Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: I live within 1000' of a school !!! What to do?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Livermore, California, USA
    Posts
    229

    Post imported post

    Hi All - I live about 320' from a K-6 school in Livermore, CA (Alameda County). Am I hosed for OC or are there any known incidents of case law that exempt you if your residence is within a school zone? Can I walk from my front door to the car parked on the street in front of my residence while practicing OC within the school zone?

    Thanks All,

    Livermoron (AKA Jon)

  2. #2
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    I expect, once you leave your property, you are in a school zone. You might do what I did. I went to Harbor Freight and bought a book safe to lock up my unloaded Rossi .357 and a double speedy loader pouch. It has a 3 wheel combination lock. Here is the link to it. Better to be safe than sorry.

    http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/cta...emnumber=95815


    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    No case law or exemption if you live within the school zone.

    There is case law stating that carrying on a public side walk IS a violation of 626.9. I belive it's People v Tapia... it's referenced in Thesues' thread.

    Speaking of Thesues, he was on private property and was recently convicted despite the exemption for private property. We're confident he will win on appeal, but each of us should mind the fact that the DA, judge, and jury may simply ignore this exemption. IMO you shouldn't carry even in your yard unless it is fully fenced.


    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    If you have written permission from the school super you can carry within the limits of their permission. Since that won't happen, you should have your stuff locked up as mentioned above until you are clear of the school zone.
    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    dirtykoala wrote:
    If you have written permission from the school super you can carry within the limits of their permission. Since that won't happen, you should have your stuff locked up as mentioned above until you are clear of the school zone.
    As you say, it just isn't going to happen. Might as well ask for written permission to run through the school hallways naked between classes while juggling running chainsaws. Each stands an equal chance of approval, zero.

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602

    Post imported post

    It is my understanding that the GFSZ Act exempts you from the 1000' rule if you are on your own property or have a permit - so may I presume that the Ca. statute is more restrictive?

    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.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    It is my understanding that the GFSZ Act exempts you from the 1000' rule if you are on your own property or have a permit - so may I presume that the Ca. statute is more restrictive?

    Yata hey
    PC 626.9, The California Gun Free School Zone does not distinguish between your own private property and anyone else's private property. It simply says:

    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).
    (c) 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.


    This is what Theseus was relying upon as part of his defense. He was on private property and thus exempt from 626.9. Hopefully the appelate court will actually read the Penal Code.

    The OP asked if he could Open Carry from his house to his car that is parked ON THE STREET. This is the critical statement. On the street is no longer on private property. Thus as soon as he stepped off of his own property, he would be violating PC 626.9.

  8. #8
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    And considering the hostility toward self defense rightsby the County he is in don't expect prosecutorial or judical honesty on the "Victim Disarmament Zone" law. You'll also note that Alameda Co.is the defendant in Nordyke v King over their gun ban ordinance at the co. fairgrounds.

    To the OP, I would feel quite comfortable possessing within your residence. But would not carry out side unless your property is not accessible to the public. Unloaded and locked in a secure fully enclosed case is the general exception.

    As for UOC at this time I strongly ask that you research why some here are saying not to UOC. The SCOTUS case McDonald v Chicago likely decided in June 2010 will we hope bring 2A protectionsto Californians. One of the reasonswe areasking this of UOCers is so individual are not facing as great a threat of prosecution for such issues Theseus', a VERY experienced UOCer, has dealt with which resulted in his convictionfor 626.9 (school zone)and a 10 year CA firearm possession prohibition.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Livermore, California, USA
    Posts
    229

    Post imported post

    Thanks everyone for the input It sounds like the best practice will be to keep "it" locked up until out of the, and I loved this term, "victim disarmament zone".

    This, of course, means that I would have to find some place to stop - get to the trunk - unlock and strap up. Not exactly inconspicuous...

    Livermoron

  10. #10
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    If it's "unloaded locked in secure fully enclosedcontainer" then it doesn't have to be in the trunk, it can be on your lap in the front seat.

    Not meaning to be disrespectful, but if you didn't alreadyknow that, I ask you to spend more time studying the brochures and THE ACTUAL PENAL CODESto understand fully the interplayof thedifferent CA prohibitions.

    I'm asking people to not UOC at this time and to at least wait for theSupreme Court ruling in McDonald v Chicago (expected June 2010). But IF you're not going to heed that advice then I want you to be in the best position legally and informationally to insure youdon't incur personal criminaland financial liability with your carrying.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Livermore, California, USA
    Posts
    229

    Post imported post

    Thanks Cato for the info. I did, of course, know about the locked container information you cited. I did not (sad to say) understand the school zone law. Becoming more informed and enjoying it. Thanks!

  12. #12
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Livermoron wrote:
    Thanks Cato for the info. I did, of course, know about the locked container information you cited. I did not (sad to say) understand the school zone law. Becoming more informed and enjoying it. Thanks!
    Mudcamper has A LOT of info at californiaopencarry.org

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    Amen to that, brother. OC is good, and I'd love to do it, but LEOs are likely to scoop you up and confiscate your weapon. For any reason. Forget about the laws. I think OCers are putting themselves in harm's way. Local law enforcement is still too stupid to react intelligently.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Lead Lobber wrote:
    Amen to that, brother. OC is good, and I'd love to do it, but LEOs are likely to scoop you up and confiscate your weapon. For any reason. Forget about the laws. I think OCers are putting themselves in harm's way. Local law enforcement still acts too stupid for us to think they would ever act intelligently.
    Fixed.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    Move out of state, where such ridiculous statutes do not apply to citizens. Have a good trip!

  16. #16
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    N6ATF wrote:
    still acts too stupid for us to think they would ever act intelligently.
    Fixed.

    I understand anyone's dislike or fear of LE if they've witnessed or been subject to an abuse of power. But painting with a wide brush, including the throwing of insults at LE, furthersthe misunderstandings over RKBAand doesn't help repair or correct it. It also pushes those LE,who are on the fence or just here for information, to disregard the concerns we express here. Take the high road brother.

    We need to do public relations and be good ambassadors not only when carrying but also when posting.

    Oleg Volk would say no less


  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    cato wrote:
    N6ATF wrote:
    still acts too stupid for us to think they would ever act intelligently.
    Fixed.

    I understand anyone's dislike or fear of LE if they've witnessed or been subject to an abuse of power. But painting with a wide brush, including the throwing of insults at LE, furthersthe misunderstandings over RKBAand doesn't help repair or correct it. It also pushes those LE,who are on the fence or just here for information, to disregard the concerns we express here. Take the high road brother.

    We need to do public relations and be good ambassadors not only when carrying but also when posting.

    Oleg Volk would say no less
    Actually I was correcting those who insult LE (and their handlers, the politicians). Both didn't rise to their rightly-or-wrongly elevated levels in society by being ignorant, incompetent, idiots, stupid, morons, illiterate, etc...

    However, if you are not an oath keeper (literally, as a signer, or effectively), it's all too easy to adopt the viral behavior of ACTING (with Oscar-winning brilliance) like you are one of these insult adjectives, so you can claim qualified immunity if your abuses ever go to court, and dissaude victims from even filing civil rights lawsuits (which would fail due to QI) in the first place.

    Just giving credit where credit's due, to the master school of acting that (too) much law enforcement is trained in.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    Livermoron wrote:
    Hi All - I live about 320' from a K-6 school in Livermore, CA (Alameda County). Am I hosed for OC or are there any known incidents of case law that exempt you if your residence is within a school zone? Can I walk from my front door to the car parked on the street in front of my residence while practicing OC within the school zone?

    Thanks All,

    Livermoron (AKA Jon)
    The United States constitution (or any portion of the Bill of Rights) does not prohibit carrying firearms. Anywhere. Local fools that drafted illegal, unconstitutional regulations about proximity to schools while exercising one's constitutional rights are stupid, and need to arrested and prosecuted immediately for treason. Hang them high.

    And this applies to loaded weapons. Current legislation that requires sidearms to be not loaded is also unconstitutional.

    It's your right and mine. Pack a loaded pistol. But do so at your own risk - this is no longer a free country governed by the rule of law by which it was founded. Doing so will most likely get you arrested, and your firearm confiscated.

    Welcome to America, home of the brave, land of the free. Where the Bill Of Rights no longer has effect or coherent meaning.

Posting Permissions

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