Beaufort County council advances ordinance banning firearm discharge within 500 feet of structures on first reading

Beaufort County Council moved forward on a local ordinance that would ban the discharge of firearms within 500 feet of structures in unincorporated areas, approving the measure on first reading by roll call 7–4.

The ordinance, introduced as 2026/o6, would add section 54-8 to the county code to make it unlawful to discharge a firearm within 500 feet of residences, schools and public parks and would establish penalties for violations. County staff said the proposal originated from neighborhood complaints about recurring gunfire near homes and schools and that the measure is intended to improve public safety.

County legal staff explained the drafting process and the rationale for the 500-foot buffer. "Based upon discussions with [the sheriff's office], we agreed to put forth an ordinance where we would prohibit the discharge of firearms 500 feet from the buildings to include residences, schools, public parks," said county counsel during the presentation. Staff said an initial 1,000-foot draft was pared back after law-enforcement review to increase enforceability.

Council debate centered on enforceability and unintended impacts on lawful recreational shooting. Several members urged a narrower or negligence-focused standard tied to the state statute addressing negligent discharge (cited in committee discussions as 16-23-440). One councilor who had drafted alternative language said a negligence standard would better target truly dangerous conduct and avoid creating a "feel-good" ordinance that is difficult to enforce.

Supporters stressed an urgent public-safety need. A council member described a case where a bullet entered a residence and remained lodged in framing, illustrating the potential harm to families: "We need something to actually address this issue," the councilor said. Others warned that a 500-foot rule could interfere with longstanding property uses and noted portions of the incidents involved adjacent municipal jurisdictions or berm-protected shooting areas.

After questions for county counsel and law-enforcement advisors and an extended public-safety discussion, council approved first reading on a roll-call vote. The first-reading vote was recorded 7 yes, 4 no (Yes: Dawson, Brown, Passamont, McGowan, Glover, Tabernick, Howard; No: Reid, Lawson, Cunningham, Bartholomew). The ordinance will return for second and third readings, at which time language can be amended.

Council did not take final action; the ordinance remains subject to additional committee input and public hearings before final adoption.