Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: School Zones

  1. #1
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    Can anyone answer the following question:

    What are the laws pertaining to someone who is OCing or CCing in a school zone?

    For instance, if I were jogging while OCing or CCing, and, I happen to be jogging in a school zone, what would happen to me (from a legal point of view)? Thanks in advance!

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.......Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    On School Property


    § 18.2-308.1. Possession of firearm, stun weapon, or other weapon on school property prohibited.

    A. If any person possesses any (i) stun weapon as defined in this section; (ii) knife, except a pocket knife having a folding metal blade of less than three inches; or (iii) weapon, including a weapon of like kind, designated in subsection A of § 18.2-308, other than a firearm; upon (a) the property of any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds; (b) that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school-sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking place; or (c) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

    B. If any person possesses any firearm designed or intended to expel a projectile by action of an explosion of a combustible material while such person is upon (i) any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds; (ii) that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school-sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking place; or (iii) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony; however, if the person possesses any firearm within a public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school building and intends to use, or attempts to use, such firearm, or displays such weapon in a threatening manner, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of five years to be served consecutively with any other sentence.

    The exemptions set out in § 18.2-308 shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to the provisions of this section. The provisions of this section shall not apply to (i) persons who possess such weapon or weapons as a part of the school's curriculum or activities; (ii) a person possessing a knife customarily used for food preparation or service and using it for such purpose; (iii) persons who possess such weapon or weapons as a part of any program sponsored or facilitated by either the school or any organization authorized by the school to conduct its programs either on or off the school premises; (iv) any law-enforcement officer; (v) any person who possesses a knife or blade which he uses customarily in his trade; (vi) a person who possesses an unloaded firearm that is in a closed container, or a knife having a metal blade, in or upon a motor vehicle, or an unloaded shotgun or rifle in a firearms rack in or upon a motor vehicle; or (vii) a person who has a valid concealed handgun permit and possesses a concealed handgun while in a motor vehicle in a parking lot, traffic circle, or other means of vehicular ingress or egress to the school. For the purposes of this paragraph, "weapon" includes a knife having a metal blade of three inches or longer and "closed container" includes a locked vehicle trunk.


  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Near a school

    http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia...9/crm00115.htm



    It is a federal offense to possess a firearm in a school zone. 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g) (West Supp. 1995). However, the Supreme Court ruled the Gun-Free School Zone Act was unconstitutional as exceeding Congress' commerce clause authority in United States v. Lopez, U.S., 115 S.Ct. 1624, ___ L. Ed.2d ___ (1995). Prior to this decision, Congress amended Section 922(g) by expressly stating in the statute the national need to regulate firearms around schools and its nexus to commerce. 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1) (West Supp. 1995). Whether this change will accommodate the ruling made the basis for the Lopez decision is yet to be finally determined.




    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act

    The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 was enacted as section 1702 of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (Pub.L. 101-647, 18 U.S.C.§922(q)) on November 29, 1990.

    It was subsequently declared to be an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional authority under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution by the United States Supreme Court, and was therefore voided. This case, United States v. Lopez (1995), was the first time in over half a century that the Supreme Court limited Congressional authority to legislate under the Commerce Clause.

    See also United States v. Morrison (2000), in which the U.S. Supreme Court also ruled that Congress lacked the authority to enact such laws even when there was evidence of aggregate effect.

    Congress re-enacted the law following the Supreme Court's ruling, correcting the technical defects identified by the Court by adding Congressional findings concerning the importance of establishing gun free school zones to protect public safety and interstate commerce [citation needed][/suP].



  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    A major point to mention is that if you have a CHP the GFSZ act does not apply to you.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    A major point to mention is that if you have a CHP the GFSZ act does not apply to you.
    Hey Now! Not exactly. :what:

    From what I can find.. the "The Gun-Free School Zones Act" is no longer valid. I cannot find any further ruling to show it is back in play.

    The CC permit doesNOT grant you any authority to pack a heater on school property if you are on foot. You MUST stay in your vehicle and the purpose is likely so that you can drop off your kids and go on your way.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    The GFSZ act was repassed in 1995 following it being overturned by the Supreme Court, with the difference that a prosecutor must show the gun affected interstate commerce, apparently it is rarely if ever used or at least tried in court. Interestingly on reading it if an off duty LEO doesn't have a license to carry they are not exempt from the 1000 foot rule.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/922(q).html
    (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; (iii) that is— (I) not loaded; and (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle; (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone; (v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual; (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or (vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Something does not jive.

    They reference United States v. Morrison 2000 and talk about lack ofthe authority to enact such laws. I do not think it is in force.

    Then the section you pasted is rather confusing. What is this "License" they speak of?

    "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"

    Then is says the police need to verify the person is "qualified" to receive it. I would submit that the police would be qualified based on their profession since they cannot have such disqualifications and still be able to do the job.

    If a cop could not possess a gun.... he could not be on the job.

    Lastly... it appears that if you HAVE a license.... you can be "in the zone."

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    348

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    On School Property


    § 18.2-308.1. Possession of firearm, stun weapon, or other weapon on school property prohibited...
    B. If any person possesses any firearm designed or intended to expel a projectile by action of an explosion of a combustible material while such person is upon (i) any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds; (ii) that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school-sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking place; or (iii) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony; however, if the person possesses any firearm within a public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school building and intends to use, or attempts to use, such firearm, or displays such weapon in a threatening manner, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of five years to be served consecutively with any other sentence.
    So a concealed CO2-powered BB/pellet gun would be okay, then? Ha, just kidding.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    Railguns are.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    243

    Post imported post

    Smurfologist wrote:
    Can anyone answer the following question:

    What are the laws pertaining to someone who is OCing or CCing in a school zone?

    For instance, if I were jogging while OCing or CCing, and, I happen to be jogging in a school zone, what would happen to me (from a legal point of view)? Thanks in advance!

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.......Or, lose it!!:X
    I think I remember seeing something about a Fox reporter (I could be wrong) being arrested for tresspassing on school property by reporting from the sidewalk (which appeared to be outside of a wall or some other structure). After arrest and search it was discovered that the reporter was armed with a concealed weapon for which he had a permit. I believe the police then tried to stick an additional charge of bringing a firearm on to school property.

    I don't know how the case ended up or if the charges were dropped. I remember the news outlet backing up the reporter. But, any one know how this ended up?

    -X

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    243

    Post imported post

    Xeni wrote:
    Smurfologist wrote:
    Can anyone answer the following question:

    What are the laws pertaining to someone who is OCing or CCing in a school zone?

    For instance, if I were jogging while OCing or CCing, and, I happen to be jogging in a school zone, what would happen to me (from a legal point of view)? Thanks in advance!

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.......Or, lose it!!:X
    I think I remember seeing something about a Fox reporter (I could be wrong) being arrested for tresspassing on school property by reporting from the sidewalk (which appeared to be outside of a wall or some other structure). After arrest and search it was discovered that the reporter was armed with a concealed weapon for which he had a permit. I believe the police then tried to stick an additional charge of bringing a firearm on to school property.

    I don't know how the case ended up or if the charges were dropped. I remember the news outlet backing up the reporter. But, any one know how this ended up?

    -X
    I should've just done a google.

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...648,full.story

    No charges for TV reporter arrested while carrying gun

    No charges will be pursued against a television reporter who was arrested near a school while carrying a loaded gun, authorities said Tuesday.

    Jeffrey Weinsier of WPLG-TV, an ABC network affiliate, was arrested in late October after police said he carried a weapon onto the grounds of Miami Central High School and refused to cross the street when asked by an officer.

    The encounter was caught by a cameraman on videotape, which the state attorney's office used to decide that no charges would be filed against Weinsier, Assistant State Attorney Maggie Gerson wrote in a memo released Tuesday.






    Weinsier had faced charges of armed trespass on school property, possession of a weapon, violation of carrying a concealed weapon and resisting arrest without violence. Weinsier, who was investigating a story on school violence, was not on school grounds when approached by police and ordered to leave, Gerson said.

    ``Since the defendant was not trespassing, anything that was found on the defendant after he was arrested will be suppressed as a matter of law,'' Gerson wrote.

    Weinsier's actions did not appear disruptive and students had been dismissed from classes when he was arrested, Gerson said.

    The reporter began carrying a gun after he received death threats stemming from a series he did about unsanitary conditions at restaurants, according to the station. Weinsier has a concealed weapons permit, police had said.

    ``From day one, I knew that I had been on the public sidewalk outside the school,'' Weinsier said Tuesday. ``I knew the law clearly. This is false arrest.''

    The reporter said he has filed a formal complaint with the Miami-Dade Schools Police Department and is reviewing the possibility of legal action.

    WPLG is owned by The Washington Post Co.

  12. #12
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    A major point to mention is that if you have a CHP the GFSZ act does not apply to you.
    There is another point that was not made. There is a difference between the Gun Free School Zone and school property.

    A jogger cannot set foot on school property while carrying - in Virginia. A jogger can enter the 1000 feet around the school if they have a CHP. I'm not debating any case law or rulings, just what the wording of the federal law states.

    The GFSZ also gives allowance if the person has a Concealed Carry Permit from the State that the school resides in.

    Example: in VA, you can only enter school property while keeping concealed and staying in the car. In UT, you can walk right in a school based on state laws.

    The GFSZ is K-12 only - does not apply to higher level and preschools.

  13. #13
    Regular Member CaptainCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Fredericksburg City, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    70

    Post imported post

    Did the OP mean jogging on "School Property", or jogging through a "School traffic zone"? I think there would be a big difference.....

  14. #14
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    Railguns are.
    I have hadsimilar thoughts about railguns and other linear accelerators.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Something does not jive.

    They reference United States v. Morrison 2000 and talk about lack ofthe authority to enact such laws. I do not think it is in force.

    Then the section you pasted is rather confusing. What is this "License" they speak of?

    "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"

    Then is says the police need to verify the person is "qualified" to receive it. I would submit that the police would be qualified based on their profession since they cannot have such disqualifications and still be able to do the job.

    If a cop could not possess a gun.... he could not be on the job.

    Lastly... it appears that if you HAVE a license.... you can be "in the zone."
    A LEOs authorization to carry while on or off duty and a CHP are not the same thing for the purposes of the GFSZ. An LEO carrying off duty is not 'in the official capacity' nor is it a license as defined by this code. OTOH if there was some order that said 'all officers are to be armed at all times or that they are always considered by the department to be 'on duty' or on call.

    While someone may have a constitutional challenge under Morrison, this code is still on the books. I agree its unconstitutional but that may not stop a zealous LEO or commonwealth attorney from trying to charge someone.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    kle wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    On School Property


    § 18.2-308.1. Possession of firearm, stun weapon, or other weapon on school property prohibited...
    B. If any person possesses any firearm designed or intended to expel a projectile by action of an explosion of a combustible material while such person is upon (i) any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds; (ii) that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school-sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking place; or (iii) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony; however, if the person possesses any firearm within a public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school building and intends to use, or attempts to use, such firearm, or displays such weapon in a threatening manner, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of five years to be served consecutively with any other sentence.
    So a concealed CO2-powered BB/pellet gun would be okay, then? Ha, just kidding.
    Actually you could not legally conceal a pellet gun but openly carrying it doesn't seem prohibited.

    Unless I've read it wrong Fairfax county actually has code that allows for it on school grounds for purposes of personal safety.
    http://www.municode.com/resources/ga...051&sid=46

    Section 6-1-2.1. Discharge of pneumatic guns in certain places prohibited; exceptions. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 6-1-2, a person may discharge a pneumatic gun on a parcel of land containing at least one acre of land in an area designated for the discharge of firearms or other guns in accordance with Appendix J to the Fairfax County Code. Provided, however, no person shall discharge any such pneumatic gun within 100 yards of a public school ground or a public park, and no person shall traverse a public school ground, or a public park while in possession of a pneumatic gun. ThisSection shall not prohibit any act described in Subsections (g)(3), (g)(4), (g)(5), (g)(6), (g)(7), (g)(8), or (g)(9) of Section 6-1-2, and this Section shall not prohibit: (i) the lawful possession of a gun of the type described herein when such gun is carried for purposes of personal safety; (ii) the lawful possession of a gun of the type described herein on a public highway within 100 yards of any public school ground or public park, or (iii) recreational shooting on gun ranges at any public school grounds operated by or with the approval of that school or recreational shooting on gun ranges at any public park operated by or with the approval of the owner of the park. Whenever any minor below the age of 16 uses any pneumatic gun, the minor must be supervised by a parent, guardian, or other adult supervisor approved by the minor's parent or guardian. Any minor using any pneumatic gun shall be responsible for obeying all laws, regulations and restrictions governing such use at all times. Violation of this Section shall constitute a Class 3 misdemeanor. (21-94-6; 39-96-6, § 1; 24-04-6.)


  17. #17
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    CaptainCharles wrote:
    Did the OP mean jogging on "School Property", or jogging through a "School traffic zone"? I think there would be a big difference.....
    CaptainCharles, my question was whether or not someone could jog through a school zone (not on school property) while OCing or CCing.

    I have just logged in, so, I am reading all of the responses. If my question has been answered, I thank everyone.

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.........Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  18. #18
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    I have just read everything, and, I will conclude that you can CC in a GFSZ on foot (with a CCWP), but, you can't OC in a GFSZ on foot (legally). Is this statement correct?

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.......Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    Smurfologist wrote:
    I have just read everything, and, I will conclude that you can CC in a GFSZ on foot (with a CCWP), but, you can't OC in a GFSZ on foot (legally). Is this statement correct?

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.......Or, lose it!!:X
    Not quite, you are not required to conceal in a GFSZ (i.e. the 1000' foot zone, that is not school property).

  20. #20
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    Smurfologist wrote:
    I have just read everything, and, I will conclude that you can CC in a GFSZ on foot (with a CCWP), but, you can't OC in a GFSZ on foot (legally). Is this statement correct?

    2nd Amendment.......Use it.......Or, lose it!!:X
    Not quite, you are not required to conceal in a GFSZ (i.e. the 1000' foot zone, that is not school property).
    Longwatch, just so I am clear, I can OC in a GFSZ (and the 1000' zone only applies to school property, not the sidewalk or street that I may be jogging on). Is that correct?

    2nd Amendment........Use it........Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    I will elaborate
    School property: CC only with a CHP in your car.
    1000 feet around the school property: CC or OC with a CHP on foot or vehicle.

    ETA: I should say I really don't think there is a real worry about arrest under the federal code, I haven't been able to find anyone charged with violation of it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Something does not jive.

    They reference United States v. Morrison 2000 and talk about lack ofthe authority to enact such laws. I do not think it is in force.

    Then the section you pasted is rather confusing. What is this "License" they speak of?

    "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"

    Then is says the police need to verify the person is "qualified" to receive it. I would submit that the police would be qualified based on their profession since they cannot have such disqualifications and still be able to do the job.

    If a cop could not possess a gun.... he could not be on the job.

    Lastly... it appears that if you HAVE a license.... you can be "in the zone."
    LEO 229,

    Yes your argument is logical, butbeing a police officer does notmeet the licensing requirement of GFSZA.

    GFSZA is a federal law.GFSZA exempts those with valid permits from GFSZA, so in Virginia those with a CHP are exempt from GFSZA. Off duty LEOs are not exempt.

    The Commonwealth does not have Gun Free School Zones, only the prohibition on carry at schools, school property and school buses.

    So LEO 229 if you did not have a CHP and carried within 1000 feet of a school you would be committing a federal felony, even though the Commonwealth has the good sense toallow you to carry insidethe school even when off duty.

    The citizen that obtains a CHP and is exempted from GFSZA and walks her child to the front door of the school while carrying (on school property) is committing a felony under the Commonwealths law.

    Stupid confusing gun laws can make criminals of us all.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Thundar wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Something does not jive.

    They reference United States v. Morrison 2000 and talk about lack ofthe authority to enact such laws. I do not think it is in force.

    Then the section you pasted is rather confusing. What is this "License" they speak of?

    "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"

    Then is says the police need to verify the person is "qualified" to receive it. I would submit that the police would be qualified based on their profession since they cannot have such disqualifications and still be able to do the job.

    If a cop could not possess a gun.... he could not be on the job.

    Lastly... it appears that if you HAVE a license.... you can be "in the zone."
    LEO 229,

    Yes your argument is logical, butbeing a police officer does notmeet the licensing requirement of GFSZA.

    GFSZA is a federal law.GFSZA exempts those with valid permits from GFSZA, so in Virginia those with a CHP are exempt from GFSZA. Off duty LEOs are not exempt.

    The Commonwealth does not have Gun Free School Zones, only the prohibition on carry at schools, school property and school buses.

    So LEO 229 if you did not have a CHP and carried within 1000 feet of a school you would be committing a federal felony, even though the Commonwealth has the good sense toallow you to carry insidethe school even when off duty.

    The citizen that obtains a CHP and is exempted from GFSZA and walks her child to the front door of the school while carrying (on school property) is committing a felony under the Commonwealths law.

    Stupid confusing gun laws can make criminals of us all.
    The ability to carry in a school off duty just changed a few years ago. It was not in the code section and I was breaking to law.

    However.. Knowing that I am a member of a brotherhood and CCing anyway... I doubt I would have ever been caught or charged. I enjoy my employee discount. :P

    Since the police are the agency that certify those that have this "Licence" I will assume that I can certify myself and that my credentials are my "Licence." Done deal!!

  24. #24
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Thundar wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Something does not jive.

    They reference United States v. Morrison 2000 and talk about lack ofthe authority to enact such laws. I do not think it is in force.

    Then the section you pasted is rather confusing. What is this "License" they speak of?

    "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"

    Then is says the police need to verify the person is "qualified" to receive it. I would submit that the police would be qualified based on their profession since they cannot have such disqualifications and still be able to do the job.

    If a cop could not possess a gun.... he could not be on the job.

    Lastly... it appears that if you HAVE a license.... you can be "in the zone."
    LEO 229,

    Yes your argument is logical, butbeing a police officer does notmeet the licensing requirement of GFSZA.

    GFSZA is a federal law.GFSZA exempts those with valid permits from GFSZA, so in Virginia those with a CHP are exempt from GFSZA. Off duty LEOs are not exempt.

    The Commonwealth does not have Gun Free School Zones, only the prohibition on carry at schools, school property and school buses.

    So LEO 229 if you did not have a CHP and carried within 1000 feet of a school you would be committing a federal felony, even though the Commonwealth has the good sense toallow you to carry insidethe school even when off duty.

    The citizen that obtains a CHP and is exempted from GFSZA and walks her child to the front door of the school while carrying (on school property) is committing a felony under the Commonwealths law.

    Stupid confusing gun laws can make criminals of us all.
    The ability to carry in a school off duty just changed a few years ago. It was not in the code section and I was breaking to law.

    However.. Knowing that I am a member of a brotherhood and CCing anyway... I doubt I would have ever been caught or charged. I enjoy my employee discount. :P

    Since the police are the agency that certify those that have this "Licence" I will assume that I can certify myself and that my credentials are my "Licence." Done deal!!
    LEO 229,

    Are you trying to pull a HankT on me??

    I think the motivation of your post above wasto try to flush out all of the "Damn LEOs think they are above the law comments"

    We all know that in the Commonwealth there isonly the CHP, which is either issued by the VSP or the circuit court.

    My post was not intended to make some left handed accusation against you or other LEOs. Please open carry or conceal carry off duty wherever you desire. It can only make our society safer.The postwas intended to show the absolute absurdity of federal legislation such as the GFSZA.

    IMHO when asked for a license I think that a copy of the bill of rights would suffice, after all we don't need a license to exercise our rights.:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    251

    Post imported post

    Thundar wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Something does not jive.

    They reference United States v. Morrison 2000 and talk about lack ofthe authority to enact such laws. I do not think it is in force.

    Then the section you pasted is rather confusing. What is this "License" they speak of?

    "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"

    Then is says the police need to verify the person is "qualified" to receive it. I would submit that the police would be qualified based on their profession since they cannot have such disqualifications and still be able to do the job.

    If a cop could not possess a gun.... he could not be on the job.

    Lastly... it appears that if you HAVE a license.... you can be "in the zone."
    So LEO 229 if you did not have a CHP and carried within 1000 feet of a school you would be committing a federal felony, even though the Commonwealth has the good sense toallow you to carry insidethe school even when off duty.

    The Gun Free School Zone Act was voided and then re-enacted after changes:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act


    The LEO safety act does not cover federal laws and statutes:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enf...ers_Safety_Act


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
  •