facing if I did this.

Yes, if you went out with the intention of doing so, it would be criminal. But this person didn't, so it's another unbounded hypothetical.

There are measurable differences between "accident", "negligent", and "intentional". It's not that hard to learn them.

Kinda fishy this isn’t a criminal case.

If I wake up a find a bullet hole in my house there will be a criminal complaint.

Any Ken or Karen can complain about anything they wish, but It's extremely dependent upon where a house is located as the whether or not it would be seen as criminal by the authorities. If it was in a downtown metro area, it likely would be so. If it was in an area with widely spaced houses and a lot of wooded areas, perhaps not.

 

[42!]

Kinda fishy this isn’t a criminal case.

If I wake up a find a bullet hole in my house there will be a criminal complaint.

I believe the resident Found the bullet and holes, didn't hear or see a shot. Cops may have just said they didn't see evidence of intent and didn't investigate further. Remember, even if it came from the club or woods they needed to have intended to shoot the house, or been too close to the house. No sound and no one seen doesn't support intent.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Yes, if you went out with the intention of doing so, it would be criminal. But this person didn't, so it's another unbounded hypothetical.

There are measurable differences between "accident", "negligent", and "intentional". It's not that hard to learn them.

We don’t know it wasn’t intentional. If someone wanted to shut down the gun club, it could very well be intentional.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Yes, if you went out with the intention of doing so, it would be criminal. But this person didn't, so it's another unbounded hypothetical.

There are measurable differences between "accident", "negligent", and "intentional". It's not that hard to learn them.


Any Ken or Karen can complain about anything they wish, but It's extremely dependent upon where a house is located as the whether or not it would be seen as criminal by the authorities. If it was in a downtown metro area, it likely would be so. If it was in an area with widely spaced houses and a lot of wooded areas, perhaps not.

Can’t make any determination without investigation and the facts.

As it stands now the club is assumed the source and may end up being shutdown permanently.

Why not support an investigation to find out the facts? There’s nothing to lose.

 

[42!]

We don’t know it wasn’t intentional. If someone wanted to shut down the gun club, it could very well be intentional.

legal system says you have to prove something is, not prove it is not.

 

[42!]

At this point I'm thinking @safetyfirst2125 is just trolling

 

[safetyfirst2125]

At this point I'm thinking @safetyfirst2125 is just trolling

I’m trying to understand why you guys want to lay down and let some Karen shutter gun clubs with bullshit accusations and evidence that defies the laws of physics without a fight.

 

[Road_Clam]

I don't see this as an issue of a PROVEN ballistics impact on a residential dwelling that in fact did originate from the gun club. This was stated as unfounded. I see this now as a anti attack on the club probably stemming primarily from noise complaints rather that rounds leaving the range. Step one find a libtard judge to rule a cease and desist order (easy-peasey in MA). Now the defendents need to hire representation which costs money, period. Meanwhile the club's members do not renew because the club is shut down, club then depletes it's cash reserve equity fighting the tons of anti-gun MA laws and politics, and ultimately the club goes under. Shitbag antis win. I hope for the best in favor of the club continuing to operate, and I hope to be proven totally wrong.

 

[Spartan65]

I don't see this as an issue of a PROVEN ballistics impact on a residential dwelling that in fact did originate from the gun club. This was stated as unfounded. I see this now as a anti attack on the club probably stemming primarily from noise complaints rather that rounds leaving the range. Step one find a libtard judge to rule a cease and desist order (easy-peasey in MA). Now the defendents need to hire representation which costs money, period. Meanwhile the club's members do not renew because the club is shut down, club then depletes it's cash reserve equity fighting the tons of anti-gun MA laws and politics, and ultimately the club goes under. Shitbag antis win. I hope for the best in favor of the club continuing to operate, and I hope to be proven totally wrong.

If the club goes down I’m buying it, splitting off the prime lots that are available and making it the NES members only range.
No stress!

Seriously, on another note. As a former member the club when I was a member had a lot of cash in the bank to fight if needed.

 

[Toast]

We don’t know it wasn’t intentional. If someone wanted to shut down the gun club, it could very well be intentional.

Once again, unbounded hypotheticals are pointless.

Can’t make any determination without investigation and the facts.

As it stands now the club is assumed the source and may end up being shutdown permanently.

Why not support an investigation to find out the facts? There’s nothing to lose.

Why not wear a paper surgical mask while driving alone? Why not stay 12 feet away from anyone? Why not avoid stepping on stepping on sidewalk cracks in deference to your mother's back?

There's nothing to lose

I’m trying to understand why you guys want to lay down and let some Karen shutter gun clubs with bullshit accusations and evidence that defies the laws of physics without a fight.

If that's the case, I will confess to be quite puzzled by your use of the same unbounded worst-case speculation that a typical Karen resorts to, unless you're playing the game of "think like your opponent" very badly.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Once again, unbounded hypotheticals are pointless.


Why not wear a paper surgical mask while driving alone? Why not stay 12 feet away from anyone? Why not avoid stepping on stepping on sidewalk cracks in deference to your mother's back?

There's nothing to lose


If that's the case, I will confess to be quite puzzled by your use of the same unbounded worst-case speculation that a typical Karen resorts to, unless you're playing the game of "think like your opponent" very badly.

Ok, you win. Shutter the club.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Chain of custody comes to mind. The evidence presented is suspect because it was provide by the plaintiff, testimony accepted from the plaintiff's expert, and no independent oversite of the custody of the bullet and assurances that it was not tampered with by the plaintiff's side - nor was the window and screen impounded for evidence and neutral (MSP lab) or dual-sided expert trajectory analysis.

What of the two overlapping circular spalled areas around the bullet hole? There should be three points of interest for trajectorizaton (or, so I made up a new word) - the screen hole; the first layer of glass and the second layer. Did he generate an estimated trajectory from these? If so, what instrumentation did he use? What were his qualifications and documented capability with said instrumentation? Did his report even mention the ballistic coefficient of the found projectile? What about weight of the projectile? Any modeling of possible source distances and direction given bullet weight, bc, and velocity ranges of this caliber? Did he document what modeling program he used?

I've been at a trial where this sort of technical data was presented with experts on both sides, but the issue was sound propagation, not bullet spread. The level of detail both experts went into was very specific, and I got an education on the CADNA and SARNAM acoustic modeling programs. I was supposed to testify but they ran out of time and the opponent agreed to accept the experts description of my part in the process. (I was the trigger man for field testing). It was not just an expert for the plaintiff saying "yeah, it's going to be noisy out there".

Why does the expert step outside his area an use the term "almost certainly?". A true professional would stick to facts like "consistent with". I've read true expert reports with proper wording like "The metal was within all specifications for 1140 hot rolled plate steel with no evidence of heat treating" rather than "the submitted sample was 1140 steel without heat treating". That his how real experts write technical analysis reports.

As to video - FAR easier to dump access logs IF the club has electronically controlled access.

reference to the sound stuff: Recreational gun range noise - the price of freedom: Ingenta Connect

None of this is going to matter unless the club is willing to spend $20K+ for all sorts of experts. And even then, the Mass Marsupials will take the easy out and screw the club in their ruling.

Also, knowing the defense attorney and the way he/we dealt with similar things (but complainants did NOT want to shut down the club), I'm very certain that he'll advise them to remediate the possibilities, put all sorts of restrictions in place and plead for leniency.

That might not ever be possible to determine.
Even here on a gun board you have conflicting theories on whether or not it's even possible.
It's going to come down to "Feels" in court.
"Your honor , our whole neighborhood lives in terror every day that one of the maniacs at the gun club is going to kill us at any second."
"We don't sleep at night. " We keep our children in the basement for fear of them getting hit by a bullet from the evil range at any moment."

Bingo! Feels here will count a lot more than scientific evidence. The judge will rule for the plaintiffs, you can take that to the bank.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

None of this is going to matter unless the club is willing to spend $20K+ for all sorts of experts. And even then, the Mass Marsupials will take the easy out and screw the club in their ruling.

Also, knowing the defense attorney and the way he/we dealt with similar things (but complainants did NOT want to shut down the club), I'm very certain that he'll advise them to remediate the possibilities, put all sorts of restrictions in place and plead for leniency.


Bingo! Feels here will count a lot more than scientific evidence. The judge will rule for the plaintiffs, you can take that to the bank.

So this appears to be a solid way to shutter every gun club in MA.

Rinse repeat.

Enjoy your dry fire drills and trips to NH.

 

[LTCRN]

I'm not too familiar with the area, is it possible someone was shooting off club property but closer to the houses? I know at my club sometimes I can hear people shooting off in the distance, they are obviously not on club property.

Yes! Or more than likely there are hunters who have trespassed on club property without even knowing it, or they do know, and don't give a damn. I recall this incident that was thoroughly investigated by Easton, Stoughton, and MSP Easton, Stoughton police to perform field investigation into bullet that struck home
The outcome was determined that hunters were suspected to be the source. The range was shutdown for more than six months and range safety improvements were made. All outdoor ranges were made "no blue sky" to appease the residents and to minimize the chance of the range being accused of being the source of an errant round again.