• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Arizona police officer asked not to wear uniform/ "gun" at daughter’s school

papa bear

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
2,222
Location
mayberry, nc
'Sworn' cops are still 'cops' 24/7. They're not security guards. This guy's on his way to work.

'LEOSA does not override the federal Gun-Free School Zone Act (GFSZA) which prohibits carrying a firearm within 1,000 feet of elementary or secondary schools. Although the GFSZA authorizes on-duty law enforcement officers to carry firearms in such circumstances, off-duty and retired law enforcement officers are still restricted from doing so unless they have a firearms license issued from the state in which they reside and then it is only good for the state in which they reside.'

Arizona does not require a license for OC and the CWP permit is now optional. Uniformed police officers are required to carry their sidearm openly at all times... That's a universal given.
.

the question still stands, "If I cant carry a pistol at my child's public school, why should an off duty civilian LEO be able to" ? i have more training and more experience with fire arms then any LEO i know.
why should he get to carry and i can't?
 

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
We are all aware of the sillyness involved with the seriously underthought gfsza.

Washington atleast recognizes ccw holders ability to "pick up and drop off students" while armed w/ valid permit.
Thankfully, our local police dont enforce archaic federal laws, like gfsza, or national time and money wasting drug policies

if the officer has his ccw permit, and there are no state laws prohibiting carry on schools where ya'all live, then I dont see how the school can tell him anything...
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
In Missouri, a cop can carry onto school property on or off the clock. I can too because I have a CCW endorsement. RSMo 571.030.3 and 571.030.4. I do not know of any cop in my area that would "arrest" a parent picking up or dropping off their kid while OC.

I have been in that position and the cop that saw my OCed pistol helped me unload my son's tuba from the truck. The "gun" was of no concern to her, me blocking a school bus in the school's main driveway for pickup and drop-offs was of concern to her.
 

kcgunfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,002
Location
KC
You want to be careful in MO with where you OC, even with an endorsement. RsMO 571.107.2 only covers you of you are concealed. Be happy the LEO wasn't up to date on the fine points.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free
 

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
In Missouri, a cop can carry onto school property on or off the clock.

Off the clock, with a local ccw permit, and only in that state, according to our thoughtless federal GFSZA laws...

Im no expert, but I believe there is nothing missouri st law can do to override this, short of refusing to enforce federal laws, leaving it up to federal agencies to police their own laws...
Correct me if im wrong, but thats the way I read it..
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
You want to be careful in MO with where you OC, even with an endorsement. RsMO 571.107.2 only covers you of you are concealed. Be happy the LEO wasn't up to date on the fine points.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free
True.
571.107.1(10) Any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility without the consent of the governing body of the higher education institution or a school official or the district school board. Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises of any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility shall not be a criminal offense so long as the firearm is not removed from the vehicle or brandished while the vehicle is on the premises;
I think, would like to think, that that cop knows that law and understands the intent of the law. Both 571.030.3 and 4, as well as 571.107.1(10). Not a normal routine for me as the OC was technically supposed to be CC but my coat was in the truck and not worn during the brief time at the school.
 

kcgunfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,002
Location
KC
I'm sorry, I misread your post and thought you got out of the truck to help your son. My mistake, everyone followed the law...

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk now Free
 

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
Lol so now we leave it up to federal and local leos to judge a laws "intent"???

I wonder how well thats worked in the past?
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
The cop I referred to likely knows the law and the intent of the law (just a guess, I know), and made a decision to not have a "see a gun = trouble = law breaker" moment. A great many cops observe, and do nothing because they do know the law and evaluate the situation, in its entirety, as it is presented to them at that moment. That cop did the same thing in my view. The intent of the law, in my view, is to not arrest law abiding folks unless they break a different law(s). I was not a threat simply because she saw a gun. I did not break the law because I had a gun on me in my truck. That indicates to me that she knew the law and understands the intent of the law. I sent a note, relating the time and location, of thanks and kudos to the chief since I did not get the cop's name.

Beside, why raise a ruckus that would have caused all sorts of hassles and delays. Just imagine if that cop would have been of those "see a gun = trouble = law breaker" cops during the drop-off situation.
 

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
The cop I referred to likely knows the law and the intent of the law (just a guess, I know), and made a decision to not have a "see a gun = trouble = law breaker" moment. A great many cops observe, and do nothing because they do know the law and evaluate the situation, in its entirety, as it is presented to them at that moment. That cop did the same thing in my view. The intent of the law, in my view, is to not arrest law abiding folks unless they break a different law(s). I was not a threat simply because she saw a gun. I did not break the law because I had a gun on me in my truck. That indicates to me that she knew the law and understands the intent of the law. I sent a note, relating the time and location, of thanks and kudos to the chief since I did not get the cop's name.

Beside, why raise a ruckus that would have caused all sorts of hassles and delays. Just imagine if that cop would have been of those "see a gun = trouble = law breaker" cops during the drop-off situation.

True, the internets full of em
 

Thoreau

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
315
Location
Phoenix, Arizona, USA
the question still stands, "If I cant carry a pistol at my child's public school, why should an off duty civilian LEO be able to" ? i have more training and more experience with fire arms then any LEO i know.
why should he get to carry and i can't?

Couldn't agree more here. This ruling-class system is better known as 'tyranny' to those who study history. A cop is a civilian just like the rest of us. To place them on a pedestal higher is to willfully submit to a ruling class.

Many of them (most even) are in the job for all the right reasons, and are to be commended for such. That does not give them any special 'rights' since, as we all know, rights are not granted by a government.

They have no more, and no less, right to defend themselves or their loved ones than I have.
 
Last edited:
Top