Do we really want constitutional carry?

Under Montana law, everyone is considered to be licensed to possess a firearm in a school zone, even those without concealment permits, if I'm not mistaken.

Just because you have a permit to carry a concealed weapon does not mean that it is a permit to carry at a school zone. For instance, in my state my permit allows me to carry concealed, but open carry is legal without a permit and the permit to carry concealed does not currently expand the number of places one can carry. It is just a permit on the method of carry. In fact, one still has to open carry in some places where concealed carry is legal.

Might a judge rule that your permit satisfies the federal law? Maybe, but it is merely wishful thinking to assume that it does. I don't think Florida law mentions anywhere that the carry permit is a license to "possess a firearm in a school zone." The federal law requires that the state issued a license "to do so."

Does constitutional carry progress the rights of people that want to carry? Absolutely.

Supposedly, U.S. vs Lopez invalidated the school zone gun ban anyway, although people have been convicted on the altered version which in my opinion is unconstitutional for the same reason the earlier one was found to be by the court.

Felid`Maximus said:

Under Montana law, everyone is considered to be licensed to possess a firearm in a school zone, even those without concealment permits, if I'm not mistaken.

Just because you have a permit to carry a concealed weapon does not mean that it is a permit to carry at a school zone. For instance, in my state my permit allows me to carry concealed, but open carry is legal without a permit and the permit to carry concealed does not currently expand the number of places one can carry. It is just a permit on the method of carry. In fact, one still has to open carry in some places where concealed carry is legal.

Might a judge rule that your permit satisfies the federal law? Maybe, but it is merely wishful thinking to assume that it does. I don't think Florida law mentions anywhere that the carry permit is a license to "possess a firearm in a school zone." The federal law requires that the state issued a license "to do so."

Does constitutional carry progress the rights of people that want to carry? Absolutely.

Supposedly, U.S. vs Lopez invalidated the school zone gun ban anyway, although people have been convicted on the altered version which in my opinion is unconstitutional for the same reason the earlier one was found to be by the court.

Click to expand...

The federal law requires a license to be issued, in order for an individual to posess a firearm, not posess a firearm in a school zone.

KeepShootin said:

The federal law requires a license to be issued, in order for an individual to posess a firearm, not posess a firearm in a school zone.

Click to expand...

I don't have a Federal License for any of my guns... I'm confused.

ixtow said:

I don't have a Federal License for any of my guns... I'm confused.

Click to expand...

I was referring to the GFSZ law and state licenses. Maximus implied that the federal law (GFSZ), , ,required that states issue a license to an individual, to carry in a school zone, when that is not the case. The federal law only requires that, states issue a license to an individual, to posses a firearm.

That is the one nice thing about having to register guns in Michigan. Our "permit to purchase" is by definition of law a license to transport, purchase, posesse, and carry a pistol so someone like me who dosnt have a CPL can still be in the "school zone", just not on school grounds.

xmanhockey7 said:

That is the one nice thing about having to register guns in Michigan. Our "permit to purchase" is by definition of law a license to transport, purchase, posesse, and carry a pistol so someone like me who dosnt have a CPL can still be in the "school zone", just not on school grounds.

Click to expand...

There is nothing good about Gun Registration anywhere. My wife has hers reg. in Mich. and for that reason I can not carry it there, the law forbids any other to be in possession of another's firearm unless blah blah blah. plus it is unconstitutional.
Not only that, it is a pain in the ass to have to go through all the B.S just to buy a gun.
Even private sales. Here i can just walk in and buy one during private sales and don't need to go to the LEO and ask for their permission.

Rick H said:

There is nothing good about Gun Registration anywhere. My wife has hers reg. in Mich. and for that reason I can not carry it there, the law forbids any other to be in possession of another's firearm unless blah blah blah. plus it is unconstitutional.
Not only that, it is a pain in the ass to have to go through all the B.S just to buy a gun.
Even private sales. Here i can just walk in and buy one during private sales and don't need to go to the LEO and ask for their permission.

Click to expand...

Oh trust me I'm 100% against registraion. I'm not saying I agre with it or want it I'm just saying that is the only good thing that is seen from it. Why couldn't you carry in Michigan? As long as you are licensed to carry by your home state you can carry concealed or openly. In fact the way the law reads people from Illinois could open carry in Michigan just not concealed. If you're in the state visiting you do not have to register it and as long as you are licensed you can carry anyones legal gun in Michigan.

I see your point, but it's still using two wrongs to make a right. The Federal Law is screwed up, so we have to screw up the State Laws to make is suck a little less.... Sort of.

xmanhockey7 said:

Oh trust me I'm 100% against registraion. I'm not saying I agre with it or want it I'm just saying that is the only good thing that is seen from it. Why couldn't you carry in Michigan? As long as you are licensed to carry by your home state you can carry concealed or openly. In fact the way the law reads people from Illinois could open carry in Michigan just not concealed. If you're in the state visiting you do not have to register it and as long as you are licensed you can carry anyones legal gun in Michigan.

Click to expand...

MCL 28.432 An individual can carry, possess, use or transport a pistol belonging to another individual, if the pistol is properly licensed and inspected under the Act, and the individual carrying, possessing, using or transporting the pistol has obtained a license to carry a pistol concealed permit from Michigan. My permit is from Florida so I can NOT carry it.

xmanhockey7 said:

Arizona has a law that basically says if you legally own the gun you are considered to have a permit. So really Arizona kinda doesn't have "permitless" carry but this was only to get around the GFSZ. (SNIP..)

Click to expand...

Cite please. We had a bill to do this that has not passed. That bill was HB2392 and I don't think the feds would honor it even if it did pass.

Edit: Yes, that bill is dead.

http://findarticles.com/p/news-arti...ill-house/ai_n57098195/pg_2/?tag=content;col1

sharkey said:

Cite please. We had a bill to do this that has not passed. That bill was HB2392 and I don't think the feds would honor it even if it did pass.

Edit: Yes, that bill is dead.

http://findarticles.com/p/news-arti...ill-house/ai_n57098195/pg_2/?tag=content;col1

Click to expand...

Yes you're correct I read over it a while ago and I guess I thought that it had passed. Montana has this I guess.....

Montana Code Annotated

45-8-360. Establishment of individual licensure. In consideration that the
right to keep and bear arms is protected and reserved to the people in
Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution, a person who has not
been convicted of a violent, felony crime and who is lawfully able to own or
to possess a firearm under the Montana constitution is considered to be
individually licensed and verified by the state of Montana within the
meaning of the provisions regarding individual licensure and verification in
the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act.

KeepShootin said:

I was referring to the GFSZ law and state licenses. Maximus implied that the federal law (GFSZ), , ,required that states issue a license to an individual, to carry in a school zone, when that is not the case. The federal law only requires that, states issue a license to an individual, to posses a firearm.

Click to expand...

The federal law says you need a license "to do so," which means whatever the judge and uneducated jury decides it means. And are you certain that your license to conceal would even qualify as a license to posses? Afterall, couldn't you possess or transport the gun in your car in FL without such a license?

If a state issued a license that specified it was to "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," it would be clear that it would satisfy the criteria of the federal law. If it doesn't say that, there is at least the risk that a federal court might decide that your permit/license was a license to do something else and not a license "to do so." Of course, the meaning of "to do so" may be "to possess a firearm" as mentioned earlier in the sentence, but it is not written without ambiguity.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/922

(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;

Click to expand...

I fully hope that it would work as a defense in court if you had a permit to conceal, but I wouldn't want to be defending myself in that case. And I certainly wouldn't oppose removing a state requirement to have a permit on the basis that it the permit may or may not satisfy the federal law.

Rick H said:

MCL 28.432 An individual can carry, possess, use or transport a pistol belonging to another individual, if the pistol is properly licensed and inspected under the Act, and the individual carrying, possessing, using or transporting the pistol has obtained a license to carry a pistol concealed permit from Michigan. My permit is from Florida so I can NOT carry it.

Click to expand...

Your cite is made up.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(0h...objectName=mcl-28-432&highlight=28 AND 28.432

28.432 Inapplicability of MCL 28.422; amendatory act as “Janet Kukuk act”.
Sec. 12.

(1) Section 2 does not apply to any of the following:
(a) A police or correctional agency of the United States or of this state or any subdivision of this state.

(b) The United States army, air force, navy, or marine corps.

(c) An organization authorized by law to purchase or receive weapons from the United States or from this state.

(d) The national guard, armed forces reserves, or other duly authorized military organization.

(e) A member of an entity or organization described in subdivisions (a) through (d) for a pistol while engaged in the course of his or her duties with that entity or while going to or returning from those duties.

(f) A United States citizen holding a license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person issued by another state.
[size=-3](g) The regular and ordinary possession and transportation of a pistol as merchandise by an authorized agent of a person licensed to manufacture firearms or a licensed dealer.

(h) Purchasing, owning, carrying, possessing, using, or transporting an antique firearm. As used in this subdivision, "antique firearm" means that term as defined in section 231a of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.231a.[/size]

(i) An individual carrying, possessing, using, or transporting a pistol belonging to another individual, if the other individual's possession of the pistol is authorized by law and the individual carrying, possessing, using, or transporting the pistol has obtained a license under section 5b to carry a concealed pistol or is exempt from licensure as provided in section 12a.
------------
28.432a Persons to whom requirements inapplicable; "local corrections officer" defined.
Sec. 12a.

(1) The requirements of this act for obtaining a license to carry a concealed pistol do not apply to any of the following:
...
(h) A resident of another state who is licensed by that state to carry a concealed pistol.

You can carry you wifes and my Michigan gun.
On topic you can't carry within 1000' of our schools and with my CPL I can't carry 1000' from any school out of MI.