Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Casper Wyoming Tribune: Wyoming gun owners could violate federal law

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    66

    Casper Wyoming Tribune: Wyoming gun owners could violate federal law

    Casper Wyoming Tribune: Wyoming gun owners could violate federal law

    http://trib.com/news/state-and-regio...tml?mode=story

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagle2009 View Post
    Casper Wyoming Tribune: Wyoming gun owners could violate federal law

    http://trib.com/news/state-and-regio...tml?mode=story
    According to the obozo regime states have no business "interfereing" with the enforcement of federal immigration laws, so by default states should be refusing to enforce gun laws, drug laws, and tax laws.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Swanzey,NH, ,
    Posts
    218
    It is my understanding that a federal officer (agent) would have to enforce that law. I know that when I was an Environmental Police Officer in MasSucKchusetts we had to be sworn in as Deputy Federal Officers, so that we could enforce Migratory bird laws and Lacey Act, As well as Commerical Marine Fisheries. Being such the state and local officers would have no primary jurisdiction, Couple that with the argument that the feds are using with Arizona, I don't see how they could have it both ways.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by Rattrapper View Post
    It is my understanding that a federal officer (agent) would have to enforce that law.
    I used to think so also...then i read the following line...

    If you rob a bank...federal crime...and a local cop is outside, do you think he's just going to watch you leave because he's not a federal agent?

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Swanzey,NH, ,
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    I used to think so also...then i read the following line...

    If you rob a bank...federal crime...and a local cop is outside, do you think he's just going to watch you leave because he's not a federal agent?
    AHHH, Armed Robbery is also a crime against the state. Subject is arrested for state charges, then if the feds want they can also charge on the federal level.

    That would be the difference here, If the state does not have the 1000ft. law then there is no state jurisdiction. Now if the subject were to violate state laws then the feds could ask for the info on the federal violation.
    Last edited by Rattrapper; 07-11-2011 at 11:00 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    I used to think so also...then i read the following line...

    If you rob a bank...federal crime...and a local cop is outside, do you think he's just going to watch you leave because he's not a federal agent?
    A police officer is also a citizen and the robbing of a bank is a felony. So depending on the state he could make a citizens arrest. Though as the other poster stated, he's going to be breaking state laws even if the overall crime is a federal crime.

  7. #7
    Regular Member x1wildone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Eagle, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    I used to think so also...then i read the following line...

    If you rob a bank...federal crime...and a local cop is outside, do you think he's just going to watch you leave because he's not a federal agent?
    This exactly what happens here in Eagle Cty. Colorado when local cops have illegal immigrants pulled over for traffic violations. Feds say they do not have time or
    room so turn em loose.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    To ALL Whom it May Concern:

    The Federal Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995 Prohibits The Casual Possession of a Firearm within 1000 of a School for Children, but This Law has NOT been Enforced by The United States Federal Government in Quite a While, with a Caveat that it has been Enforced in Conjunction with other Federal Felonies.

    Wyoming, like MANY other States, has NO such 1000 Foot 'Gun Free' Buffer Zone Prohibition around 'Schools for Children'.

    The Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q) ONLY Applies to and Effects Public Elementary, Public Middle, and Public High Schools, Operated by a Public Board of Education as Determined by The Laws of The Applicable State wherein The Question Concerning as to whether or not such 'School for Children' is Publically Funded and Publically Operated.

    The Term 'School for Children' means a School for Person less than 18 Years of Age, under The Federal Law, as based, in Part, by MANY other States' Laws.

    Under Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2) there are 6 Exceptions to This Law..., The Possession of a Wyoming Concealed Carry Permit being an Exception under United States Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2)(B)(ii).

    The Federal Law so Enumerated DOES NOT Apply to or Effect: 1. Nursuries, 2. Day Cares, 3. Toddler Schools, 4. Pre-Kindergartens, 5. Private Schools (whether for Children or Adults), 6. Parochial Schools (whether for Children or Adults), or 7. Institutions of Higer Learning/Alternative Learning (i.e. Universities, Colleges, Post Graduate Schools, DUI Schools, GED Schools, Hunting Schools, CCW Schools, etc., whether Public, Private, or Parochial, whether Children are Attendance or not).

    aadvark

    *** Under Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(3) The United States Federal Government also Regulates The Discharge of a Firearm within a 1000 Feet of a School for Children, as Defined therein. ***

    *** The Link to Federal Law is here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...2----000-.html ***

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Swanzey,NH, ,
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Any LEO has the authroity to DETAIN a person under reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed whether that crime is within their jurisdiction or not. Then, once the subject is detained, they will notify the proper LEO Agency that does have jurisdiction who will come and make the custodial arrest and file the charges.

    So, Joe Citizen open carries in a school zone - violating ONLY Federal law, a Barney Fife of the City PD sees it. Barney detains Joe Citizen and calls the Federal Marshall's office who comes out and arrests Joe Citizen and files the charges.

    It was the exact same situation when I would transport sensitive military equipment on public highways in convoys. When we would set up a perimeter at a truck stop, if Joe Citizen chose to violate our perimeter, we were authorized to use force (up to and including deadly force in a real-world situation) in order to DETAIN Joe Citizen, until the local police/sheriff could be notified and they would perform the custodial arrest of the subject.
    Sorry CDR, you completely wrong on this one. A police officer has to be empowered with the specific powers of arrest, and specific powers of jurisdiction. You really need to read the empowering legislation for police officers and constables in each state.

    In your situation you were empowered to protect Federal Government Property. Now you turned them over to the state, what "State Charge" did they use, and were you called back to testify, In which court?
    Last edited by Rattrapper; 07-12-2011 at 12:10 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark View Post
    To ALL Whom it May Concern:

    The Federal Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995 Prohibits The Casual Possession of a Firearm within 1000 of a School for Children, but This Law has NOT been Enforced by The United States Federal Government in Quite a While, with a Caveat that it has been Enforced in Conjunction with other Federal Felonies.

    Wyoming, like MANY other States, has NO such 1000 Foot 'Gun Free' Buffer Zone Prohibition around 'Schools for Children'.

    The Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q) ONLY Applies to and Effects Public Elementary, Public Middle, and Public High Schools, Operated by a Public Board of Education as Determined by The Laws of The Applicable State wherein The Question Concerning as to whether or not such 'School for Children' is Publically Funded and Publically Operated.

    The Term 'School for Children' means a School for Person less than 18 Years of Age, under The Federal Law, as based, in Part, by MANY other States' Laws.

    Under Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2) there are 6 Exceptions to This Law..., The Possession of a Wyoming Concealed Carry Permit being an Exception under United States Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2)(B)(ii).

    The Federal Law so Enumerated DOES NOT Apply to or Effect: 1. Nursuries, 2. Day Cares, 3. Toddler Schools, 4. Pre-Kindergartens, 5. Private Schools (whether for Children or Adults), 6. Parochial Schools (whether for Children or Adults), or 7. Institutions of Higer Learning/Alternative Learning (i.e. Universities, Colleges, Post Graduate Schools, DUI Schools, GED Schools, Hunting Schools, CCW Schools, etc., whether Public, Private, or Parochial, whether Children are Attendance or not).

    aadvark

    *** Under Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(3) The United States Federal Government also Regulates The Discharge of a Firearm within a 1000 Feet of a School for Children, as Defined therein. ***

    *** The Link to Federal Law is here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...2----000-.html ***
    U.S Code 18,922 makes no mention of a concealed handgun permit being an exception to the 1000' School Zone law. What it does mention is having a license to possess a firearm.

    "(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;"

    I suspect very few states require a license to possess a firearm, I know Virginia does not. And note that said "license" does not have to be on the person while carrying... just that the person is to have such a "license".
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  11. #11
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Swanzey,NH, ,
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    U.S Code 18,922 makes no mention of a concealed handgun permit being an exception to the 1000' School Zone law. What it does mention is having a license to possess a firearm.

    "(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;"

    I suspect very few states require a license to possess a firearm, I know Virginia does not. And note that said "license" does not have to be on the person while carrying... just that the person is to have such a "license".
    You are absolutely correct on the law, But it does not give state the authority to enforce that law. The fed's can't have it both ways. They have already filed a law suit that, fed's have to enforce federal law (Arizona).

    Do think the feds are going to put a federal officer at every school, Just in case?
    Last edited by Rattrapper; 07-13-2011 at 09:33 AM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Rattrapper View Post
    You are absolutely correct on the law, But it does not give state the authority to enforce that law. The fed's can't have it both ways. They have already filed a law suit that, fed's have to enforce federal law (Arizona).

    Do think the feds are going to put a federal officer at every school, Just in case?
    Yeah, it's really weird. You have to wonder if it has been left in place as a Catch-22. An interesting scenario would be someone out for a walk (with their dog, perhaps) and open carrying across the street from an elementary school. Now said person has left his wallet at home with all of his credentials so there is no ID of any kind in his possession. An officer sees him and stops to ask for an ID, which he doesn't have and doesn't need. He is breaking no laws in Virginia in his venture and no federal law since it clearly states a license to possess which Virginia does not issue. And even it if did, there is no mention that he must have said license on his person... just that he must have it.

    You have to wonder who writes this nonsense.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    U.S Code 18,922 makes no mention of a concealed handgun permit being an exception to the 1000' School Zone law. What it does mention is having a license to possess a firearm.

    "(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;"

    I suspect very few states require a license to possess a firearm, I know Virginia does not. And note that said "license" does not have to be on the person while carrying... just that the person is to have such a "license".

    I must say I've never heard that argument before. Taking concealed out of the equation....Would possess=carry?

  14. #14
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Did anyone else laugh a bit when they read the part about the federal "GF"SZ act being a "little-known" law?

    a crime to possess a functional firearm on public property... within 1,000 feet of the property line of any elementary, middle or high school.
    Apparently it wasn't worth mentioning that it has to be in a locked case. Broken down is OK, not required, but the locked case is required.
    WI just changed our "GF"SZ law to pretty much say "yeah, whatever the federal law says, do that".
    Up 'til 01NOV we only have to have firearms "unloaded & encased". After that, if it's a long gun, or a pistol w/o a permit, it has to be unloaded & in a locked case in a school zone.
    There's no way it can be used as a primary offense (I'm thinking hunters driving through an unfamiliar town), but certainly could be a secondary 'crime' found in a search of the vehicle after being stopped for something else. Another good reason to deny consent for a search.

    [Spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office] said the scenario of the driver who has a weapon in his vehicle and inadvertently breaks the law boils down to a matter of “common sense.”
    “Why would we charge anyone with that?” Powell said.
    Because they just committed a federal felony?
    Because you're supposed to enforce the law? If a judge wants to throw the case out s/he may.
    And as one person commenting on the story pointed out, the best way to get rid of a bad law is through good enforcement.

    Mark Spungin... president of the Wyoming State Shooting Association, said the federal law is unconstitutional and should be repealed.
    The U.S. Supreme Court, he noted, ruled the law unconstitutional but Congress passed it again.
    “It’s been ignored ever since it passed,” Spungin said. “I don’t see it being an issue here.”
    The operative word in concealed carry is “concealed,” he pointed out.
    Maybe it's been ignored there for the past 15 years, but it's been used elsewhere & the long-standing lack of enforcement is no promise that some officer & some prosecutor wouldn't do it tomorrow.
    And why should someone have to carry concealed if s/he doesn't want to, just to sneak around being arrested for a federal crime? It's still a crime. (It's a stupid, useless law, but it's still a law... & a felony, not to be taken lightly.)

    The national coalition is pushing for amendments to exempt any firearm carried in accordance with the laws of the state where the school is located.
    Another exemption would be for off-duty law enforcement officers...
    Why would LEO need special privileges if the law applies equally to everyone?
    If everyone can carry up to the property line of a school, then it doesn't matter what someone's job is.

    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark
    The Federal Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995
    ONLY applies to and affects public elementary, middle, and high schools
    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...2----000-.html
    The federal law says "school zone". I suppose that the real law, as opposed to the one at the cornell.edu site, might have links to the definitions of various terms, but the law as quoted there does NOT exempt private or parochial schools.

    I did track down the definitions once, and "school" was defined as something like "providing education for students in grades K-12".

    Another annoying thing about the "GF"SZ law is that there's no provision for "while students are present". So driving past with a pistol on your hip at 1am on a Sunday in July is the same crime as driving past at noon on a Wednesday in November.

    And there's no provision for knowing you're too near a school. If you're visiting another town, how could you know, unless you drive past it, & then it's too late.
    WI law has a phrase about "knowing or reasonably should have known" you were in a school zone, which I think is a large part of why it's practically never prosecuted. Unless someone drives past, lives near, or is on the grounds of a school, it's hard to prove.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 07-13-2011 at 11:30 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  15. #15
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    I must say I've never heard that argument before. Taking concealed out of the equation....Would possess=carry?
    No, possess means to have something under one's control. If you are at a neighbor's house and he hands you a glass of water, he clearly owns the glass however it is under your control and in your possession. To possess does not imply ownership. I would bet it would also equate to "on or about one's person".

    While the School Zone Act is poorly worded with its use of "license" and "possess", I imagine that in most states, the fact that someone has a Concealed Carry permit is sufficient to satisfy this archaic law. Otherwise as another member has stated, you'd be frequently in violation of this law as you went about your business on a daily basis since there are so many primary and secondary schools in this country.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 07-13-2011 at 12:12 PM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post


    The federal law says "school zone". I suppose that the real law, as opposed to the one at the cornell.edu site, might have links to the definitions of various terms, but the law as quoted there does NOT exempt private or parochial schools.

    I did track down the definitions once, and "school" was defined as something like "providing education for students in grades K-12".
    GFSZ Act
    18 USC 921 Definitions
    (a) As used in this chapter—
    (25) The term “school zone” means—
    (A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or
    private school; or
    (B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of
    a public, parochial or private school.
    (26) The term “school” means a school which provides
    elementary or secondary education, as determined
    under State law.



    And there's no provision for knowing you're too near a school. If you're visiting another town, how could you know, unless you drive past it, & then it's too late.
    WI law has a phrase about "knowing or reasonably should have known" you were in a school zone, which I think is a large part of why it's practically never prosecuted. Unless someone drives past, lives near, or is on the grounds of a school, it's hard to prove.
    Fed law says knowingly also:

    (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.
    Last edited by mrjam2jab; 07-13-2011 at 02:01 PM.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran GLOCK21GB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    4,348
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Yeah, it's really weird. You have to wonder if it has been left in place as a Catch-22. An interesting scenario would be someone out for a walk (with their dog, perhaps) and open carrying across the street from an elementary school. Now said person has left his wallet at home with all of his credentials so there is no ID of any kind in his possession. An officer sees him and stops to ask for an ID, which he doesn't have and doesn't need. He is breaking no laws in Virginia in his venture and no federal law since it clearly states a license to possess which Virginia does not issue. And even it if did, there is no mention that he must have said license on his person... just that he must have it.

    You have to wonder who writes this nonsense.
    lol, i do this every night I walk the dog..
    http://youtu.be/xWgVGu3OR4U AACFI, Wisconsin / Minnesota Carry Certified. Action Pistol & Advanced Action pistol concepts + Urban Carbine course. When the entitlement Zombies begin looting, pillaging, raping, burning & killing..remember HEAD SHOTS it's the only way to kill a Zombie. Stockpile food & water now.

    Please support your local,county, state & Federal Law enforcement agencies, right ???

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Rattrapper View Post
    Sorry CDR, you completely wrong on this one. A police officer has to be empowered with the specific powers of arrest, and specific powers of jurisdiction. You really need to read the empowering legislation for police officers and constables in each state.

    In your situation you were empowered to protect Federal Government Property. Now you turned them over to the state, what "State Charge" did they use, and were you called back to testify, In which court?
    No he's not... according to the Terry v Ohio rules, which most states have codified into their rules of criminal procedure, they allow for detention based on reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, will be, or is being committed. A state leo is perfectly within the "detention" portion of their authority if their is "reasonable suspicion" while they wait for an officer of proper jurisdiction to arrive and decide if there is enough probable cause to make an arrest and complete the booking process.
    Last edited by georg jetson; 07-13-2011 at 07:13 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    U.S Code 18,922 makes no mention of a concealed handgun permit being an exception to the 1000' School Zone law. What it does mention is having a license to possess a firearm.

    "(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;"

    I suspect very few states require a license to possess a firearm, I know Virginia does not. And note that said "license" does not have to be on the person while carrying... just that the person is to have such a "license".
    The way a concealed weapons permit in most states complies with 18 USC 922(q)(ii) is by fulfilling this... " 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." So the individual is licensed to possess(concealed) AND the state verifies that they're "qualified".

  20. #20
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    The way a concealed weapons permit in most states complies with 18 USC 922(q)(ii) is by fulfilling this... " 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." So the individual is licensed to possess(concealed) AND the state verifies that they're "qualified".
    What they're doing is applying a loose interpretation of the wording of the law. Note the phrase, "obtains such a license". This specifically refers to the license mentioned prior to this phrase which is one to posses, not carry, a firearm. They take this a step further with the "the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license" part of the statute. In my state, we are not required to obtain a license to possess a firearm, much less to own one which means the part about being qualified does not even apply since there is no license to begin with.

    That's why I said one has to wonder who writes this nonsense.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

Posting Permissions

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