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

Thread: OC and School Rule

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    How serious is the law regarding no OC within 1000 feet of any school? I live right behind a school, so would I be breaking the law once I step foot off of my property? This seems so ridiculous because basically, I cannot OC if I'm near my own house.

    Also, how do they measure the 1000 feet? Is it 1000 feet in general, or 1000 feet going by streets and sidewalks. And is it 1000 feet to the edge of the school property, school building, or front door of the school?

    The whole rule is ridiculous.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42

    Post imported post

    Very good question.



    I wondered the very same thing the other day. I wonder if this measurement is measured from the outer perimeter of the school grounds-in a straight line, from the actual building, etc...

    Anyone know for certain how this 1,000 feet is measured?



    Dirty

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42

    Post imported post

    Serious indeed.

    We're fairly close to the school here at my house-just down the street. When I walk the dog around the block I checked the distance from the closest point on the walk to the school and found it to be 0.3 of a mile, which is roughly 1,600 feet from the school. I'm safe.

    Dirty

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Gonzales, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    That'd be my thought too.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    Ok, so I would be able to OC to and from my house, only if I was carrying to and from my car. Is that what you're saying?

    Sorry if I'm being bothersome. I just want to know all the facts before I do anything. Thanks for helping me out.

  9. #9
    Regular Member turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Independence, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    Ok, so I would be able to OC to and from my house, only if I was carrying to and from my car. Is that what you're saying?

    Sorry if I'm being bothersome. I just want to know all the facts before I do anything. Thanks for helping me out.
    Yep, you can OC to and from your car while on private property, which certainly includes your own property. You can drive down the street and pull into a parking lot of a business, exit the car and go into the business while OCing within the 1000' zone. Again, private property. Don't walk down a public street or sidewalk tho...
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Him: "I carry my gun concealed"
    Me: "You're not very good at it"
    Him: "What do you mean?"
    Me: "I know you have a gun"
    End of conversation.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    turbodog wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    Ok, so I would be able to OC to and from my house, only if I was carrying to and from my car. Is that what you're saying?

    Sorry if I'm being bothersome. I just want to know all the facts before I do anything. Thanks for helping me out.
    Yep, you can OC to and from your car while on private property, which certainly includes your own property. You can drive down the street and pull into a parking lot of a business, exit the car and go into the business while OCing within the 1000' zone. Again, private property. Don't walk down a public street or sidewalk tho...
    Thanks for clearing that up. Guess I won't be OC'ing anytime soon as using the sidewalks and streets is the only way of getting around. I'm in downtown New Orleans, and I usually have to park my car far from my house.

    Don't you all think this law is absolutely ridiculous? What difference does it make if I carry my firearm near a school.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    If you are going to carry, especially open carry, it pays to read and know the law for yourself, and not rely on internet lawyers. (Not downing anyone, just staing a general rule).

    In this case, here is what you need: RS 14:95.2

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    42

    Post imported post

    Thanks LA Carry.

    To me this reads you can OC no closer than 1,000 feet in a straight line direction from the outer perimeter of the school grounds.

    I think I'm still going to get my roll around tape measure and see for myself just how close I get to the school while walking the pup.

    Dirty

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    43

    Post imported post

    dirty_sanchez,

    I would argue that La. Rev. Stat. 14:95.2 does not apply to open carry. Note that it states the following:

    "The provisions of this Section shall not apply to . . . [a]ny constitutionally protected activity which cannot be regulated by the state, such as a firearm contained entirely within a motor vehicle."

    Open carry has been recognized as a constitutionally-protected activity. See State v. Nelson, 367 So. 2d 317, 318 (La. 1979) ("Each citizen is guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms not concealed on his person."). I don't see how the argument could be made that open carry is less protected than carrying in a motor vehicle; both exceptions work as a negative inference from the text of Louisiana's right to keep and bear arms.

    However... the federal government also has a law banning carrying within 1,000 feet of a school. I'm not familiar enough with the interaction between state constitutional rights and federal statutory law to saw which would trump the other in this instance, but suffice to say the federal law could still apply even if La. Rev. Stat. 14:95.2 does not.

    As for how far 1,000 feet is, the answer is: a long friggin' way. It's about 2-4 city blocks, depending on how wide the blocks are. I'd wager this constitutes roughly half of the City of New Orleans. It makes carrying legally very difficult here.

    In any case, if it's any consolation, my understanding is that the firearm free zone laws usually aren't used against persons off school grounds who haven't committed another, serious crime. It's usually a tacked-on offense. Alas, you're still at the whim of the officer, of course.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    While I completely agree that your argument has moral and logical merit, the legal ground that it is upon is tenuous. Courts have ruled that "reasonable restrictions" apply to constitutionally protected activities, and considering the grave potential consequences, I would never advise anyone to ignore them.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    43

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry,

    This isn't really a "reasonable restrictions" case -- it's a clear matter of statutory construction. The statute says that it does not apply to constitutionally protected activities, and so the only issue is whether open carry is constitionally protected. The question of whether the restriction is reasonable is prior -- we're both assuming, for the sake of argument, that the 1,000 foot school zone restriction is "reasonable" under Heller (and the courts may eventually hold otherwise).

    I agree that none of this matters if you're arrested and have to spend thousands defending yourself against a bogus conviction. The fact that there are no appellate cases dealing with this issue would likewise weigh against open carrying within 1,000 feet of schools. Although Louisiana technically doesn't follow the common law doctrine of stare decisis, courts nevertheless tend to respect precedent here in the same way they do in any other state.

    That said, the far better legal argument is still that under state law, the 1,000 foot rule does not apply to open carry. Federal law, as I noted above, is a whole 'nuther ball of wax.

  16. #16
    Regular Member turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Independence, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    Courrèges wrote:
    Louisiana Carry,

    This isn't really a "reasonable restrictions" case -- it's a clear matter of statutory construction. The statute says that it does not apply to constitutionally protected activities, and so the only issue is whether open carry is constitutionally protected. The question of whether the restriction is reasonable is prior -- we're both assuming, for the sake of argument, that the 1,000 foot school zone restriction is "reasonable" under Heller (and the courts may eventually hold otherwise).

    That said, the far better legal argument is still that under state law, the 1,000 foot rule does not apply to open carry. Federal law, as I noted above, is a whole 'nuther ball of wax.
    I still wonder what makes possessing a gun in car a protected activity but outside a car it's not?

    Our state constitution says we have the right to keep and bear arms, this is not constitutional protection?

    If not, what IS constitutional protection?
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Him: "I carry my gun concealed"
    Me: "You're not very good at it"
    Him: "What do you mean?"
    Me: "I know you have a gun"
    End of conversation.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    43

    Post imported post

    turbodog wrote:
    Courrèges wrote:
    Louisiana Carry,

    This isn't really a "reasonable restrictions" case -- it's a clear matter of statutory construction. The statute says that it does not apply to constitutionally protected activities, and so the only issue is whether open carry is constitutionally protected. The question of whether the restriction is reasonable is prior -- we're both assuming, for the sake of argument, that the 1,000 foot school zone restriction is "reasonable" under Heller (and the courts may eventually hold otherwise).

    That said, the far better legal argument is still that under state law, the 1,000 foot rule does not apply to open carry. Federal law, as I noted above, is a whole 'nuther ball of wax.
    I still wonder what makes possessing a gun in car a protected activity but outside a car it's not?

    Our state constitution says we have the right to keep and bear arms, this is not constitutional protection?

    If not, what IS constitutional protection?
    Exactly. There is nothing that legally distinguishes carrying in a motor vehicle from open carry, at least from a constitutional perspective. The Louisiana Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms "except" that regulation of concealed carry is permissible. Under the canons of legal interpretation, the expression of one idea is the exclusion of another -- thus, we assume that the exception listed is the only exception (except for so-called "reasonable restrictions" -- minor infrigements for competing interests of health and safety). Both the motor vehicle exception and the open carry exception work from this same negative inference.

    As I noted above, the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized in State v. Nelson that the right to bear arms not concealed on one's person (i.e., open carry) isconstitutionally protected. I think it's a pretty clear statement of law.

    However, the problem is that nobody has actually litigated this precise issue through the courts, so it's one of those cases of"you might be right, but being right isn't always enough." I wouldn't want to have to fight the issue, potentially through multiple appeals.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South Starks ( not near water tower ), ,
    Posts
    24

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    So I 'm guessin there has been clarification on going into a convenience store within the zone while CCW ??



    I have been told by the CHL unit several years ago that thats not really private property ( convenience, grocery, gas station etc )and if its within the zone you cannot carry, only at a private residence



    I know thats not remotely what the statue says....thats what the CHL unit said

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    Yrdawg wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    So I 'm guessin there has been clarification on going into a convenience store within the zone while CCW ??



    I have been told by the CHL unit several years ago that thats not really private property ( convenience, grocery, gas station etc )and if its within the zone you cannot carry, only at a private residence



    I know thats not remotely what the statue says....thats what the CHL unit said
    There may be case law to that effect, but I am not aware of it. However, a plain reading of the statute should work in favor of the accused. You and I know the hazards of listening to LEOs when it comes to speculation about legal interpretation. They may be able to give an informed opinion on what you will be arrested for, but only a judge/jury/appeals court can speak for what you will be convicted of. The law does not say residence, it says private property. I spoke to an appeals court judge about that kind of thing, and he said that his guiding principle is that doubt works in our favor.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South Starks ( not near water tower ), ,
    Posts
    24

    Post imported post

    LOL



    Hey theres hope in doubt then



    Its always amazn tryin how to legaly carry out my 2 A rights



    No doubt the stat is plainly worded as you say and as far as I have been able to determine , La only recognizes two types of property ....public and private

    Tks as always for info



  21. #21
    Regular Member turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Independence, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Yrdawg wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    So I 'm guessin there has been clarification on going into a convenience store within the zone while CCW ??



    I have been told by the CHL unit several years ago that thats not really private property ( convenience, grocery, gas station etc )and if its within the zone you cannot carry, only at a private residence



    I know thats not remotely what the statue says....thats what the CHL unit said
    There may be case law to that effect, but I am not aware of it. However, a plain reading of the statute should work in favor of the accused. You and I know the hazards of listening to LEOs when it comes to speculation about legal interpretation. They may be able to give an informed opinion on what you will be arrested for, but only a judge/jury/appeals court can speak for what you will be convicted of. The law does not say residence, it says private property. I spoke to an appeals court judge about that kind of thing, and he said that his guiding principle is that doubt works in our favor.
    The law states: "(4) The possession of a firearm occurring within one thousand feet of school property and entirely on private property, or entirely within a private residence..."

    So the law does say "residence" but, it seems to me, it differentiates between private "property" and "residence".

    A business, though having public access, is still considered private property by Louisiana law, correct?

    If you went along with the claim that "private property" means only ones residence, does that mean strictly the structure of a house or does it also include the associated lot surrounding the structure? Otherwise, one could never carry from the car to the house legally.

    And how would this apply to an apartment or condo? Your "residence" in such a place is only a small part of the "structure", so would you be in violation carrying from parking lot through the building?


    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Him: "I carry my gun concealed"
    Me: "You're not very good at it"
    Him: "What do you mean?"
    Me: "I know you have a gun"
    End of conversation.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    43

    Post imported post

    turbodog wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Yrdawg wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    So I 'm guessin there has been clarification on going into a convenience store within the zone while CCW ??*

    *

    I have been told by the CHL unit several years ago that thats not really private property ( convenience, grocery, gas station etc )*and if its within the zone you cannot carry, only at a private residence

    *

    I know thats not remotely what the statue says....thats what the* CHL unit said
    There may be case law to that effect, but I am not aware of it.* However, a plain reading of the statute should work in favor of the accused.* You and I know the hazards of listening to LEOs when it comes to speculation about legal interpretation.** They may be able to give an informed opinion on what you will be arrested for, but only a judge/jury/appeals court can speak for what you will be convicted of.* The law does not say residence, it says private property.* I spoke to an appeals court judge about that kind of thing, and he said that his guiding principle is that doubt works in our favor.
    The law states: "(4) *The possession of a firearm occurring within one thousand feet of school property and entirely on private property, or entirely within a private residence..."

    So the law does say "residence" but, it seems to me, it differentiates between private "property" and "residence".

    A business, though having public access, is still considered private property by Louisiana law, correct?

    If you went along with the claim that "private property" means only ones residence, does that mean strictly the structure of a house or does it also include the associated lot surrounding the structure? Otherwise, one could never carry from the car to the house legally.

    And how would this apply to an apartment or condo? Your "residence" in such a place is only a small part of the "structure", so would you be in violation carrying from parking lot through the building?

    *
    You're right -- the officer was wrong. "Private property" means just that -- property that is privately-owned. The statute also excludes private residences, including private residences located on public property (i.e., in housing projects). There is no contrary definition in either the statute or the criminal code.

    There's no ambiguity, either -- if "private property" meant the same as "private residence," or included all private residences, then there would be a redundancy in the statute. It runs completely contrary to statutory interpretation to assume suplus language.

    BTW -- the legal rule your former appellate judge was talking about is called the "rule of lenity." Bascially, any ambiguity in a criminal statute is supposed to be construed in favor of the accused -- although you can find a lot of cases where this rule is pretty much ignored, or at least not strictly applied. Here, I see no argument that there's any ambiguity as an initial matter, so resort to the rule of lenity isn't even necessary.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Keithville, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    374

    Post imported post

    Courrèges wrote:
    turbodog wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Yrdawg wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    ejacobson325 wrote:
    Louisiana Carry wrote:
    Pretty serious.

    IIRC, it is up to five years at hard labor for a violation.

    I would imagine it is from the edge of the property.
    So basically, I cannot OC from or to my own home?
    Not if it involves stepping onto private property to go somewhere besides your vehicle.
    So I 'm guessin there has been clarification on going into a convenience store within the zone while CCW ??



    I have been told by the CHL unit several years ago that thats not really private property ( convenience, grocery, gas station etc )and if its within the zone you cannot carry, only at a private residence



    I know thats not remotely what the statue says....thats what the CHL unit said
    There may be case law to that effect, but I am not aware of it. However, a plain reading of the statute should work in favor of the accused. You and I know the hazards of listening to LEOs when it comes to speculation about legal interpretation. They may be able to give an informed opinion on what you will be arrested for, but only a judge/jury/appeals court can speak for what you will be convicted of. The law does not say residence, it says private property. I spoke to an appeals court judge about that kind of thing, and he said that his guiding principle is that doubt works in our favor.
    The law states: "(4) The possession of a firearm occurring within one thousand feet of school property and entirely on private property, or entirely within a private residence..."

    So the law does say "residence" but, it seems to me, it differentiates between private "property" and "residence".

    A business, though having public access, is still considered private property by Louisiana law, correct?

    If you went along with the claim that "private property" means only ones residence, does that mean strictly the structure of a house or does it also include the associated lot surrounding the structure? Otherwise, one could never carry from the car to the house legally.

    And how would this apply to an apartment or condo? Your "residence" in such a place is only a small part of the "structure", so would you be in violation carrying from parking lot through the building?

    You're right -- the officer was wrong. "Private property" means just that -- property that is privately-owned. The statute also excludes private residences, including private residences located on public property (i.e., in housing projects). There is no contrary definition in either the statute or the criminal code.

    There's no ambiguity, either -- if "private property" meant the same as "private residence," or included all private residences, then there would be a redundancy in the statute. It runs completely contrary to statutory interpretation to assume suplus language.

    BTW -- the legal rule your former appellate judge was talking about is called the "rule of lenity." Bascially, any ambiguity in a criminal statute is supposed to be construed in favor of the accused -- although you can find a lot of cases where this rule is pretty much ignored, or at least not strictly applied. Here, I see no argument that there's any ambiguity as an initial matter, so resort to the rule of lenity isn't even necessary.
    I only mention it because it is not unforseeable that the prosecution would try to construct said ambiguity.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Covington, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    89

    Post imported post

    so basically even at 9:00pm when im walking with my wife and i pass a school i can go to jail. Because i do live near a school and i have been ocing at night for two weeksand passing the school. will i still get in trouble.

  25. #25
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,623

    Post imported post

    tntorqu wrote:
    so basically even at 9:00pm when im walking with my wife and i pass a school i can go to jail. Because i do live near a school and i have been ocing at night for two weeksand passing the school. will i still get in trouble.
    Section 922 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code: (1) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone. Exception: This does not include possession of a firearm on private property that is not part of school grounds or possession of a loaded firearm by an individualwho is licensed to do so by the State. (i.e. a concealed carry, weapon, or firearm permit).Is Louisiana statute to a higher standard?

    Yata hey

    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.

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
  •