Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Gun-Free School Zones

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    75

    Post imported post

    I'm working on a project to try and get a couple of my state's laws improved. I need to get some accurate information on what your state's laws currently are. OCDO is about the best place I know of to find a group of knowledgeable people who are willing to help, so ... specifically:

    1) Does your state criminalize possession of a weapon on school grounds or within 1,000 feet?

    2) If yes, then how does your state define "school" for purposes of the above? Is it just K-12? Does it include colleges? Preschool?

    3) Do you have URLs (links) to the aforementioned statutes or could you give me the reference?

    Thank you very much.


  2. #2
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    Firearms are prohibited on school grounds, but only on school grounds. It includes colleges and day care facilities. http://leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-202.html#NRS202Sec265

  3. #3
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    So what gives, Nevada says prohibited on school grounds, but according to the feds, your in violation of United states code [whatever] if you are within 1000 feet of a school.

    I called the county sheriff and asked him what his take on it was, because a 1000 foot radius around an elementary school encompasses my apartment complex.

    His words were. "your apartment complex is private property, the statute does not apply, however you may run into an issue if the owner of the property objects."

    [note, I would like to see an eviction proceeding upheld because I exercise my right to OC on the property which I reside, regardless of weather I own it or not.. nothing in my lease mentions a prohibition on the OC, CC or possession of a firearm.]

    I then asked him, How could I legally come and go from the property I reside on if the only exit onto a public street is within that 1000 foot radius? His answer was "I don't know."
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  4. #4
    Regular Member greengum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    330

    Post imported post

    The Federal law was deemed unconstitutional by the SCOTUS. Congress then reworded it and passed the act again. It has yet to be heard from the court. I personally don't worry about it. This state is pretty cool with OC and every LEO I have encountered has been really cool about it too.

  5. #5
    Regular Member greengum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    330

    Post imported post

    Nevada carrier wrote:
    So what gives, Nevada says prohibited on school grounds, but according to the feds, your in violation of United states code [whatever] if you are within 1000 feet of a school.

    I called the county sheriff and asked him what his take on it was, because a 1000 foot radius around an elementary school encompasses my apartment complex.

    His words were. "your apartment complex is private property, the statute does not apply, however you may run into an issue if the owner of the property objects."

    [note, I would like to see an eviction proceeding upheld because I exercise my right to OC on the property which I reside, regardless of weather I own it or not.. nothing in my lease mentions a prohibition on the OC, CC or possession of a firearm.]

    I then asked him, How could I legally come and go from the property I reside on if the only exit onto a public street is within that 1000 foot radius? His answer was "I don't know."
    I know in Kalifornia if you search the forums PC 626.9 and 626 has been used against people standing on their own private property. One case involved a man on his front porch. He was convicted of being within 1000 feet of a school and the judge determined that even though he was on his property, it was not sealed off to where others could not gain entrance so he ruled it public. That is state law there but here in Nevada if you are not doing anything illegal or standing right outside the playground for hours looking like a pedo or something ( NRS 393.410 ) I highly doubt you will encounter any issues. If you do you should win in court if it is appealed all the way up like the last GFSZ federal act.

    Detailed information on this is contained in the Nevada pamphlet.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    I only ask because there are good cops and there are rookie cops who want to go back to the office and brag about their first felony arrest. I intend to exercise my OC rights until I get my CCW as I only yesterday made my first handgun purchase. But I live in a high density part of las Vegas with sometimes an occasional violent crime and a lot of property crime on a regular basis.

    I am a night owl and tend to walk 2 blocks to the filling station at Reno and Decatur, Sometimes at 4 in the morning, I see hookers, pimps, all types of gang bangers mostly the Malibu's most wanted type, but sometimes they are worse than OG's. I'm not about to be anyones victim in my own neighborhood.

    Just want to make sure I can set foot on public property coming and going from my own home with my firearm.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    471

    Post imported post

    Public property yes, just fine. You just can't carry inside a posted public building (which is a building owned by the state).

    The 1,000 foot school thing is vague. NV does not have that rule on the books, it is a Federal law. Technically, IANAL, but technically I'd say there's no reason for a local LEO to enforce it and many of them are unaware of it anyway. It should be up to the Fed to enforce it, but there is only one known case in the entire country where one was arrested for it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Henderson, ,
    Posts
    232

    Post imported post

    Nevada carrier wrote:
    I am a night owl and tend to walk 2 blocks to the filling station at Reno and Decatur, Sometimes at 4 in the morning, I see hookers, pimps, all types of gang bangers mostly the Malibu's most wanted type, but sometimes they are worse than OG's. I'm not about to be anyones victim in my own neighborhood.
    I think a CCW would serve you better in a gang infested neighborhood at 4am.
    If I were a gang banger and seen a single guy walking around my turf with a gun, I would get some other gang bangers together and take your gun away from you…Are you ready to have a shoot out with a bunch of gang bangers just looking for some action… You will be out gunned, and just the fact that you are asking these questions, shows you have a different outlook on life..
    I have seen gang bangers shoot people in a passing car just for fun…and not think anything about it…

    But it is just my opinion……


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    115

    Post imported post

    Nevada carrier wrote:
    I only ask because there are good cops and there are rookie cops who want to go back to the office and brag about their first felony arrest. I intend to exercise my OC rights until I get my CCW as I only yesterday made my first handgun purchase. But I live in a high density part of las Vegas with sometimes an occasional violent crime and a lot of property crime on a regular basis.

    I am a night owl and tend to walk 2 blocks to the filling station at Reno and Decatur, Sometimes at 4 in the morning, I see hookers, pimps, all types of gang bangers mostly the Malibu's most wanted type, but sometimes they are worse than OG's. I'm not about to be anyones victim in my own neighborhood.

    Just want to make sure I can set foot on public property coming and going from my own home with my firearm.
    I'm guessing you live in royal palms?? right across from Helen Jydstrup Elementary?

  10. #10
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    gun free school zones suck.....................thank you, and good night.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    471

    Post imported post

    McX wrote:
    gun free school zones suck.....................thank you, and good night.
    Isn't your entire state a gun free zone?

  12. #12
    Regular Member Sabotage70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fabulous Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    844

    Post imported post

    jfrey123 wrote:
    McX wrote:
    gun free school zones suck.....................thank you, and good night.
    Isn't your entire state a gun free zone?
    lol
    EDC=XDm40 16+1+16+16

    RED DRAGONS!!!!

  13. #13
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    jfrey123 wrote:
    Public property yes, just fine.* You just can't carry inside a posted public building (which is a building owned by the state).
    It depends also on what the public building is.

    If it is the 202.3673 warning then you can open carry, just not carry concealed. (For example I've seen such signage at the DMV.)

    If it is the property of a public or private school, university, or child care facility you can't carry even if there is no sign.

    The Post Office is also an example of weapon free zone, in this case per federal regulations.

  14. #14
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    we like to think of them as; school free gun zones, since the criminals have no trouble bringing guns into the school zones, and if they attend school it's not like they will actually be learning anything, it's just a venue for them to continue honing the criminal skills until the graduate. so, i guess, strike that, they are learning something. the rest of the law abiding population just has to dig out their maps, and their rulers, and start figuring: how am i going to get from here to there, while avoiding there, and there, and there........................

  15. #15
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    I'm guessing you live in royal palms?? right across from Helen Jydstrup Elementary?
    No on the complex, yes on the school... what do I do? to stay legal? the feds say no Nevada says okay as long as I stay off the school's property... technically I cant even leave the complex without breaking a federal law the way I read it. Suggestions?

    I think a CCW would serve you better in a gang infested neighborhood at 4am.
    I intend to get a CCW forthwith, but in the mean time, Open carry is the only kind of carry for me. I wouldn't say the neighborhood is "infested," just not very "high society" per se.

    And your opinion is appreciated, I wouldn't have come here if I didn't welcome opinions.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  16. #16
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    If you keep your firearm unloaded and in a locked case you could be exempt from the school zone law, but in doing so you might find yourself guilty of a felony offense for concealing the firearm in said locked case if you carry it and it does not appear to ordinary observation to contain a gun.

    I cannot recommend anything for you, since you are responsible for your own legal risks, but I find the federal law ignorable. If they prosecute me for it, which I doubt they will, I will fight it and I believe I will win. If you concealed a firearm in a locked case they might not prosecute you for it but if they did it would be very hard for you to win that case in court.

    If you live in Nevada and you ever owned a gun before you had a concealed firearm permit, chances are you have already done things which would be prosecutable as a felony under either Federal or State law.

    If your car is parked on private property to be perfectly legal you could open carry to the car, and put it into a locked case in the car that you never pick up into your hands, close the case and lock it, then drive off the property and uncase it once you are farther than 1000 feet from a school, which pretty much rules out most urban areas.

    If you park on public property, then there is no real legal option unless you devise a case that you can lock a firearm into that is discernible as a firearm to ordinary observation.

    Federal law also provides an exception for possession
    (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;
    but good luck getting a contract with a school to carry next to them!

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    Check out this lockable case....might be just what you need, pretty cheap too:

    http://www.meritline.com/80-transpar...source=fgmedia

  18. #18
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    I spoke to the Sheriff's office and they assured me that the 1000 foot rule is only enforced if there is another offense being charged. His reasoning behind this is that it is unreasonable to expect people to know of or be able to avoid all "gun free school zones." Nevertheless, I feel that I'm safe so long as I'm taking the most direct rout into and out of my apartment complex, and do not carry on the roads directly adjacent to the school.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  19. #19
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    I spoke to a metro cop today and asked him about stepping off the private property where I reside and into a federal gun free school zone.

    He said that "in his opinion, being barred from carrying a firearm off the premises of your residence with no legal alternate rout makes enforcement of the federal law constitutionally impossible."

    He also said that if I knowingly entered the school zone and there was a reasonably convenient alternate rout around it that a metro police officer may in fact arrest me for the violation of the federal law. He did also say however, that because it's a federal law, the federal prosecutor would have to bring the charges, and they would have to do so in federal court. He said barring any other crime being committed, Metro cops would rather not bother themselves with a federal arrest unless there was a damn good reason.

    Of course this is a metro cop talking and nothing he says can at all be construed as legal advice nor can he speak for all police officers.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    524

    Post imported post

    Good to know that our Metro Officers are Constitutional Law Scholars.

    Ken

  21. #21
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    They teach all police officers, not just metro cops about our constitutional rights and how to manipulate people into waiving them.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post

    Section 922(q) is a criminal statute that by its terms has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly one might define those terms."

    The Government's essential contention, in fine, is that we may determine here that §922(q) is valid because possession of a firearm in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce. Brief for United States 17. The Government argues that possession of a firearm in a school zone may result in violent crime and that violent crime can be expected to affect the functioning of the national economy in two ways. First, the costs of violent crime are substantial, and, through the mechanism of insurance, those costs are spread throughout the population. See United States v. Evans, 928 F. 2d 858, 862 (CA9 1991). Second, violent crime reduces the willingness of individuals to travel to areas within the country that are perceived to be unsafe. Cf. Heart of Atlanta Motel, 379 U. S., at 253. The Government also argues that the presence of guns in schools poses a substantial threat to the educational process by threatening the learning environment. A handicapped educational process, in turn, will result in a less productive citizenry. That, in turn, would have an adverse effect on the Nation's economic well being. As a result, the Government argues that Congress could rationally have concluded that §922(q) substantially affects interstate commerce. We pause to consider the implications of the Government's arguments. The Government admits, under its "costs of crime" reasoning, that Congress could regulate not only all violent crime, but all activities that might lead to violent crime, regardless of how tenuously they relate to interstate commerce. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 8-9. Similarly, under the Government's "national productivity" reasoning, Congress could regulate any activity that it found was related to the economic productivity of individual citizens: family law (including marriage, divorce, and child custody), for example. Under the theories that the Government presents in support of §922(q), it is difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power, even in areas such as criminal law enforcement or education where States historically have been sovereign. Thus, if we were to accept the Government's arguments, we are hard pressed to posit any activity by an individual that Congress is without power to regulate.

    The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce.

    To uphold the Government's contentions here, we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States. Admittedly, some of our prior cases have taken long steps down that road, giving great deference to congressional action. See supra, at 8. The broad language in these opinions has suggested the possibility of additional expansion, but we decline here to proceed any further. To do so would require us to conclude that the Constitution's enumeration of powers does not presuppose something not enumerated, cf. Gibbons v. Ogden, supra, at 195, and that there never will be a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local, cf. Jones & Laughlin Steel, supra, at 30. This we are unwilling to do.
    US vs. Lopez (1995) - Excerpts from majority opinion striking down the original Gun-Free School Zones Act as unconstitutional. - Emphasis Mine

    The lack of a requirement that the gun moved in IC [which was addressed in the newer Gun-Free School Zones Act] was only one of the issues [and a minor one] that SCOTUS raised. The law was on its face unconstitutional...

    Section 922(q) is a criminal statute that by its terms has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly one might define those terms.

    The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce.
    ...and Congress knows that. I seriously doubt anyone at DOJ is going to try and pursue a federal GFSZA case unless and until the composition of the supreme court changes to one more willing to dispense with the 10th Amendment all together. That is to say a Democrat/Liberal/Socialist majority. If they tried a case right now, SCOTUS would slap them down and rule the law unconstitutional once again...and they know it.

Posting Permissions

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