Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Open carry at Shadle Park Mall

  1. #1
    Regular Member darkside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    spokane wa
    Posts
    34

    Question Open carry at Shadle Park Mall

    Just curious if anyone has carried at Shadle Park mall and if they had a cpl because of proximity to both a junior and a senior high school within 1000 ft(at least the junior high). Just curious .

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    19

    Shadle Center

    Yes ; Starbucks, Safeway, Panda Express, Verizon (Go Wireles store), and the old liquor store. And yes to the cpl.
    Last edited by 40grit; 10-13-2012 at 09:03 PM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member darkside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    spokane wa
    Posts
    34

    Thumbs up thanks

    Thanks for the reply. Not trying to be nosey but just really making sure i understood the law about school zones and carrying a firearm. Would rather be sure of my facts before i make a mistake.

  4. #4
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Well,,,

    Quote Originally Posted by darkside View Post
    Thanks for the reply. Not trying to be nosey but just really making sure i understood the law about school zones and carrying a firearm. Would rather be sure of my facts before i make a mistake.
    Did you know that NO ONE!!! has ever been charged "just for carrying" within the 1000 ft GFSZ federal law boundry!!!
    In fact... a resident of Vermont CANNOT get ANY type of permission slip, in any form, that exempts them from that law!
    Last edited by 1245A Defender; 10-13-2012 at 09:53 PM.
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  5. #5
    Regular Member darkside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    spokane wa
    Posts
    34

    so...

    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    Did you know that NO ONE!!! has ever been charged "just for carrying" within the 1000 ft GFSZ federal law boundry!!!
    In fact... a resident of Vermont CANNOT get ANY type of permission slip, in any form, that exempts them from that law!
    Just 2 things in response,
    1. No I didnt know that, but i do know that i dont want to be the first one charged with it by an over-zealous leo.

    2. Glad i dont live in Vermont.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    Did you know that NO ONE!!! has ever been charged "just for carrying" within the 1000 ft GFSZ federal law boundary!!!
    In fact... a resident of Vermont CANNOT get ANY type of permission slip, in any form, that exempts them from that law!
    I think that law was shot down as unconstitutional.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,629
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    I think that law was shot down as unconstitutional.
    The GFSZA of 1990 was declared unconstitutional in 1995.

    Congress passed a slightly revised bill called the Gun-Free School Zones Amendments Act of 1995, which is still on the books. The new law's revisions were widely considered to be cosmetic changes.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    The GFSZA of 1990 was declared unconstitutional in 1995.

    Congress passed a slightly revised bill called the Gun-Free School Zones Amendments Act of 1995, which is still on the books. The new law's revisions were widely considered to be cosmetic changes.
    Thanks for the info. The interstate commerce clause has been stretched way too far now.

    Since you purchase iron that was mined in another state or it contains alloys that are from another state 'we' as congress can now control every aspect of it.

    It's all unconstitutional it a clear misuse of the interstate commerce clause.

    When one reads the writings of the Founding Fathers, there is little doubt that the commerce clause (as applied between the states of the Union), was to be used for little more than insuring what we would call today, a "free trade zone". That limited role is quite rightfully where the federal government's authority in interstate commerce should end. Any reach for authority beyond that envisioned by the men who wrote the Constitution should be considered unconstitutional.
    http://originalintent.org/edu/federaljur.php
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  9. #9
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    I'm yet to see someone charged for merely carrying within 1000 feet of a school. Every single case I know of that law being brought into play (mostly appeals to district courts) the GFSZA was an "add on" charge to someone who was dealing drugs or threatening people, or committing a burglary within the 1000' zone. Most U.S. Attorneys wouldn't even touch a legal carrier... I think the simple fact is, the majority of people who get convicted were doing something dirty, and while it shouldn't matter in theory, I doubt a judge is going to be searching for reasons to reverse the conviction of a drug dealer.

    As far as CPLs, yes get one anyway, not only is it a shield to GFSZA, it also gives you flexibility in how you carry. for instance if i were in the mall and a mass shooter showed up, even if I were open carrying at first i certainly don't want to visibly armed when the cops roll on scene
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  10. #10
    Regular Member darkside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    spokane wa
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    As far as CPLs, yes get one anyway, not only is it a shield to GFSZA, it also gives you flexibility in how you carry. for instance if i were in the mall and a mass shooter showed up, even if I were open carrying at first i certainly don't want to visibly armed when the cops roll on scene
    Thanks, i've had my CPL for quite a while. I'm just new to the whole OC thing.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Vitaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    593
    doesn't have to be YOUR private property

    18 USC § 921(a)(25) The term “school zone” means—

    (A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or

    (B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school.

    18 USC § 922 (q)(2) --

    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •