Loudoun Stray Bullet Ordinance Draws Ire Of Gun Rights Advocates

LEESBURG, VA — The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors voted Wednesday night to amend its county ordinance to address a growing number of stray bullets that have struck homes or landed in adjacent properties in the county. The amended ordinance is expected to make it easier to hold accountable people who fire rounds onto other people's property. Loudoun has seen at least 20 cases of wayward gunfire in recent years, where bullets have landed in other people's property and, in a few instances, struck people.

In the 6-3 vote, the Board of Supervisors updated the county's code to include a 100-yard discharge ban from "all occupied structures" and to adopt an amendment that will make it a violation for projectiles to leave the boundaries of a property unless permission has been given by the adjacent property owner.

Supervisor Ron Meyer, who voted for the changes, noted at the meeting that in more than 20 recent instances of the discharge from firearms in the county, people have been charged in those cases but none of them has been convicted. Meyer, Republican supervisor for the Broad Run District, believes the amended ordinance will give the police and prosecutors a better chance at "punishing bad actors" who shoot onto other people's properties.

Last month, an Ashburn resident fired a round from a .45 caliber handgun in his house that pierced the wall and entered his neighbor's house. In September, the sheriff's office reported an incident that occurred on Gable Farm Lane between Leesburg and Hamilton where a woman was slightly injured from a stray bullet. Deputies determined the shots came from a private property where people were target shooting nearby.

The amended ordinance approved by the county board states: "The discharge of firearms is prohibited within 100 yards of a building with a current occupancy permit and/or regularly occupied structure, unless the owner or authorized agent has given permission."

The board also amended language in the ordinance so that it states: "The discharge of firearms for recreational or target shooting purposes shall be conducted in such a manner as to ensure that projectiles do not leave the boundaries of the property or parcel upon which the shooting is occurring, unless permission to do so has been granted by the adjacent landowner. A projectile leaving the boundaries of the property or parcel shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this section."

Dozens of people spoke at Wednesday's public hearing, most of them opposing the proposed amendment to the county ordinance. Many argued the amended ordinance represents yet another attack on their Second Amendment rights, while others said there are already laws on the books that handle cases when people shoot onto someone's property. Some speakers also called on Loudoun to follow the lead of other jurisdictions in the state to become a so-called Second Amendment Sanctuary or Constitutional County, but county leaders have shown little interest in considering such a resolution.

In response to speakers who said the amended ordinance would take away their property rights, Tony Buffington, Republican supervisor for the Blue Ridge District, responded: "We are absolutely not voting to away private property rights. We are saying shoot on your property, but don't infringe on your neighbors right not to have your bullets fly through his property or her property.”

Kristen Umstattd, a Democrat who represents the Leesburg District on the board, countered comments from the audience that the ordinance infringes on their Second Amendment rights. "This does not violate any part of the Second Amendment," Umstattd said. “Every gun owner in this county, especially those who are here tonight, is most likely a very responsible gun owner and would never purposely or hopefully even inadvertently shoot across someone else’s land."

Regarding the amended ordinance's possible impacts on property rights, Umstattd said, "We have to acknowledge that while protecting your property rights, we also need to protect the property rights of those who live around you or others who shoot."

The amended county ordinance "protects everybody's property rights," she said, and "does not limit your ability to use a gun. It limits the ability of reckless shooters to violate other people's property rights."

Prior to the vote, Buffington, who represents the more rural areas of the county, explained why he supported the amended ordinance. "Any reasonable and responsible gun owner would have no problem with this language right here because all it's saying is that when you're shooting on private property, you agree and understand that you will not shoot off that property onto someone else’s property without their permission," he said.