From Facebook
George Gostias: As an attorney, former mcrgo volunteer, and NRA instructor I can tell you that you there is way to much misinformation on the web. If that is where you get your legal advice from you are headed for trouble. DO NOT, i repeat, do not carry a firearm onto school property. Federal law still prohibits that. see gun free school zones act of 1990.
What do you guys think?
Although the attorney may be trying to dissuade gun owners from doing so, and MAY be correct regarding a person just taking their pistol and carrying it at a school, the fact remains that Federal law does NOT prohibit those who have a license issued by the state in which the school is located, which required a background check before it was issued, from possessing the firearm in a school.
If he thinks that a Michigan license to purchase, carry, etc does not meet that requirement, he MAY be correct. And in the dictum regarding a charge in which that issue had absolutely no bearing on the actual decision, at least one Lansing area judge may actually hold the same personal opinion.
But, as the case in which the Kent County prosecutor decided no law was violated when a CPL holder carried while voting at a school in Grand Rapids showed, when people are asked to prosecute actual violations of the law, they will likely choose to follow the law even though they personally disagree with what the law clearly states. Knowing the prosecutor's desire to aggressively prosecute those who violate the law, I'm sure the prosecutor would have done so if he had even the remotest chance of being successful.
My guess is that this attorney is attempting to express something that is more wishful thinking than an understanding based on a reading of the law. This statement only shows that not all self-identified gun-law experts are.
If I had to find an attorney to represent me in regards to anything having to do with firearms and I saw this person's name as possible representation, I would keep looking.
Were you surprised that a supposed advocate would be so willing to throw OC under the bus in the furtherance of personal desires? Considering the most recent discussions regarding sb59, this attitude is no shock to me.
