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

18 USC 922(g) vs. US. v Lopez

chewy352

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
769
Location
Harrah, Oklahoma
imported post

Be aware that although 626.9PC does not effect long arms, that 18 USC 922(q) does. Now how likely a prosecution under this section is another story is another question due to US. v Lopez

The law is still on the books, so you can be charged for it should they decide to be a pain in your side.

I would avoid carrying in all school zones
.


SCOTUS said, "We hold that the Act exceeds the authority of Congress "[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States . . . ." U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 3."


Is the section of the law still enforceable?

US. v Lopez is an interesting read non the less.
 

chewy352

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
769
Location
Harrah, Oklahoma
imported post

I just got out of my political science class and after class I asked my professor about this situation specifically.

He said that since SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional in that the accused did not effect interstate commerce. The law remains on the books due to it being part of a larger law which would have to be rewritten and go through all the legislative hurtles again.

In order to be charged with 18 USC 922(g) on would have to be interfering with interstate commerce ie: drug possession, some type of business, etc.

Going about your daily business does not interfere with interstate commerce.

In summery you can be charged but unless you are taking part in interstate commerce at the time the charges are unconstitutional.


I really hate the interstate commerce clause lol
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

chewy352 wrote:
SNIP Is the section of the law still enforceable?
This is where quoting the law actually comes in handy.

After the ruling, Congress went back and clarified the prohibition to include guns that have moved in interstate commerce. Sneaky, overreaching jerks.

To my knowledge, no one hase been charged under the new statute.

I can't copy and paste, but here is a link to a .pdf that shows the changes after Lopez.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

chewy352 wrote:
Be aware that although 626.9PC does not effect long arms, that 18 USC 922(q) does. Now how likely a prosecution under this section is another story is another question due to US. v Lopez

The law is still on the books, so you can be charged for it should they decide to be a pain in your side.

I would avoid carrying in all school zones
.


SCOTUS said, "We hold that the Act exceeds the authority of Congress "[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States . . . ." U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 3."


Is the section of the law still enforceable?

US. v Lopez is an interesting read non the less.
Go back and read 18,922.q.2 and specifically q.2.ii, and you'll clearly see that if you are licensed to carry within your state, you can carry within a school zone.
 

ak56

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
746
Location
Carnation, Washington, USA
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
chewy352 wrote:
Be aware that although 626.9PC does not effect long arms, that 18 USC 922(q) does. Now how likely a prosecution under this section is another story is another question due to US. v Lopez

The law is still on the books, so you can be charged for it should they decide to be a pain in your side.

I would avoid carrying in all school zones
.


SCOTUS said, "We hold that the Act exceeds the authority of Congress "[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States . . . ." U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 3."


Is the section of the law still enforceable?

US. v Lopez is an interesting read non the less.
Go back and read 18,922.q.2 and specifically q.2.ii, and you'll clearly see that if you are licensed to carry within your state, you can carry within a school zone.
Also check your state laws. Many states have laws prohibiting carry in school zones.
 

chewy352

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
769
Location
Harrah, Oklahoma
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
chewy352 wrote:
Be aware that although 626.9PC does not effect long arms, that 18 USC 922(q) does. Now how likely a prosecution under this section is another story is another question due to US. v Lopez

The law is still on the books, so you can be charged for it should they decide to be a pain in your side.

I would avoid carrying in all school zones
.


SCOTUS said, "We hold that the Act exceeds the authority of Congress "[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States . . . ." U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 3."


Is the section of the law still enforceable?

US. v Lopez is an interesting read non the less.
Go back and read 18,922.q.2 and specifically q.2.ii, and you'll clearly see that if you are licensed to carry within your state, you can carry within a school zone.
CA does not require a license to UOC.
 

chewy352

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
769
Location
Harrah, Oklahoma
imported post

ak56 wrote:
SouthernBoy wrote:
chewy352 wrote:
Be aware that although 626.9PC does not effect long arms, that 18 USC 922(q) does. Now how likely a prosecution under this section is another story is another question due to US. v Lopez

The law is still on the books, so you can be charged for it should they decide to be a pain in your side.

I would avoid carrying in all school zones
.


SCOTUS said, "We hold that the Act exceeds the authority of Congress "[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States . . . ." U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 3."


Is the section of the law still enforceable?

US. v Lopez is an interesting read non the less.
Go back and read 18,922.q.2 and specifically q.2.ii, and you'll clearly see that if you are licensed to carry within your state, you can carry within a school zone.
Also check your state laws. Many states have laws prohibiting carry in school zones.
CA has PC 626.9 which does not seem imo to outlaw longarms in school zones. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=626-626.11
 
Top