School Zones -1000ft??

SouthBayr · Sep 16, 2009

imported post

So I have searched and read through here and understand 626.9

California Penal Code Section 626.9
(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f). {snip}

but...

here is the silly part, Does the 1000ft mean as a crow flies or walking distance?

The reason I ask is because there is a school located on the other side of a freeway I live close by to. I'm willing to bet it's within a 1000ft of my residence (as a crow flies) but probably a good mile if I had to actually walk.

dirtykoala · Sep 16, 2009

imported post

edit!

Decoligny · Sep 16, 2009

imported post

SouthBayr wrote:

So I have searched and read through here and understand 626.9

California Penal Code Section 626.9
(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f). {snip}

but...

here is the silly part, Does the 1000ft mean as a crow flies or walking distance?

The reason I ask is because there is a school located on the other side of a freeway I live close by to. I'm willing to bet it's within a 1000ft of my residence (as a crow flies) but probably a good mile if I had to actually walk.

That 1,000 feet is in a straight line as the crow flies from the edge of school property.

A lot of people go to google maps and draw a 1,000 diameter circle around the center of the school. This is not accurate. The edge of the school property could be 250 feet from the school itself.

chewy352 · Sep 19, 2009

imported post

When i received my first written warning (funny i never received anything in writing) I was told by Escondido PD that it is as a crow flies from the school property line.

Question: If i do not receive anything in writing or sign anything is it in fact a written warning?

Michael

Decoligny · Sep 19, 2009

imported post

chewy352 wrote:

When i received my first written warning (funny i never received anything in writing) I was told by Escondido PD that it is as a crow flies from the school property line.

Question: If i do not receive anything in writing or sign anything is it in fact a written warning?

Michael

Written warning? WTF? 626.9 violations are punishable by two, three, or five years in state prison.

Are you trying to tell us that an Escondido PD officer gave you a written warning for a FELONY OFFENSE?

:what: :banghead: :what:

chewy352 · Sep 20, 2009

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

chewy352 wrote:

When i received my first written warning (funny i never received anything in writing) I was told by Escondido PD that it is as a crow flies from the school property line.

Question: If i do not receive anything in writing or sign anything is it in fact a written warning?

Michael

Click to expand...

Written warning? WTF? 626.9 violations are punishable by two, three, or five years in state prison.

Are you trying to tell us that an Escondido PD officer gave you a written warning for a FELONY OFFENSE?

:what: :banghead: :what:

The law says that i have to know or should reasonably know that i was within 1000' of a school. That can at times be hard to prove especially when i have never lived in Escondido. So i have two opinions on why i recieved this so called "written warning"

1.) The officer is pro 2a rights but had to confront us and at least educateme because it is still his job no matter his beliefs.

2.) By giving us a warning, if I return to that area UOC then he has an open and shut 626.9 case because he can prove that i know there is a school.

I personally believe that number 2 is more likely. However Escondido has so far in my experience been very respectful of UOC. As much as the law allows them to be.

Michael

Edward Peruta · Sep 20, 2009

imported post

It's only a matter of time before this 1,000 foot rule is sorted out.

Some individual or group should file the necessary legal action to have the law evaluated on constitutional grounds with the claim and belief that a reasonable individual will never know the exact distance from a school.

It is well established that laws that contain built in ambiguity and are functionally vague to the average citizenhave been ruled to be unconstitutional and unenforceable.

There is absolutely no way to judge the distance from school property without carrying some type of scientific measuring equipment.

I'm willing to bet that there are few if any individuals in the more populated areas of California who know the location of every school in their community. Pick any elected official in San Diego County and ask them to rattle of EVERY SCHOOL in the county. When I get back I'm gonna take my video camera and do some serious research on this topic.

The only sensible way that the law will pass judicial muster is if the local communities painted the sidewalks and streets a bright color within the 1,000 foot area. Something like what theydo to curbs in cities across the country to classify and give notice of strictparking rules. Another way would be to erect signs on every street and sidewalkwithin the 1.000 foot perimeter to provide notice that a measured line is about to be crossed.

HERE IS THE RUB:

Like every other law that is stupid and ill conceived, the 1,000 foot law pertaining to firearms will remain on the books, continue to be discussed, and enforced by law enforcementuntil it pisses someone off and is challenged by a personwith the courage and financial resources to prove how unrealistic and stupid it is.

It's gonna take more than posting on message boards and talking to solve issues.

In most states, the law prohibits carrying firearms ON SCHOOL PROPERTY.

The opposition to any correcting legislation is the fact that firearms are not the only area of the law where distances from schools are regulated. They do it for drugs and sex offenders also.

chewy352 · Sep 20, 2009

imported post

This can be compared to the school zone speed limit signs. They have to post it because not everyone is going to know they are coming up on a school until its to late.

I wish i had the money to fight this law but food for my family comes first.

Michael

CA_Libertarian · Sep 20, 2009

imported post

Edward Peruta wrote:

... Some individual or group should file the necessary legal action to have the law evaluated on constitutional grounds with the claim and belief that a reasonable individual will never know the exact distance from a school.

I believe the 'reasonably should have known' language covers this ambiguity.

If you're 999.5 feet from school property, the jury can decide if you could have reasonably known you were 0.5 feet off on your gauging of the distance.

If you're standing 100 feet away, it's pretty easy to say a reasonable person knows that distance is definitely not more than 1,000 feet.

(*The above examples ignore that you have to also reasonably know the school is there... which gives defendants even more protection from prosecution when it comes to accidental violations.)

ETA: I agree this law needs to be challenged; and it should be on grounds of equal protection. The fact is that this law discriminates against people who live near schools. While the rest of the town enjoys the ability to carry while they walk their dog down the street, people in school zones can't do that. Obviously, we first need the courts to recognize Self Defense as a right before we can show how this law infringes on our ability to defend ourselves.

N6ATF · Sep 20, 2009

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

Edward Peruta wrote:

... Some individual or group should file the necessary legal action to have the law evaluated on constitutional grounds with the claim and belief that a reasonable individual will never know the exact distance from a school.

Click to expand...

I believe the 'reasonably should have known' language covers this ambiguity.

If you're 999.5 feet from school property, the jury can decide if you could have reasonably known you were 0.5 feet off on your gauging of the distance.

If you're standing 100 feet away, it's pretty easy to say a reasonable person knows that distance is definitely not more than 1,000 feet.

(*The above examples ignore that you have to also reasonably know the school is there... which gives defendants even more protection from prosecution when it comes to accidental violations.)

ETA: I agree this law needs to be challenged; and it should be on grounds of equal protection. The fact is that this law discriminates against people who live near schools. While the rest of the town enjoys the ability to carry while they walk their dog down the street, people in school zones can't do that. Obviously, we first need the courts to recognize Self Defense as a right before we can show how this law infringes on our ability to defend ourselves.

Maybe our last step should be to get this type of constitutional amendment proposition passed:

"We, the people of the State of California, find that as criminals do not follow laws, any government employee, official, or agent, who writes, votes for, signs, or enforces a law which disarms law-abiding adults, making them by definition disarmed potential victims, shall be guilty of a felony and be imprisoned for no fewer than 5 years, or be fined $5 million dollars."

jyda · Sep 24, 2009

imported post

Just wondering how this would affect my private property (primary house) which is located within a 1000 ft radius of a community college?

bigtoe416 · Sep 24, 2009

imported post

Community colleges don't count, just K-12 schools.

dirtykoala · Sep 24, 2009

imported post

edit!

jyda · Sep 24, 2009

imported post

Ahhhh, thanks. I guess I missed that K-12 distinction... sorry.

Streetbikerr6 · Sep 24, 2009

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

SouthBayr wrote:

So I have searched and read through here and understand 626.9

California Penal Code Section 626.9
(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f). {snip}

but...

here is the silly part, Does the 1000ft mean as a crow flies or walking distance?

The reason I ask is because there is a school located on the other side of a freeway I live close by to. I'm willing to bet it's within a 1000ft of my residence (as a crow flies) but probably a good mile if I had to actually walk.

Click to expand...

That 1,000 feet is in a straight line as the crow flies from the edge of school property.

A lot of people go to google maps and draw a 1,000 diameter circle around the center of the school. This is not accurate. The edge of the school property could be 250 feet from the school itself.

Hope your not referring to my post! I clearly showed my red lines not from the center of the school yet from the edges of the small elem. school.

Also, correct me if I am wrong although I believe you may open carry on your property in front of your house even within the 1000 feet correct? or must it be in your home.

CA_Libertarian · Sep 25, 2009

imported post

Streetbikerr6 wrote:

...correct me if I am wrong although I believe you may open carry on your property in front of your house even within the 1000 feet correct? or must it be in your home.

Correct... for now...

626.9(c):

Code:

 Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm  under any of the following circumstances:
 (1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private  property, if the place of residence, place of business, or private  property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the  firearm is otherwise lawful.

...

Thesues is currently being prosecuted under 626.9, and the DA is trying to get the trial judge to change the definition of "private property" to include only places not accessible to the public.

Until this case is resolved; I suggest NOT relying on this exemption.

School Zones -1000ft??

SouthBayr

Regular Member

dirtykoala

Regular Member

Decoligny

Regular Member

chewy352

Regular Member

Decoligny

Regular Member

chewy352

Regular Member

Edward Peruta

Regular Member

chewy352

Regular Member

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher

N6ATF

Banned

jyda

New member

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

dirtykoala

Regular Member

jyda

New member

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher