Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Firearms Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee amends firearms-discharge ordinance, moves amended civil option to council
Summary
After extended debate over civil versus criminal enforcement, the committee amended the civil draft — deleting a 25-acre exclusion, setting fines 'up to $500' per violation, and adding a firearms-safety-course element — and voted to send both civil and criminal drafts to county council for first reading, with the civil option advanced as the committee preference.
The committee debated competing drafts to address unlawful discharges of firearms in unincorporated Beaufort County and voted without objection to move an amended civil-penalty ordinance to county council for first reading.
Staff presented two drafts for item 9c: a criminal ordinance that included distance-based limits (for example, a 500-foot buffer near schools and playgrounds) and a civil-penalty alternative aimed at negligent or careless discharges likely to cause injury or property damage. The civil draft, modeled on other counties, originally proposed escalating fines ($200, $300, $500) and several exclusions, including a landowner exemption tied to a 25-acre threshold.
Committee members and staff spent much of the discussion on enforcement logistics and appropriate penalties. The sheriff’s office told the committee deputies respond to all shots-fired calls, document incidents and, when no criminal violation is found, hand matters to code enforcement for civil follow-up. Code enforcement staff cautioned that civil enforcement still requires evidence-gathering and that code officers lack law-enforcement protective equipment, so coordinated responses would be necessary.
Council member Joe moved a set of amendments that removed the paragraph creating the 25-acre exclusion, set civil fines to be up to $500 per violation (the magistrate court maximum), and added a requirement for a firearms-safety course to be included in sentencing or enforcement procedures; a colleague seconded the amendment and the committee accepted the change without objection. Joe said the stronger penalty and safety training would create greater deterrence: "When you do something ignorant like this ... that gun is being discharged in an inappropriate setting," he said, arguing for stiffer deterrents and an educational component.
County counsel and staff cautioned the committee that magistrate courts are given discretion on fines and that making the penalty "up to $500" preserves judicial discretion while allowing stronger enforcement where warranted. Several members said they preferred the magistrate-discretion approach; others urged a firm mandatory fine. The agreed language leaves magistrates the ability to set the appropriate penalty up to the $500 limit and directs staff to draft the firearms-safety-course element into the enforcement framework.
Outcome: By unanimous no-objection voice action the committee adopted the amendments and agreed to forward the amended civil ordinance to county council for first reading; staff said both the criminal and civil drafts will be carried to council, with the committee’s amended civil draft presented as the committee-preferred approach.
What’s next: Staff will prepare the amended civil ordinance language (including the firearms-safety-course provision) for the council packet and present both drafts to council for first reading and further action.
