Ward 5 Alderman Patrick Miller
The Starkville Board of Aldermen held its first public hearing on amendments to the city’s ordinance relating to the discharge of firearms in city limits.
The ordinance will be brought to compliance with state statue 45-9-53. The proposed changes would comply with the state’s guidelines for hunting on annexed territory, including the territory the city is in the process of writing an annexation ordinance for. At a work session earlier this month, Ward 5 Alderman Patrick Miller said some of his constituents own hunting land in the area the city has drawn an annexation ordinance for.
The state code states that shotguns, bows and arrows, air rifles and air pistols can be discharged on properties 10 acres or larger on annexed land more than 150 feet from any dwelling or other building. A center-fire rifle, or pistol, or a muzzle loading rifle or pistol may be discharged on properties 50 acres or more and at least 300 feet from a residence or occupied building. The code also states that the weapon in question should be operated in a manner not reasonably expected to cause a projectile to cross the boundary of the tract.
Starkville Ward 5 resident Ronnie Wofford spoke in favor of the proposed changes.
“I’m very much in favor if this,” Wofford said. “I think if you take a look at it, it’s not like you’re going to have a street on every half acre with a weapon. I believe it applies if the city annexed you in in the ordinance, not just are they in the city.”
Wofford said his own land was within the size range for shoguns and air rifles, but not more powerful weapons. He said he hoped it would be expanded even more.
“Even with a shotgun or an air pistol, you’re not really hunting anything out there, not really doing anything,” Wofford said. “It’s really a protection thing. If you’re walking through the woods, and you’ve got 30 something acres, you’re not going to carry a shotgun all the time. You’re going to have a pistol for snakes or for something, when you’re walking through the woods.”
However, Starkville citizen and regular aldermen meeting attendee Alvin Turner spoke against the change, asking the aldermen not to fix something that wasn’t broken.
“I asked and asked, and I still could not get the people who made the law to tell me everything that I needed to know about weapons that quickly,” Turner said.
He said the community would be less safe should the amendment be made.
“There’s nothing wrong with the law,” Turner said. “If we make it weak, we can put everybody in jail.”
The city will be required to hold a second public hearing before the issue goes up for a vote.
Prior to the hearing being opened, Vice Mayor and Ward 6 Alderman Roy A’. Perkins raised concerns about the word ‘may’ being used in the ordinance, rather than the word “shall.” The section Perkins called into question dealt with a line saying a county or municipality “may not apply a regulation” for the discharge of firearms.
“Is that language construed where it is discretionary application of the statute with the Board of Aldermen, or with the wording of the statute where they may not apply,” Perkins said. “Does that mean the statute has mandatory application?”
City Attorney Chris Latimer told Perkins he had raised the same question with the attorney general, but had not heard back as of Tuesday night.
“It doesn’t stop the discussion tonight,” Latimer said. “Likewise, the mayor said we’ll have the freedom to act one way or the other even if it’s not discretionary.”
Miller said the same statute was used by Oktibbeha County, so landowners would be allowed to use their land as they were allowed to prior to the annexation.
“What that would allow you to do is maintain what you’re already allowed to do in the county,” Miller said.