ALERT! Plymouth/Terryville Area Members!

Plymouth is one of the few towns in Connecticut that specifically allows shooting clubs and ranges by permit as long as they meet all applicable regulations. These regulations currently include demonstrating that there will be no adverse effect on neighboring properties with respect to traffic, noise, and safety. The regulations also require supervision by qualified personnel, limit the range to sport shooting (ie skeet, trap, target) and limit the range to operation during daylight hours only. The town must issue a permit before they can operate, and the range must meet all other federal, state and local regulations (environmental, zoning, etc).

On Thursday, November 12, 2015 there will be a public hearing at Plymouth Town Hall to consider a petition to change this and outlaw all future outdoor firearm clubs or ranges. You may download a copy of the proposed amendment here: Proposed Amendments To Plymouth P&Z Regulations (pdf)

CCDL feels the current regulations more than adequately address both existing and any future shooting clubs. While there are currently two clubs located in town, there is no guarantee they will operate forever. If they close, not only do Plymouth-area residents lose a nearby place to safely and legally enjoy an American tradition, they lose a place to exercise a Constitutional right.

Also, while the petition is likely a reaction to a proposed private gun club, the petition as written would appear to outlaw outdoor shooting on private residential property as well. If this petition does move forward, this issue must be addressed and clarified.

We encourage all members, especially those who live and pay taxes in Plymouth to attend this public meeting and voice your opposition to this petition.

Both residents and non-residents may speak. You will have a 3 minute time limit, so make your points quickly. Please be polite and respectful, and be aware the media may be present. Limit your comments to how this regulation would effect you or the town.

Date: November 12, 2015
Time: 7:00pm (but we suggest getting there around 6:00-6:30)
Location: Town Hall – 80 Main St, Terryville, CT in the Community Room on the ground level. There is limited parking in the front of town hall but there is ample parking around back.

What else you can do:
•Write a letter to:

Plymouth Mayor David Merchant; 80 Main St, Terryville, CT 06786
Or submit by online form

Plymouth Planning & Zoning Commission Chairman Carl Johnson; 80 Main St,
Terryville, CT 06786
Or submit by online form

•Email a “letter to editor” to your local paper saying how you oppose this and the negative effect this will have on the town.

Waterbury Republican-American: opinion@rep-am.com
The Bristol Press: letters@centralctcommunications.com
(Important: Include your full name, address and telephone number for verification purposes.)

If you have any questions contact CCDL Legislative Coordinator; Ray Bevis at legislative@ccdl.us

plymouth land use meeting

25 thoughts on “ALERT! Plymouth/Terryville Area Members!

    • Residents around WHAT range, Paul? If you have been paying attention, the range I’m guessing you’re talking about withdrew their application months ago. There are no applications for a new range in Plymouth.
      So now you want to ban any and all ranges in town, including backyard ranges? Isn’t that a bit extreme? Saying “well, you can still have an indoor range, that’s good enough” Is the same as saying “We want to ban semi-auto guns, but you can still have bolt action, so that’s good enough.”
      Someone who built a home next to a shooting range, that has their own shooting range doesn’t want another range nearby, so let’s ban ALL shooting ranges. I know that wasn’t the intent, but read the proposed zoning regulation changes. There is nothing in there that differentiates a commercial range or club from a backyard range. Ironically enough, I understand the person spearheading this has a backyard range himself that will become illegal if he doesn’t get a permit for it before this passes.

    • A realtor unless a licensed Connecticut appraiser cannot give property valuation only existing comparative property sales numbers. These letters are worthless.

  1. You timid little mice, what will you do when something serious happens.Ranges for pratice and people that would keep you safe, the government won’t be there to help when you need help or anybody to protect life and property, just keep waiting. CONNECTICUT IS FOLLOWING MASSACHUTES,
    NOTHING FOR FIREARMS, WAIT FOR POLICE.

    • So why don’t you put the range behind your house William Reagan? This is not about the 2ND Amendment!!! Its about people who will suffer from a Commercial Gun Range in their backyard. Yes I am also against it because I live less than a 1/4 mile a way and my land value will greatly decrease. Who wants to buy a house with constant shooting going on? And for the record…I do sight in my guns on my property (130 acres). I do hunt on my property. I am Ct. Pistol Holder. I am also a Police Officer who first hand knows the value of training and practice. I am however against hundreds of people (mostly out of town people) disrupting my peace and quiet and driving my land values down. Join Terryville Fish and Game, Plainville Fish and Game, Bristol Fish and Game or some other already established Club.

      • And yet another person who apparently A: Does not understand the application for that range was withdrawn, so it’s a non-issue; and B: that under the proposed regulations they will no longer be allowed to shoot on their own land, and neither will anyone else.
        They also don’t understand that under the current EXISTING regulations already on the books, any new range has to PROVE they would not adversely effect the neighbors due to noise, traffic, or safety issues before they can get a permit to operate. So all the concerns mentioned are ALREADY addresses under the current zoning regulations. But if you have actually read the current zoning regulations and feel yet more is needed, you should at the very least speak up before the proposed new regulations ban you from shooting on your property as well.

        BTW, again this is a moot point since the range you seem to be concerned with withdrew their application for a permit months ago, but we’ve heard from several other realtors and appraisers who are of the opinion that adding a gun range in a commercially zoned area that is 1/2 mile from a property right next to another gun range would not make a noticeable difference in that property’s value. Certainly no less than the previous business located there.

  2. Chris
    That is not true! Almost all the neighbors shoot in thair yards. I am a member of Terryville fish and game and a CCDL member. This range is a 47 lane range and is being resubmited. I am a gun owner an a supporter of the w amendment.

    • Paul, the range has not been resubmitted, and it has been months.
      Have you READ the proposed rule change (it’s linked on this blog post).
      Can you point out where it differentiates between commercial ranges and private home ranges? (hint: It doesn’t. Don’t you think that is a concern?)
      Have you read the existing zoning regulations which already address all your concerns?
      https://imageserv11.team-logic.com/mediaLibrary/2017/ZoningRegs.pdf

      G.
      FIREARMS CLUB
      1.
      Issuance of Permits
      :
      No person, firm or corporation shall establish, maintain conduct or
      operate any firearms club within the limits of the Town of Plymouth
      without having first obtained a permit and a Certificate of Use and Compliance.
      2.
      Procedure
      :
      Application to conduct or maintain a firearms club shall be made by the applicant on a form furnished for that purpose by the Commission. The applicant shall file with this application proof of ownership of the premises or of a lease or written permission of the owner thereof, together with:
      i.
      Evidence that the club is organized in compliance with the provisions and requirements contained in the Ge
      neral Statutes of the State of Connecticut; and
      ii.
      A site plan meeting the requirements of Article 7, Section A. The plan shall also note any requirements contained in the General Statutes of the State of Connecticut relative to the operation of a firearms club.
      3.
      Requirements:
      A site proposed to be used for a firearms club shall be at least thirty (30) acres in area. The applicant must demonstrate to the Commission that due to neighborhood area conditions such as open land, topography and other circumstances, a firearms club can be operated without having an adverse effect with respect to traffic, noise and safety on abutting properties. Firearms shall be limited to sports shooting i.e.
      skeet, trap or target, and shall only be discharged under the supervision of qualified personnel between the hours of ½ hour prior to sunup and sundown
      .
      4.
      Validity of Permit:
      A permit issued by the Commission for a firearms club shall be valid for a period of one year or as
      the Commission may determine and application for renewal of said permit shall be made prior to its expiration.

    • Better look again, Edward. The proposed change bans firearm clubs or ranges. Not commercial ranges. Not club ranges.
      Ranges. Period.

  3. This past Saturday I heard more gunshots that I can remember coming from all over town. Do you think this really means private citizens legally shooting on their own property? Do I need a “Range” to shoot a target on my own property? Does this include my Archery Range? Do you live in Plymouth Chris? Will the constant banging bother you?

    • The applicant is requesting the banning of outdoor firearms clubs or ranges (Article 3) and striking article 6G-Firearms Club. If that happens, you now will have NO definitions describing an outdoor firearms club or a range. Therefore one can conclude that NO personal shooting range would be permitted anywhere within Plymouth/Terryville. There would be no definition of the word range in the town POCD, therefore we would have to default back to the common definition of the word range and can conclude that this will include a driving ‘range’ by Webster’s standards.

  4. Also…do you think Mr. Porter (who occasionally shoots in his back yard) change this so he could no longer continue this activity. The Answer is No.

  5. I sPoke to the applicant personally and in no way, shape or form is private property being targeted. The attorney will address this personally tomorrow. Chris et al is trying to cause mass hysteria! Nice try!

    • Mass hysteria nothing. I understand the INTENT wasn’t to ban shooting on private property. However, no matter what the intent is, the proposed regulation change, AS SUBMITTED does not exclude that. I’ve made it very clear here that even those who think they support this need to make certain that doesn’t happen.
      Second, I understand fully this is a direct result of (in my opinion, misunderstood) opposition to one specific case of a proposed range that has since withdrawn it’s application for a permit to operate. CCDL’s position is the town already has adequate regulations on the books that appear to be working. A shooting club can not operate unless it can prove it will not cause adverse noise, traffic, safety, or environmental concerns. Unless you are totally antigun, what more could you want? The permit must be renewed yearly, so if a range does NOT live up to that agreement, you can easily have it shut down. So again, unless the real agenda is to ban all shooting (which the proposed regulation WOULD do if not amended, no matter what the intent), what is the issue with the current regulations? Has a new range been allowed to open and violate those rules? No!

  6. Town Of Plymouth Connecticut
    Planning and Zoning Commission
    Town Hall
    80 Main Street
    Terryville, Ct 06786

    Mr. Carl Johnson, Chairman
    Dear Mr. Johnson:
    I would appreciate the opportunity to address the Commission this evening regarding proposed amendments to P & Z regulations regarding outdoor firearms clubs and ranges.
    I would like to first state my qualifications:
    1. I am 68 years old and a resident and registered voter of Wolcott, CT and I have been an owner of firearms and an outdoor target shooter for 58 years. I have maintained a concealed carry permit in Connecticut since the mid 1970’s
    2. I am an honorably discharged US Army veteran, having qualified as expert with the M-14, Sharpshooter with the M-16 A1, M-79 Grenade Launcher and 1911 A-1-. 45 cal pistol.
    3. After active duty during the Vietnam era, I was a member of the Texas Army National Guard, 71st Airborne Infantry Brigade and the Connecticut Army National Guard, 102 Infantry, where I was a training NCO.
    4. I have maintained a concealed carry permit in Connecticut since the mid 1970’s, am proficient in the handling of pistols, revolvers, rifles and shotguns as well as a reloader of all types of ammunition.
    5. I am an NRA certified Range Safety Officer and the same for Chase Rifle and Pistol Association (the Police range) in Waterbury Connecticut on the Plymouth border. And I am a member in good standing of the NRA, CCDL, NAGR (Frontline Defender), The Firearms Policy Coalition, and Gun Owners of America. Along with my late Brother, a Waterbury Police Officer and Sister-in-Law, I helped organize and manage the Bull’s Eye Gun Shop in Waterbury. They both were national pistol shooting champions and we were NRA certified pistol instructors’ for 1000’s of Connecticut residents over a 15 year period. Regarding CCDL, for whom I speak this evening, we are a nearly 20,000 member Connecticut organization dedicated to preserve our fundamental gun rights.
    *************************************************************************************
    6. Regarding Real Estate and valuation, I have been a licensed Real Estate Broker and Realtor since 1971, home builder and developer, developer of commercial/industrial properties around the state, formerly an appraiser, landlord, real estate financier and I am currently Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of GFE Corp LLC, The Global Financial Exchange. Of Watertown and Wolcott CT.
    I am a firm believer in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution – “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed”, and Sec .15. of the Connecticut Constitution, SEC. 15. “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”
    *************************************************************************
    7. The Right to freely bear and use arms, one of our most basic rights is one given by the all mighty and not the State. This is clearly what the Founders said and intended.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The Issues
    Within the Town of Plymouth and surrounding towns are approximately seven outdoor firearms facilities, have they reduced the values of local properties? As a Realtor I am not aware of any such instances.
    Can Mr. George Porter (who I am told fires weapons on his own property) or his Attorneys, Jackson O’Keffe or Attorney Dunn, Esq. cite any adverse results of these long standing facilities being in the town. (Many dating back over 75 years). Can they cite any prior noise or safety issues? Are there any instances where these facilities have not paid their fair share of property taxes, vital to every town today?
    Are not all these operating facilities and any to be opened properly in the future not agents supporting safe firearms handling for the public, police (training), first responders, our youth and residents who legally own firearms?
    Don’t these facilities provide opportunity to Connecticut firearms manufacturers, ammunition component manufacturers, retail and wholesale firearms entities, and therefore contribute to employment opportunities, paying taxes and maintaining Connecticut (the Constitution State and the Armory of Democracy) business livelihood?
    I strongly recommend and endorse that P & Z not amend the Zoning Regulations as requested by Mr. Porter via his Attorney and specifically Article 3: General Regulations and more specifically Article 4 B. or Article 6 G.
    I make this heartfelt request on behalf of all those who believe in the Constititions referenced above and for the benefit of all our citizens that their rights be maintained and unabridged.

    Gregg R. Nolan

    222 Munson Road
    Wolcott, CT 06716
    Tel: 203-879-4675
    Cell: 203-910-7030
    EM: horizons@sprynet.com

  7. Please don’t beleave the lies! This zoning change will not affect assisting clubs or president shooting in their own backyards. These people have lied, stolen signs and used the CCDL against us.

    • Paul, we don’t have an issue with existing clubs, we want more clubs. CCDL is never used against anyone person or organization, we are a 2ND amendments rights group. Get n the right side of the bigger issue than what Mr. Porter wants.

  8. I can’t believe that the CCDL would promote lie like these. I have a lot of friends that are members. It is sad that leadership in such a great organization would stoop so low!

  9. Hate to see what these idiots do if a black gentleman wants to move next door. As I have said before Chris, you cannot reason with these antis. I’m sure if a state police range was proposed all would be applauding who are now just personally attacking you. Chris is to nice to personally attack these cretins .. I’m not, they all all antis.

Comments are closed.