Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Federal School Zone?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157

    Federal School Zone?

    Hi to all the Alaska folks. I'm from the MI forum but I have a question that I'm hoping you'll be able to answer.

    Since Alaska doesn't license you to carry a firearm how do you deal with the Fed. School Zone law? I've already asked this over on the Vermont forum but I'd be interested in reading your comments as well.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...2----000-.html

    Paragraph q, sub-paragraph 2


    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—

    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;

    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

    (iii) that is—

    (I) not loaded; and

    (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;


    (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

    (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;

    (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or

    (vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.

    Both the License To Purchase and the Concealed Pistol License that MI has exempt us from this law per (ii) but I was curious how gun carriers in states that don't have either of these approach this issue.

    Thanks,

    Bronson
    Last edited by Bronson; 10-16-2010 at 04:06 AM.
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Thomas Paine

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    Alaska issues Licenses that are Federal School Zone compliant under 18 U.S.C. 922(q), per Alaska Code AS 18.65.705.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark View Post
    Alaska issues Licenses that are Federal School Zone compliant under 18 U.S.C. 922(q), per Alaska Code AS 18.65.705.
    Are they required or optional?

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Thomas Paine

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    The Permits that Alaska Issues are 'Shall-Issue' and they are Optional.
    However, Persons with such Permits benefit in three ways: 1. Exception from 18 U.S.C. 922(q), 2. OMIT, AND 3. InterState Reciprocity, mainly, with the lower 48 States.
    Last edited by aadvark; 12-19-2010 at 04:52 PM.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Carry a black powder pistol and you don't have to worry about GFSZ.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    137
    If one has a permit issued by pennsylvania, but is carrying in Fla., which recognizes pa. permits, is that individual able to carry in a school zone in fla? I do not believe it is lawful, the law reads that the individual has to have a permit issued by the state where one is actually carrying in a school zone. Reciprocity does have its pitfalls. School zones pop up very quickly and such zones cover a pretty large radius around the actual school building.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Brimstone Baritone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Leeds, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    786
    I wouldn't be too worried about that law anyway. The original law was already declared unconstitutional once, and adding the bit about 'interstate commerce' doesn't (shouldn't) change that one bit. I also have never seen or heard of anyone tried and convicted under that law since the revision, so maybe you can be the first? :P

    YMMV, IANAL, TINLA

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by mcdonalk View Post
    I wouldn't be too worried about that law anyway. The original law was already declared unconstitutional once, and adding the bit about 'interstate commerce' doesn't (shouldn't) change that one bit. I also have never seen or heard of anyone tried and convicted under that law since the revision, so maybe you can be the first? :P

    YMMV, IANAL, TINLA
    I'm pretty sure I have read of people getting convicted. These cases came from Wisconsin Open Carry.

    United States v Belen Nieves-Castano

    United States v Dorsey

    United States v Danks (1999)

    United States v Tait (2000)

    United States v Haywood (2003)

    United States v Smith (2005)

    United States v Weekes (2007)

    United States v Benally (2007)

    United States v Cruz-Rodriguez (2008)

  9. #9
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    So if someone does not get the optional permit then they cannot carry withing a 1000' of school property....correct?

    I'm asking all of this because on another forum it was brought up that Utah is trying to go the same way AZ recently went...no permit needed to carry open or concealed. The UT folks on that forum were very supportive of the idea but when I asked how the proposed law addressed the Fed. School Zone law I heard cyber-crickets. One of the UT guys asked "how do they do it in Alaska, Vermont, and Arizona?" so here I am asking you folks how you deal with it.

    Thanks for the info.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Thomas Paine

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    So if someone does not get the optional permit then they cannot carry withing a 1000' of school property....correct?
    From what I understand you don't have to worry about the federal GFSZ if you carry an antique firearm. They are those which were made before 1898 or any which use a percussion cap or flintlock.

  11. #11
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Negate need to apply for a license.

    The state can also pass legislation specifically stating all persons not prohibited to possess firearms in VT are considered licensed by the state for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. 922 (q)(2). This would cover residents and non-residents alike.

    Also posted in VT forum.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by lockman View Post
    The state can also pass legislation specifically stating all persons not prohibited to possess firearms in VT are considered licensed by the state for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. 922 (q)(2). This would cover residents and non-residents alike.

    Also posted in VT forum.
    Why would they do that? There is no money in it for them.

  13. #13
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    Why would they do that? There is no money in it for them.
    Its never been about the money in Vermont.

    Others are learning.

    Personally, I like the way Alaska does it with the optional permit designed to get the most reciprocity country wide for its citizens.

    I think Washington is about 5 or 6 years away, provided we can replace the current Governor with one that is pro 2a.

  14. #14
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    I'm pretty sure I have read of people getting convicted. These cases came from Wisconsin Open Carry.

    United States v Belen Nieves-Castano

    United States v Dorsey

    United States v Danks (1999)

    United States v Tait (2000)

    United States v Haywood (2003)

    United States v Smith (2005)

    United States v Weekes (2007)

    United States v Benally (2007)

    United States v Cruz-Rodriguez (2008)
    The common thing your missing here is that each of the convictions of the GFSZA in these cases were preceded by other felony charges and prior convictions, such as for drugs, murder, aggravated assault, felon in possession of a firearm, etc.

    I think what we are saying here, is that there are no known convictions of the GFSZA that weren't preceded by much more serious crime(s) first. A charge by itself, I don't think its ever happened, and MANY state/local LEAs will not arrest for it.

    At least, not among the cases you cite. Granted, some of the links wouldn't open or were broken.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark View Post
    2. Exception from 'Brady' e-Check & Waiting Period,
    This one is no longer the case and has been so for several years now.
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    Thank you, FlintLock!

  17. #17
    Regular Member Anubis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Arapahoe County CO, ,
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by mcdonalk View Post
    I wouldn't be too worried about that law anyway.
    Of course not. I trust the BATFE leaders to never get a wild hair and decide to enforce 922 by trapping armed citizens passing by a school. BATFE has never done anything gun owners don't like.

    Another problem to consider is that section 921 has the definition of school zone, but does not have a definition of "licensed by the state" mentioned in 922. Is that a CC license? Is it a permit to buy, like the Illinois FOID card? Some states require no permit to purchase and no permit to carry in a vehicle, whether they have a permit system.

Posting Permissions

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