Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32

Thread: Student Must Get Campus PD Approval for Gun License

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    May issue, I guess.

    http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=302771

    What about the AG Opinion stating that the Sheriff must have a good reason to deny?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    133

    Post imported post

    Last I knew, the Sheriff is the highest ranking Law Enforcement Officer in the county, to include cities and universities. So what does it matter what the campus police thinks. The Sheriff is the last word on who does and who doesn't get a permit.

  3. #3
    Regular Member thnycav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Windsor VA, ,
    Posts
    305

    Post imported post

    A campus is consider private property and they can set restrictions as to firearms as a business can as well. If it is a State institution they fall under the jurisdiction of the State which is higher authority than the county.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    thnycav wrote:
    A campus is consider private property and they can set restrictions as to firearms as a business can as well. If it is a State institution they fall under the jurisdiction of the State which is higher authority than the county.
    Even though state law says where one may and may not carry?



    Let us assume you are correct. That really has nothing to do with whether the Sheriff should issue the license, does it?

  5. #5
    Regular Member thnycav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Windsor VA, ,
    Posts
    305

    Post imported post

    I was just talking in general terms. Most states do use the county government to issue weapons permits. The point was a local Sheriff can not override a university ban on weapons.

  6. #6
    Regular Member thnycav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Windsor VA, ,
    Posts
    305

    Post imported post

    Sorry did not fully read the link, but there is a question is he a resident of the state or not? If he is a resident of the stateand knows he can not bring it on campus with him I really do not see any reason the university can or should be involved in the transaction at all.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    gsh341 wrote:
    Last I knew, the Sheriff is the highest ranking Law Enforcement Officer in the county, to include cities and universities. So what does it matter what the campus police thinks. The Sheriff is the last word on who does and who doesn't get a permit.
    This is one of the issues we face in Alabama....while the sheriff does make the decision, many of them "overstep" their authority in making up additional requirements...ie, campus police interview prior to issue/renewal....they are simply not following the letter of the law and are, in fact, "making it up as they go"....this is the same reason that we get harrased for OC.
    There is no such requirement in law and should have NO bearing on wheather a PL is issued/renewed.....same goes for the restrictions on the back of many counties "unrestricted" PLs.
    IMHO, this is one of the main issues that we, as legally armed citizens, need to address.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    133

    Post imported post

    thnycav wrote:
    A campus is consider private property and they can set restrictions as to firearms as a business can as well. If it is a State institution they fall under the jurisdiction of the State which is higher authority than the county.
    1. A state university does fall under the jurisdiction of the state financially, but the university is within the county so the Sheriff has full authority both on and off campus. Even the FBI and Secret Service is outranked by the local Sheriff within that county. This is because he is the ONLY elected law enforcement officer in the county. (Actually, Sheriffs nationwide are all elected, so they as a group outrank every other law enforcement officer unless they are outside their repective counties.)This does not protect him from prosecution if he breaks the law himself, but no one can trump his legal authority.

    2. The student in question is a citizen of the county, not the campus, so the campus police have no right to question him about whether or not he NEEDS a CCW. In fact, the campus police have no jurisdiction over a student once that student leaves campus property. And in case you hadn't read that far in the other thread, the student in question lives off campus.

    This Sheriff is just looking for a reason to deny a CCW.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    A lawsuit attempting to enforce the "suitable person" component of that lawwill either win or shed enough light on the issue to get the legislature to change the law. This is a perfect thing for a local Alabama gun rights organization to get started on.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    A lawsuit attempting to enforce the "suitable person" component of that lawwill either win or shed enough light on the issue to get the legislature to change the law. This is a perfect thing for a local Alabama gun rights organization to get started on.
    While I agree that this is something that needs to be addressed, I don't feel that the laws need to be changed so much as LEOs should be forced to follow what we already have.....this seems to be the main issue IMHO

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Post imported post

    gsh341 wrote:
    1. A state university does fall under the jurisdiction of the state financially, but the university is within the county so the Sheriff has full authority both on and off campus. Even the FBI and Secret Service is outranked by the local Sheriff within that county. This is because he is the ONLY elected law enforcement officer in the county. .........but no one can trump his legal authority.
    Wanna bet? Situation: Sheriff is chasing criminal who runs into restricted area at Marshall Space Flight Center. Sheriff must stop and gain consent of federal law enforcement to enter. If he follows your advice, he will be disarmed and in federal custody in 1.3 seconds (exactly). Check out the Supremacy Clause.
    Urban Legends are fun but don't always believe what you hear from Uncle Fred.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    133

    Post imported post

    Double post

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    133

    Post imported post

    apjonas wrote:
    gsh341 wrote:
    1. A state university does fall under the jurisdiction of the state financially, but the university is within the county so the Sheriff has full authority both on and off campus. Even the FBI and Secret Service is outranked by the local Sheriff within that county. This is because he is the ONLY elected law enforcement officer in the county. .........but no one can trump his legal authority.
    Wanna bet? Situation: Sheriff is chasing criminal who runs into restricted area at Marshall Space Flight Center. Sheriff must stop and gain consent of federal law enforcement to enter. If he follows your advice, he will be disarmed and in federal custody in 1.3 seconds (exactly). Check out the Supremacy Clause.
    Urban Legends are fun but don't always believe what you hear from Uncle Fred.

    If it would be so easy to detain the Sheriff, the Sheriff will not need to be detained as he will just ask for the criminal to be handed over. After all, the crook has already been caught by the security forces that would so easily detain the Sheriff.

    Also, the FBI and other "national" police forces are not constitutional, as there is no provision allowing the Federal Government to create such police forces.

    The Supremacy Clause merely states that Federallaw supersedes conflicting State and local law, NOT State and local law enforcement agencies.

    If your view of the Supremacy Clause made Federal agenciesauthority greater than the Sheriffs, who could possibly hope to arrest a FBI agent that murdered a citizen? The FBI would merely have to state that it was acting in accordance with its authority and we, the citizens, would become powerless against the FBI, ATF, IRS or any otherFederal agency.

    However, the Tenth Amendment states that those powers notdelegated to the Federal Government by the constitution are held by the States and the people. Since the Constitution does not specifically authorize a Federal police agency, the feds are trumped by the Sheriff, as he has been elected by the people to act as the chief law enforcement officer in his county.
    [/quote][/quote]

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    apjonas wrote:
    gsh341 wrote:
    1. A state university does fall under the jurisdiction of the state financially, but the university is within the county so the Sheriff has full authority both on and off campus. Even the FBI and Secret Service is outranked by the local Sheriff within that county. This is because he is the ONLY elected law enforcement officer in the county. .........but no one can trump his legal authority.
    Wanna bet? Situation: Sheriff is chasing criminal who runs into restricted area at Marshall Space Flight Center. Sheriff must stop and gain consent of federal law enforcement to enter. If he follows your advice, he will be disarmed and in federal custody in 1.3 seconds (exactly). Check out the Supremacy Clause.
    Urban Legends are fun but don't always believe what you hear from Uncle Fred.
    That actually depends on the circumstances or even what crime has been commited. Would the sheriffs dept EVER be allowed to protect the President or any other high level VIP?.....have a bomb threat and see how fast the ATF will be in control......have a VIP kidnapping and see how unimportant the local sheriff becomes.
    There is ALWAYS at least one person with the power to arrest a sheriff.

    apjonas.....your comment here is not even relevant....Marshall SFC is FEDERAL PROPERTY not county property and therefor not under the jurisdiction of the sheriff.....and the Supremacy Clause deals with laws not LEOs.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    Comp-tech wrote:
    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    A lawsuit attempting to enforce the "suitable person" component of that lawwill either win or shed enough light on the issue to get the legislature to change the law. This is a perfect thing for a local Alabama gun rights organization to get started on.
    While I agree that this is something that needs to be addressed, I don't feel that the laws need to be changed so much as LEOs should be forced to follow what we already have.....this seems to be the main issue IMHO
    Isn't that what would happen if such a lawsuit won? And, if you lost, then there is nothing to force them to follow, correct?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    133

    Post imported post

    Comp-tech,

    If you read my post about the Sheriff's authority you will note that I did include the fact that a Sheriff can be arrested if he breaks the law.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    gsh341 wrote:
    Comp-tech,

    If you read my post about the Sheriff's authority you will note that I did include the fact that a Sheriff can be arrested if he breaks the law.
    He can only be detained/arrested by a Higher than him Ranking LawEnforcement officer. If a civilian would try to arrest a Law Enforcement Officer it would be a Felony. Even dissarming a Law Enforcement Officer would be a Felony

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    133

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    gsh341 wrote:
    Comp-tech,

    If you read my post about the Sheriff's authority you will note that I did include the fact that a Sheriff can be arrested if he breaks the law.
    He can only be detained/arrested by a Higher than him Ranking LawEnforcement officer. If a civilian would try to arrest a Law Enforcement Officer it would be a Felony. Even dissarming a Law Enforcement Officer would be a Felony
    Once he breaks the law he has no further legal standing and is just another criminal, so any other Law Enforcement Officer can arrest him. If all else fails, the people can vote him out of office. That's the nature of being an elected official.

    Consider it like this, the President is the leader of the country, but even he can be removed from power and sent to jail.In a highly unlikely scenario, ifthe president shot Hillary while he was in office (wouldn't that be nice?) you can bet he'd be going away for murder.

    How could the Sheriff committing a crime be any different?

  19. #19
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    He can only be detained/arrested by a Higher than him Ranking LawEnforcement officer. If a civilian would try to arrest a Law Enforcement Officer it would be a Felony. Even dissarming a Law Enforcement Officer would be a Felony
    Not in the case of an LEO/Sheriff commiting a crime....ie, if the officer were to try to make an unlawful arrest, the citizen is under no obligation to submit.

    See.....
    JOHN BAD ELK v. U S, 177 U.S. 529 SCOTUS
    and.....
    Morris v. State, Al Court of Appeals 342 So.2d 417


  20. #20
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    Comp-tech wrote:
    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    A lawsuit attempting to enforce the "suitable person" component of that lawwill either win or shed enough light on the issue to get the legislature to change the law. This is a perfect thing for a local Alabama gun rights organization to get started on.
    While I agree that this is something that needs to be addressed, I don't feel that the laws need to be changed so much as LEOs should be forced to follow what we already have.....this seems to be the main issue IMHO
    Isn't that what would happen if such a lawsuit won? And, if you lost, then there is nothing to force them to follow, correct?
    I was actually ageeing with your point......as much as I'd like to see changes, I can't afford the cost of such a lawsuit.
    Maybe something usefull will come from Mr. Mathis and his attorney.

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    gsh341 wrote:
    Comp-tech,

    If you read my post about the Sheriff's authority you will note that I did include the fact that a Sheriff can be arrested if he breaks the law.
    I think that I highlighted which of your comments that I was responding to....I stand by my comments regarding a sheriffs authority....he/she would NOT have to commit a crime to be "outranked" in their respective county....it depends on the crime/situation on just how far a sheiffs authority extends.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    Comp-tech wrote:
    ......as much as I'd like to see changes, I can't afford the cost of such a lawsuit.
    Comp-tech, this is where having an organization of people willing to donate their time, talent, and treasure comes in handy.

    It is very, very difficult for lone individuals to accomplish much of anything.

  23. #23
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    Malum Prohibitum wrote:
    Comp-tech wrote:
    ......as much as I'd like to see changes, I can't afford the cost of such a lawsuit.
    Comp-tech, this is where having an organization of people willing to donate their time, talent, and treasure comes in handy.

    It is very, very difficult for lone individuals to accomplish much of anything.
    I agree 100%...this is why we are trying to get something started....I just hope we can accomplish something within my lifetime.....I would very much like to OC without LEO harrasment.....

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Post imported post

    gsh341 wrote:
    Once he breaks the law he has no further legal standing and is just another criminal, so any other Law Enforcement Officer can arrest him. If all else fails, the people can vote him out of office. That's the nature of being an elected official.
    I don't know what you mean by "legal standing." If a LEO of any stripe commits a crime, he can be arrested, charged, etc. However, he does not automatically lose LEO powers simply by being suspected of criminal activity or being arrested. Now revocation may happen quickly (it might only require a oral order from a superior) but it requires something.

    Consider it like this, the President is the leader of the country, but even he can be removed from power and sent to jail.In a highly unlikely scenario, ifthe president shot Hillary while he was in office (wouldn't that be nice?) you can bet he'd be going away for murder.
    Not necessarily. It depends upon the charging. If only done under federal law, he can immediately pardon himself. In fact, he can do so in advance. Whether or not he could be held to account under a state charge is also dicey. Unless and until he is removed from power or resigns, he is not going to be arrested and any charges will be of no effect. Again, you would expect Congress to act quickly (one way or the other) but contrary to popular belief the president is above the law or more accurately has special protections under the law. Remember Bill Clinton? It took a legal battle to determine whether or not he could be required to show up at a civil deposition while president. He was only forced to because it was determined that doing so would not interfere with his ability to act as president. By the way, speaking positively about the murder of anyone, much less a United States Senator, much much less one who is a Secret Service protectee twice over is industrial strength stupid as well as rude.

    How could the Sheriff committing a crime be any different?
    Just remember it's the law - it doesn't have to make sense or be fair.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Post imported post

    gsh341 wrote:
    apjonas wrote:
    gsh341 wrote:
    1. A state university does fall under the jurisdiction of the state financially, but the university is within the county so the Sheriff has full authority both on and off campus. Even the FBI and Secret Service is outranked by the local Sheriff within that county. This is because he is the ONLY elected law enforcement officer in the county. .........but no one can trump his legal authority.
    Wanna bet? Situation: Sheriff is chasing criminal who runs into restricted area at Marshall Space Flight Center. Sheriff must stop and gain consent of federal law enforcement to enter. If he follows your advice, he will be disarmed and in federal custody in 1.3 seconds (exactly). Check out the Supremacy Clause.
    Urban Legends are fun but don't always believe what you hear from Uncle Fred.


    If it would be so easy to detain the Sheriff, the Sheriff will not need to be detained as he will just ask for the criminal to be handed over. After all, the crook has already been caught by the security forces that would so easily detain the Sheriff.
    And this is what happened (this scenario is based on an actual incident). But it does show that the Sheriff does not "outrank" everybody else which is what you claimed.

    Also, the FBI and other "national" police forces are not constitutional, as there is no provision allowing the Federal Government to create such police forces.
    zzzzzzzzzzz, please take the militia nonsense elsewhere. Even if you were de jure correct you are de facto wrong.

    The Supremacy Clause merely states that Federallaw supersedes conflicting State and local law, NOT State and local law enforcement agencies.
    Umm...what (or who) do you think creates federal agencies and instills power in them?

    If your view of the Supremacy Clause made Federal agenciesauthority greater than the Sheriffs, who could possibly hope to arrest a FBI agent that murdered a citizen? The FBI would merely have to state that it was acting in accordance with its authority and we, the citizens, would become powerless against the FBI, ATF, IRS or any otherFederal agency.
    Stop acting stupid. I know that you know the answer to your question.

    However, the Tenth Amendment states that those powers notdelegated to the Federal Government by the constitution are held by the States and the people. Since the Constitution does not specifically authorize a Federal police agency, the feds are trumped by the Sheriff, as he has been elected by the people to act as the chief law enforcement officer in his county.
    Look, I know you would like this fantasy world of yours to become real and I don't disagree with everything that you say. But if reading the text of the constitution were the be all and end all, there would be no need for statutory law or courts. We could just hire some temps to "look it up." There is no need to resort to silliness to support your point. A sheriff is normally the chief law enforcement officer of a county and has wide ranging powers. However he is not God (despite his own delusions) nor Superman. For 99% of what he does your concept may hold true. However it only takes that 1% (or .000000000001% for that matter) to demonstrate a counterexample that makes your claim untrue. Q.E.D.




Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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