• 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.

School grounds

D

dwayner79

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
76
Location
, ,
Been a while since I have been on OCO. Hope you all are well.

Our church just started meeting at a private k-12 school. So the question is, is there a legal ground for being able to carry since the school is not being used as a school while there on Sundays? From what I can tell, the intent is to protect school kids, but it makes no comment about "when school kids are present," etc. For now, I am not carrying. Anyone know a reason why I can?

Thanks in advance.
 
Rich B

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
I have thought about the same reasoning you are using, but I would not try it. It is almost a guaranteed arrest if you are OCing in a school, and I have my doubts about whether you would be able to adequately fight the charges.
 
D

dwayner79

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
76
Location
, ,
BTW I am using "carry", not open or concealed since there is no distinction in CT. I typically CC.
 
J

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Federal law makes no distinction as to hours of use for the school ormulti-use or even an old unused boarded up waiting to be demolished school.... can't carry without a permit within 1000 feet OF THE PROPERTY.
 
Rich B

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
dwayner79 said:
BTW I am using "carry", not open or concealed since there is no distinction in CT. I typically CC.
Click to expand...

Well there would be a distinction in a case like this. If no one saw the firearm, I doubt there would be an issue whether you are breaking the law or not. If you are carrying openly, I am fairly certain there will be an issue.
 
A

aadvark

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,597
Location
, ,
The ONLY Places in Connecticut that Citizens can NOT Possess Firearms are:
1. Schools, under Conneticut Law53a-217b, AND
2. The Conneticut General Assembly Building, under Conneticut Law 2-1e.

Open Carry of a Loaded Puistol or Revolver is LEGAL in EVERY other Place in Conneticut, provided; that The Person so doing so is Licensed under Connecticut Law 29-28.
 
Rich B

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
Saying we can only not possess a firearm in a K-12 and at the General Assembly Building is a bit off to begin with, although I understand the distinction attempting to be made.

Post offices and court houses are great examples of places you are not going to want to challenge in CT anytime soon.
 
brk913

brk913

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
370
Location
Plainville, CT
aadvark said:
The ONLY Places in Connecticut that Citizens can NOT Possess Firearms are:
1. Schools, under Conneticut Law53a-217b, AND
2. The Conneticut General Assembly Building, under Conneticut Law 2-1e.

Open Carry of a Loaded Puistol or Revolver is LEGAL in EVERY other Place in Conneticut, provided; that The Person so doing so is Licensed under Connecticut Law 29-28.
Click to expand...

That is a dangerous position to take. There are a lot more places off limits to CT Permit holders.

CT courthouses, parole, probation offices, prisons, etc...CT Casinos are off limits by Tribal Law...Anyone in control of a "premises" can nullify your permit by stating they "Ban Weapons"...CT State Parks and Forests, off limits by DEP rule, get caught and it's only a ticket but the state could then begin procedures to revoke your permit...by Executive order you also cannot carry on to state property if you are working under a state contract.... there are more but its to early for me to make a complete list...keep in mind that even though you may only be ticketed or asked to leave it gives the state grounds to review your "suitability", so until that standard is removed tread lightly...;
 
KIX

KIX

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
960
Location
, ,
We need to think about sensible legislation as far as storage though.

I.e. if we are on these grounds, we should be allowed to store a firearm locked in our vehicles.

I find it ironic that there is a ton of legislation that states your vehicle is private property, regardless of where it is. But, the moment it rolls on a school ground, government property, etc. that you lose that right.

Jonathan
 
KIX

KIX

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
960
Location
, ,
beanoboy7 said:
Don't forget federal and State property too!
Click to expand...

Not all state property is exempt.

Look at protests on capital grounds.

There are exceptions..... just not many.

And, after reading this post, it triggered something in my last post. A distinction I never usually fail to correct.

What's with this "government" property. Government is supposed to be of, by and for the people and it's our property. Time we took some of it back!

Jonathan
 
E

emsjeep

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
210
Location
NY-CT
brk913 said:
That is a dangerous position to take. There are a lot more places off limits to CT Permit holders.

CT courthouses, parole, probation offices, prisons, etc...CT Casinos are off limits by Tribal Law...Anyone in control of a "premises" can nullify your permit by stating they "Ban Weapons"...CT State Parks and Forests, off limits by DEP rule, get caught and it's only a ticket but the state could then begin procedures to revoke your permit...by Executive order you also cannot carry on to state property if you are working under a state contract.... there are more but its to early for me to make a complete list...keep in mind that even though you may only be ticketed or asked to leave it gives the state grounds to review your "suitability", so until that standard is removed tread lightly...;
Click to expand...


I need to go read the law again but as I recall the statute only says something to the effect that it doesn't invalidate the authority of a private property owner to restrict carry on their property. I see no indication that it would invalidate your permit and subject you to the offense of carrying without a permit. You might see a trespassing charge, sure, but I see no indiction of anything beyond that. I ran some pretty extensive research on this a couple of months ago and I couldn't find anything at all in the case law, ever, indicating that this situation had ever come up.
 
Last edited:
brk913

brk913

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
370
Location
Plainville, CT
emsjeep said:
I need to go read the law again but as I recall the statute only says something to the effect that it doesn't invalidate the authority of a private property owner to restrict carry on their property. I see no indication that it would invalidate your permit and subject you to the offense of carrying without a permit. You might see a trespassing charge, sure, but I see no indiction of anything beyond that. I ran some pretty extensive research on this a couple of months ago and I couldn't find anything at all in the case law, ever, indicating that this situation had ever come up.
Click to expand...

Sec. 29-28:
(e) The issuance of any permit to carry a pistol or revolver does not thereby authorize the possession or carrying of a pistol or revolver in any premises where the possession or carrying of a pistol or revolver is otherwise prohibited by law or is prohibited by the person who owns or exercises control over such premises.

The way I read it, your permit is not valid where the person who owns or controls premises says it is prohibited. It would be just like carrying into the Capitol Building.

EDIT: Here is the penalty for violating:
Sec. 29-37. Penalties. (a) Any person violating any provision of section 29-28 or 29-31 shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than three years or both, and any pistol or revolver found in the possession of any person in violation of any of said provisions shall be forfeited.
 
Last edited:
KIX

KIX

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
960
Location
, ,
brk913 said:
The way I read it, your permit is not valid where the person who owns or controls premises says it is prohibited. It would be just like carrying into the Capitol Building.
Click to expand...

So it should be for private property. Capitol, I'm surprised they swung our way last year on th eprotest bit.

Jonathan
 
E

emsjeep

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
210
Location
NY-CT
KIX said:
So it should be for private property. Capitol, I'm surprised they swung our way last year on th eprotest bit.

Jonathan
Click to expand...

The rights of private property owners who invite the general public on a regular basis for their mutual benefit have never been absolute or coextensive with the rights of say, a private home owner. There are plenty of 1st Amendment cases that have been adjudicated to this point, for one: PruneYard Shopping Ctr. v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74, 100 S. Ct. 2035, 64 L. Ed. 2d 741 (1980).

Heller and McDonald draw relevant analogies between first and second amendment rights, there is no reason to believe that the second would be treated any differently from the first if the cultural atmosphere was right. Both cases actually came up first under the search terms I used to pull the case above...which I thought was kind of funny...


As far as I can tell, and that is pretty far, no one has been prosecuted for the private property issue. The other huge problem is the issue of notice, is a sign sufficient? Do you have to see the sign? What type of sign? At every entrance? Personal verbal notification? Can they ever really prove that they informed you? or is the property owner's secret intention to prohibit expressed sometime later sufficient?
 
Last edited:
KIX

KIX

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
960
Location
, ,
Signs visible at every entrance, as I understand it, has been sufficient.

The casino incident is similar. Permit was returned to the individual because the sign was covered by a plant or something similar.

If a private property owner, doesn't want me on his property carrying, I think he has that right regardless. I'd be a hypocrite if I said otherwise. There is a parallel between that and Castle Doctrine - my home/property is indeed my castle and I have the right to defend it.

Whether there is case precedence or not, I just don't agree with telling someone what they can do on their own property.

I do like these constructive discussions though.

Jonathan
 
E

emsjeep

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
210
Location
NY-CT
KIX said:
Signs visible at every entrance, as I understand it, has been sufficient.

The casino incident is similar. Permit was returned to the individual because the sign was covered by a plant or something similar.

If a private property owner, doesn't want me on his property carrying, I think he has that right regardless. I'd be a hypocrite if I said otherwise. There is a parallel between that and Castle Doctrine - my home/property is indeed my castle and I have the right to defend it.

Whether there is case precedence or not, I just don't agree with telling someone what they can do on their own property.

I do like these constructive discussions though.

Jonathan
Click to expand...

Casino incident? Do you have a party name?
 
KIX

KIX

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
960
Location
, ,
I'll have to put that on my agenda for my continued research project.

I think I came across that on the BFPE site before I started a more formal approach to looking at the monthly hearings.

When I find it, I'll start a "casino" thread, OK?

Jonathan
 
D

dwayner79

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
76
Location
, ,
So this kinda derailed, but I suppose the answer is no.

@Rich B - I know I could CC, but if I ever needed to use it, or if someone saw printing, etc. I would still be likely to lose my license at best, go to jail at worst... Not something I am willing to risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top