Brush Prairie, WA Lady Hit By "Stray" Bullet
- Thread starter thallub
- Start date
- Status
No, that's crap. No one has the right to have their stray bullets cross the boundary of my property, even if I border a shooting range. NO ONE!
If you think I am wrong, do I have the right to spray full auto fire from within my property into the shooting range? Maybe I can take my 4x4 Jeep and go muddin on the 300 yard range, since property ownership and boundaries don't mean anything. Maybe I can shoot that 18 point buck that hangs out on your property from the tree stand on my property - you don't have any problem with that, do you???
Come on, people, there's property rights and there's 2nd Amendment rights. This isn't about 2nd Amendment rights. Nor does it have to do with city boys moving to the country. There is no right to allow you to shoot on someone's private land or permit stray bullets to traverse that person's property.
Last edited:
Besides ricochets...bullets can and do leave the range when the muzzle of the firearm is pointed over the backstop berm and a negligent discharge occurs.
That's why I cringe when I see shooters work their actions with the muzzles pointed skyward at our range --- Yet there is no written rule against it at our range --- I still try to warn some members about this bad habit.
That's why I cringe when I see shooters work their actions with the muzzles pointed skyward at our range --- Yet there is no written rule against it at our range --- I still try to warn some members about this bad habit.
I'm waiting for the lawyers to chime in about Public Nuisance laws. If this is an ongoing problem..grandfathering or not...and not enough reasonable measures are being undertaken to abate that hazard it could be declared a public nuisance and shut down. Even IF you can prove to the Authority Having Jurisdiction that the abatement measures taken are satisfactory and they are allowed to reopen and then the abatement measures prove not to be satisfactory and someone is hurt; the AHJ usually has no liability for the mistake but the owner sure does.
Is it a supervised or unsupervised range?
Is the back stop high enough?
Is the back stop sturdy enough to stop XXX caliber? How was that determined?
There are still a lot of unanswered questions that can't be answered just by looking at google sat. But the house right behind the back stop does raise some interesting questions in my mind.
Is it a supervised or unsupervised range?
Is the back stop high enough?
Is the back stop sturdy enough to stop XXX caliber? How was that determined?
There are still a lot of unanswered questions that can't be answered just by looking at google sat. But the house right behind the back stop does raise some interesting questions in my mind.
The range where I used to be a member, coincidentally also in Washington, was closed for two years because bullets were allegedly breaking windows in a business park built directly beyond the end of the rifle range.
Not that bullets should be leaving the range, but it was interesting to drive down the road on which the business park was built, and find no structures for hundreds of yards on either side, as if they'd chosen the lot directly downrange of the line.
We were shown bullets and broken windows, but analysis showed some of the bullets had no glass traces on them.
A car had a broken window, but on Sundays the massive parking lot had only a handful of cars in it; where were all the bullets that must have landed, but didn't break anything?
I wanted to climb on the roof and see if there were any bullets up there?
We suspected a guy with a ball peen hammer and a pocket full of bullets may have been at work, but the club had, over a period of decades, paid to replace some windows, so no claiming that the bullets couldn't have come from the range.
Not that bullets should be leaving the range, but it was interesting to drive down the road on which the business park was built, and find no structures for hundreds of yards on either side, as if they'd chosen the lot directly downrange of the line.
We were shown bullets and broken windows, but analysis showed some of the bullets had no glass traces on them.
A car had a broken window, but on Sundays the massive parking lot had only a handful of cars in it; where were all the bullets that must have landed, but didn't break anything?
I wanted to climb on the roof and see if there were any bullets up there?
We suspected a guy with a ball peen hammer and a pocket full of bullets may have been at work, but the club had, over a period of decades, paid to replace some windows, so no claiming that the bullets couldn't have come from the range.
I've been to this range a few times and its an excellent range with an excellent setup, the staff is super friendly, knowledgeable and very safety concious. I find it hard to believe a bullet could leave the range un-intentionaly they have a huge arch bullet stop over the shooting lanes plus a barrier at the end. You can see a sooter point of view photos on their website such as this: http://clarkrifles.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/rr100yc.jpg
Ive heard some speculation on if it was really a bullet because photos seen in news reports dont look like a bullet graze, see for yourself: http://www.katu.com/news/local/Brush-Prairie-woman-likely-hit-by-stray-bullet-while-gardening-290150931.html?tab=gallery&c=y&img=3 but I am not a doctor so maybe... im not saying either way, i havent heard any official reports.
I will admit the house is scary close to the range in the line of fire. http://www.hillmap.com/m/ag1zfmhpbGxtYXAtaGRychULEghTYXZlZE1hcBiAgICg-MiaCAw
Ive heard some speculation on if it was really a bullet because photos seen in news reports dont look like a bullet graze, see for yourself: http://www.katu.com/news/local/Brush-Prairie-woman-likely-hit-by-stray-bullet-while-gardening-290150931.html?tab=gallery&c=y&img=3 but I am not a doctor so maybe... im not saying either way, i havent heard any official reports.
I will admit the house is scary close to the range in the line of fire. http://www.hillmap.com/m/ag1zfmhpbGxtYXAtaGRychULEghTYXZlZE1hcBiAgICg-MiaCAw
Last edited:
Gaucho Gringo
New member
She is a nutjob who has complained before. The other time the "bullets" that supposedly came from the range were complete cartridges scattered on the ground. When the range was built the city limits were a good 15 miles away. The entire area was logged off in the early 1900's and was very cheap land until about the 1980's when they started building houses and they are still building them as fast as they can 35 years later. The whole Portland-Vancouver area is now is about 40 miles wide and 60 miles long.
Yep, now we have folks blaming the victim. We're all well aware that the well run firing range with it's dedicated, safe and experienced shooters would not allow bullets to bounce of the ground well short of the berm and go zinging over the berm. (Sarcasm off)
In a few instances citizens have lied about bullets impacting on their property. Yep, the owners of gun ranges will lie; so will some guys who shoot on those ranges. i allowed some folks including law enforcement types to use my private firing range. Someone killed a neighbors cow on the adjacent property. i paid for that cow after everyone who fired there denied shooting out of safety and killing that cow. i changed gate lock and no one has permission to shoot there.
BTW: How high is the berm? For a 300 yard range the berm better be at least 50 feet high. That's a lot of dirt and most firing ranges fall short here.
Show me.
Look at the picture of the bullet hole in the house at the link.
Every complaint of bullets hitting people and property that i've checked out proved to be true.
In a few instances citizens have lied about bullets impacting on their property. Yep, the owners of gun ranges will lie; so will some guys who shoot on those ranges. i allowed some folks including law enforcement types to use my private firing range. Someone killed a neighbors cow on the adjacent property. i paid for that cow after everyone who fired there denied shooting out of safety and killing that cow. i changed gate lock and no one has permission to shoot there.
BTW: How high is the berm? For a 300 yard range the berm better be at least 50 feet high. That's a lot of dirt and most firing ranges fall short here.
Show me.
Look at the picture of the bullet hole in the house at the link.
Every complaint of bullets hitting people and property that i've checked out proved to be true.
Gaucho Gringo
New member
Look at her head, that is no bullet wound. Read our complete local forum that the members are here rather than some news source that doesn't now it's AFAHITG. https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/clark-rifles-whats-the-scoop.189165/
And bullet holes in houses are usually jagged splintery rather than neat round holes.
And bullet holes in houses are usually jagged splintery rather than neat round holes.
That reminds me of a "news' report that had a picture of an Iraqi woman holding an UNFIRED CARTRIDGE, and claiming it was the "bullet that hit her house".
When I was about 10 or 12, a guy called the cops on me because he "could hear the bullets hitting in his yard".
When I showed the cops I was shooting Black Cat firecrackers, they just laughed
Not a bullet wound
I am a member of Clark Rifles, so i'm a bit sensitive about the defamation that this hoax is causing.
As always, the media has told only one side of the story (shocker).
I first want to point out that this lady's son was caught trespassing on the range several years ago. Sheriff showed up and he admitted that he was digging bullets out of the embankment (on range property). This is fact, and completely discredits their claims of this "bag of bullets" they have found on their property.
Second, while I'm not a doctor, I do have an EMT in the family who I asked to look at the photo from KATU. It is completely impossible that this wound was from a bullet.
If the bullet struck her from "Front to back", the skin in between her
"Entrance wound" and "Exit Wound" would be cavitated and SEVERELY bruised all around the area. That's assuming the bullet actually did enter, travel underneath the skin, then exit farther back. The second problem with the theory that a bullet traveled underneath the skin on her head is that there is the layer of skin over your scalp is extremely thin. (put your hand on your head now, and feel for yourself). If a bullet penetrated deep enough that it got beneath the skin, even a .22" bullet would have had to contact the skull to get completely beneath the skin. This lady was released from the hospital in a matter of hours. If her skull were hit by a bullet, the tests alone (MRI, x-ray, etc...) would have kept her there all day.
The only other way this could have been a bullet wound is if it hit her from top to bottom (which she states it did not). In that case, it would have taken two different bullets to create the two vertical scratches.
Here is a link to her wound photo, taken at the hospital:
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Brus...ardening-290150931.html?tab=gallery&c=y&img=3
Please look at that and tell me you honestly think it could be a bullet wound.
Next, here is a link to what a "bullet graze" actually looks like:
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/dailypix/2005/Mar/23/localnews7a_b.jpg
I'd like to close by pointing out two things from the initial report (before it got scrubbed by anti-gun media). The sheriff states "(There's) a slight possibility that it was a bullet or a firearm round that grazed the woman,”. The sheriff is extremely skeptical this was even caused by a bullet.
Next, this is from an artical in The Oregonian:
"Whether it was a bullet or something else that caused the head wound isn't clear. Detectives spoke to medical professionals who treated the woman but "have not definitively determined it was a projectile from a firearm.""
Link is as follows:
http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/index.ssf/2015/01/clark_county_sheriffs_office_c_1.html
I am a member of Clark Rifles, so i'm a bit sensitive about the defamation that this hoax is causing.
As always, the media has told only one side of the story (shocker).
I first want to point out that this lady's son was caught trespassing on the range several years ago. Sheriff showed up and he admitted that he was digging bullets out of the embankment (on range property). This is fact, and completely discredits their claims of this "bag of bullets" they have found on their property.
Second, while I'm not a doctor, I do have an EMT in the family who I asked to look at the photo from KATU. It is completely impossible that this wound was from a bullet.
If the bullet struck her from "Front to back", the skin in between her
"Entrance wound" and "Exit Wound" would be cavitated and SEVERELY bruised all around the area. That's assuming the bullet actually did enter, travel underneath the skin, then exit farther back. The second problem with the theory that a bullet traveled underneath the skin on her head is that there is the layer of skin over your scalp is extremely thin. (put your hand on your head now, and feel for yourself). If a bullet penetrated deep enough that it got beneath the skin, even a .22" bullet would have had to contact the skull to get completely beneath the skin. This lady was released from the hospital in a matter of hours. If her skull were hit by a bullet, the tests alone (MRI, x-ray, etc...) would have kept her there all day.
The only other way this could have been a bullet wound is if it hit her from top to bottom (which she states it did not). In that case, it would have taken two different bullets to create the two vertical scratches.
Here is a link to her wound photo, taken at the hospital:
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Brus...ardening-290150931.html?tab=gallery&c=y&img=3
Please look at that and tell me you honestly think it could be a bullet wound.
Next, here is a link to what a "bullet graze" actually looks like:
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/dailypix/2005/Mar/23/localnews7a_b.jpg
I'd like to close by pointing out two things from the initial report (before it got scrubbed by anti-gun media). The sheriff states "(There's) a slight possibility that it was a bullet or a firearm round that grazed the woman,”. The sheriff is extremely skeptical this was even caused by a bullet.
Next, this is from an artical in The Oregonian:
"Whether it was a bullet or something else that caused the head wound isn't clear. Detectives spoke to medical professionals who treated the woman but "have not definitively determined it was a projectile from a firearm.""
Link is as follows:
http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/index.ssf/2015/01/clark_county_sheriffs_office_c_1.html
i took the liberty of googling up some stuff about that range. That stuff includes a picture of some structure that might be passed off as the berm. In all my years of doing range stuff i never saw anything this sorry at a public firing range.
The Clark county manager says "safety could be enhanced significantly with some investment by the range owner". IMO: That is a classic understatement.
http://www.katu.com/news/investigat...ed-significantly-290875481.html?tab=video&c=y
i know some folks who operate a very busy firing range in TX that butts up against a residential area. There is a pistol range and an adjacent 100 yard rifle range. The ranges have high side berms. There are 6-10 employees of that firing range watching the shooters at all times. The owners of that range have never had a complaint about bullets leaving their range.
The US Army always owns the property past the maximum range of the most powerful rifle fired on the range. For the 7.62mm rifle that's over 4,000 meters. The vast majority of firing range owners do not own the property to the maximum range of the guns fired on their ranges. It behooves them to take extraordinary measures to contain vbullets on their property.
The surface danger zone of a small arms firing range is cone shaped because bullets don't always go straight ahead. There are disperson areas to the left and right of the line of sight to the target. To the left and right of the dispersion areas are the richochet areas. There are buffer areas to the left and right of the ricochet areas.
See Figure 4-1.
http://www.apd.army.mil/jw2/xmldemo/p385_63/main.asp
Many shooters don't know what a properly constructed and safe firing range looks like. Hint: It don't look like that firing range in Clark county, WA.
The Clark county manager says "safety could be enhanced significantly with some investment by the range owner". IMO: That is a classic understatement.
http://www.katu.com/news/investigat...ed-significantly-290875481.html?tab=video&c=y
i know some folks who operate a very busy firing range in TX that butts up against a residential area. There is a pistol range and an adjacent 100 yard rifle range. The ranges have high side berms. There are 6-10 employees of that firing range watching the shooters at all times. The owners of that range have never had a complaint about bullets leaving their range.
The US Army always owns the property past the maximum range of the most powerful rifle fired on the range. For the 7.62mm rifle that's over 4,000 meters. The vast majority of firing range owners do not own the property to the maximum range of the guns fired on their ranges. It behooves them to take extraordinary measures to contain vbullets on their property.
The surface danger zone of a small arms firing range is cone shaped because bullets don't always go straight ahead. There are disperson areas to the left and right of the line of sight to the target. To the left and right of the dispersion areas are the richochet areas. There are buffer areas to the left and right of the ricochet areas.
See Figure 4-1.
http://www.apd.army.mil/jw2/xmldemo/p385_63/main.asp
Many shooters don't know what a properly constructed and safe firing range looks like. Hint: It don't look like that firing range in Clark county, WA.
- Status