Larry wrote on June 26, 2008 09:24 AM: The Clark County Gun Park is an excellant idea.
I live almost right next door (less than an 1/4 mile) to the NLVPD and the LVMPD shooting ranges.
I can NOT hear the gunfire from inside my house and barely hear it from the outside.
I welcome a public shooting range here in the valley and I will buy a lifetime membership as soon as it opens.

GERI RYCHTARIK wrote on February 19, 2008 09:41 AM: Part 2 OF 2 - Taxpayers are spending 63 million dollars of BLM money on a shooting park. Is there other jurisdiction in America that would ever spend this amount on a shooting park also located on 2,900 acres of “free” land and then ask taxpayers here to contend with unwarranted noise? What homeowner would ever purchase a home if the developer said, “Oh by the way there will be several soft conversations taking place simultaneously in your back yard, hour after hour, seven days a week.” If, as Mr. Turner says, one soft conversation is 57 decibels then how many decibels are five or ten simultaneous soft conversations? I suspect it then becomes more than just a soft conversation and more like a war zone.



I wonder if Mr. Turner’s home is adjacent to the shooting park? I’m betting it’s not. Mr. Turner also states that the county has not received any complaints about the noise generated by the skeet shooting range at Floyd Lamb. Mr. Turner might just be interested to know that this range is located in the Ward six of city of Las Vegas and was, until recently, a state and not a county park. There have been plenty of complaints about this range and I was one of them. Saving homeowners from some of the direct noise are this park’s mature trees. But this still does not stop the gun discharges from the current and future park from echoing off of the Sheep Mountains. I think the time is now for the County and the city of Las Vegas to bring in some real noise control experts, before the park is fully constructed. Other wise their may be more noise created inside a courtroom than at the new shooting park.

RICHARD RYCHTARIK wrote on February 19, 2008 09:38 AM: Part 2 of 2 - Taxpayers are spending 63 million dollars of BLM money on a shooting park. Is there other jurisdiction in America that would ever spend this amount on a shooting park also located on 2,900 acres of “free” land and then ask taxpayers here to contend with unwarranted noise? What homeowner would ever purchase a home if the developer said, “Oh by the way there will be several soft conversations taking place simultaneously in your back yard, hour after hour, seven days a week.” If, as Mr. Turner says, one soft conversation is 57 decibels then how many decibels are five or ten simultaneous soft conversations? I suspect it then becomes more than just a soft conversation and more like a war zone.



I wonder if Mr. Turner’s home is adjacent to the shooting park? I’m betting it’s not. Mr. Turner also states that the county has not received any complaints about the noise generated by the skeet shooting range at Floyd Lamb. Mr. Turner might just be interested to know that this range is located in the Ward six of city of Las Vegas and was, until recently, a state and not a county park. There have been plenty of complaints about this range and I was one of them. Saving homeowners from some of the direct noise are this park’s mature trees. But this still does not stop the gun discharges from the current and future park from echoing off of the Sheep Mountains. I think the time is now for the County and the city of Las Vegas to bring in some real noise control experts, before the park is fully constructed. Other wise their may be more noise created inside a courtroom than at the new shooting park.

Richard Rychtarik wrote on February 19, 2008 09:36 AM: Part 1 of 2 - Your editorial in the RJ on Monday defending the noise generated by the Clark County shooting park is not tolerable. I would venture to guess that there is a whole lot of special interest (can you say money and profit) tied up in this 63 million dollar boondoggle. Of course the 57 decibels of "soft conversation" generated by the shooters just happens to come in under the mandated limit of 60 decibels.

County taxpayers fully expect that a venture of this magnitude, when sanctioned by the county, would not impinge upon the rights of its citizens to the private and quiet enjoyment of their homes. Nor would they expect that what the county sanctions would lower the value of their property, at least not without compensation.

Here is what I propose, let us ask the EPA to measure sound levels at many locations now and then after the park is in operation. If it's over 60 decibels then the county can stop the operation and begin reducing the noise levels until the park passes. Below is my most recent letter to you on this subject, please read it.

Wednesday's RJ Nevada section article about noise creation from the Clark County Shooting Park only tells part of the story. Already a nuisance, the skeet shooting range now operating within Floyd Lamb City Park provides a microcosm of the noise homeowners can expect once the Clark County Shooting Park is up and firing. In this article, Don Turner, the county’s gun-park expert (whatever that is) says the noise will be only 57 decibels or about the level of a soft conversation, once it reaches the neighborhoods. What makes 57 or 60 decibels sacrosanct?

tim wrote on February 13, 2008 05:45 PM: this park has been in the works for quite some time. these homeowners sound like the same idiots who bought a house next to a pig farm and didnt think it would smell bad. where do these people come from?

Ray wrote on February 13, 2008 01:51 PM: I sorry to say this but Mr. Dubois and Ms. Nolan are not being totally truthful about notification about the shooting range. I brought in that area 5 years ago and I was told about the range by my builder, read about it on the county master plan, and also read about it numerous times in the Review-Journal. I do have a concern that his builder did not disclose this to him, but my builder, Pulte, did. I think the NV statues require this and maybe someone, Mr. Dubois or his wife, should go after them to buy his house back if he has a problem with the range going in out in OUR neighborhood. I definitely think he should have legal recourse against the developer.

TimeRanger wrote on February 13, 2008 12:24 PM: "Dubois agreed the developer should've been more upfront. Now, he wants the county to provide a preventive measure, such as berms or other sound barriers to muffle the gunfire."

Hey Dubois, why don't you and your neighbors get together and "class-action" your developer? This makes far more sense than trying to stick Joe Taxpayer with the cost.

foutsc wrote on February 13, 2008 11:57 AM: Big city liberals move in, running from the cesspool their liberalism caused, then they want to make the new place just like the old. It makes no sense. We have the same problems in Colorado. We like our guns out here in the west. If you don't like it, move away. Just say No to Californication.

Ray Nichols wrote on February 13, 2008 08:09 AM: LOL!! Mike thinks Lawrence Weekly voted on this. You people need to learn to READ! This was passed five years ago, LONG before these people moved out there. THE ACT OF CONGRESS which allowed this passed over five years ago, the county actually voted on this LONG before Lawrence Weekly was on the board!! LOL ... DO YOUR HOMEWORK people ... learn to read. Well the RJ doesn't want that, intelligence .. and the RJ don't mix well.

Ray Nichols wrote on February 13, 2008 08:06 AM: The RJ ... as usual is looking for sensation. These people are idiots, had they done the most basic level of research they'd have found that nearly a decade ago the County started talking about this. MORE THAN ONE ACT OF CONGRESS was passed to make this possible. I do not advocate guns, don't own one, don't like them at all, that isn't the point here. Its a simple case of a handful of people who didn't do their homework before spending hundreds of thousands of dollars?? Typical for Southern Nevada I guess, greedy people in a rush, well they only have themselves to blame. If they did have a dishonest realtor, they need to take them to court. The RJ needs to actually find real news and report on that. But the RJ serves one purpose and that is to be the mouthpiece of gaming, against any form of government. Let the big gamers dictate public policy, the paper hides behind libertarianism, but really they are a tool for Terry Lani and his like. Anything the paper can do to bash government, and to undermine the will of the people, it will, it always does. More of the same ... that is all this trash story is.

Read All Comments