Drafting letter to local school principal

[DanM]

I would say "if it's a public accommodation which your tax dollars paid for..." well, that's a different argument.

Splitting hairs? maybe

No, not at all. If I am interpreting you correctly, I think that's a good, in-context, counter-point that would be interesting to discuss. Please let me offer my interpretation of what you are saying, and you let me know if I'm wrong:

Question: Can a tax-funded entity in Michigan providing sporting event services be preempted from firearms regulations?

TheQ: Such an entity may be able to shield itself from preemption by arguing, and having a court accept the argument, "We are not providing a 'public accommodation'".

Would you clarify if I'm interpreting you correctly, Phil? My apologies if not, and please certainly provide clarification in your own words.

 

[TheQ]

Question: Can a tax-funded entity in Michigan providing sporting event services be preempted from firearms regulations?

Answer: Yes, if the tax source is the Federal Government.

 

[Venator]

We would do well to keep in mind that CADL is not yet settled caselaw

It is until a decision is made to change it. But until then it's settled.

 

[TheQ]

It is until a decision is made to change it. But until then it's settled.

And *drum roll* such a decision (or rather, a decision on whether to make a decision) is currently being considered!

 

[DanM]

1. We don't want to have the carpet pulled from underneath us on a new case if SCoM hears the case and decides against us.
2. Finances - we can't afford to fight multiple cases as one time.
3. We'd hate to bring more friends to CADL's side in their SCoM case.

Raggs, I can't tell you what to do, but I can say that Phil's points above are convincing to me. Personally, if I had something "cooking" with regard to preemption challenges, I could lay low for a while and see what the SCoM does. I'm with Phil on his point here.

 

[Venator]

And *drum roll* such a decision (or rather, a decision on whether to make a decision) is currently being considered!

And until then it's settled.

 

[TheQ]

And until then it's settled.

Is it caselaw? Sure!

Would I want to use it as the foundation of a $30,000 lawsuit? Hell no!

Would I want to draw attention of possible enemies to it? Nope.

 

[Raggs]

Dan I would be happy to use different arguments for the letter, I do not expect it to go very much further than the letter and whatever reply I get from the principals.

Raggs, I can't tell you what to do, but I can say that Phil's points above are convincing to me. Personally, if I had something "cooking" with regard to preemption challenges, I could lay low for a while and see what the SCoM does. I'm with Phil on his point here.

 

[DanM]

Dan I would be happy to use different arguments for the letter, I do not expect it to go very much further than the letter and whatever reply I get from the principals.

I think your letter is strong just with the MCL you provided and the reference to the MSP bulletin.

If you are amenable to Phil's opinion about dropping reference to CADL vs MOC, I think your letter wouldn't suffer too much, at this time, from not having that. ASAP after SCoM makes it's decision not to hear an appeal, or it rules in our favor, let's draft immediately an updated letter at that time to include reference to CADL vs MOC.

Feel free, however, to make your final decision for yourself. We all appreciate that you are engaged enough to be active.

 

[Raggs]

Well despite popular opinion I have no ax to grind with MOC and have no interest in harming the organization, I will send it to the principals without the CADL paragraph

I think your letter is strong just with the MCL you provided and the reference to the MSP bulletin.

If you are amenable to Phil's opinion about dropping reference to CADL vs MOC, I think your letter wouldn't suffer too much, at this time, from not having that. ASAP after SCoM makes it's decision not to hear an appeal, or it rules in our favor, let's draft immediately an updated letter at that time to include reference to CADL vs MOC.

Feel free, however, to make your final decision for yourself. We all appreciate that you are engaged enough to be active.

 

[Raggs]

Final?

This should be the last one

Dear Principal

I received your letter and due to your misunderstanding of the “open carry permit” I want to take this opportunity to further explain. I have reviewed all of the links you provided. I had read all of these and studied each of them in depth before you furnished them to me. However, you seem to have missed or omitted one: Michigan Compiled Law Excerpt:

http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7...0926--,00.html

which in part says

(4) Except as provided in subsection (5), an individual who possesses a weapon in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following …

(5) Subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following:
(a) An individual employed by or contracted by a school if the possession of that weapon is to provide security services for the school.
(b) A peace officer.
(c) An individual licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.
(e) An individual who possesses a firearm on school property if that possession is with the permission of the school's principal or an agent of the school designated by the school's principal or the school board.

Also you might like to read Michigan State Police here: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ms...2_336854_7.pdf Which will open a pdf from the Michigan state police update

As provided by law in the State of Michigan, I am legally within my rights to open carry a firearm on school property since I hold a valid Michigan Concealed Pistol License.

Thank You

 

[Raggs]

...

 

[FreeInAZ]

snip-

As provided by law in the State of Michigan, I am legally within my rights to open carry a firearm on school property since I hold a valid Michigan Concealed Pistol License.

Thank You

Very well done in my honest opinion. I think this should get your point across that "policy" does not trump state law.

 

[Raggs]

ok sent via email, will let you know if I get a reply

 

[Ezerharden]

Late reply sorry, but it looks good. Hope he sees the facts and starts to obey the law. Good job.

 

[TheQ]

So good to see we can all get along

 

[Raggs]

Update

Had a phone call from a Superintendent of the district that If I were to open carry at the school I would be asked to leave and if I did not leave they would then go after trespass. I requested this in an email from the superintendent and will likely post that as soon as it is received.

 

[FreeInAZ]

Had a phone call from a Superintendent of the district that If I were to open carry at the school I would be asked to leave and if I did not leave they would then go after trespass. I requested this in an email from the superintendent and will likely post that as soon as it is received.

I would ask him if the school tries to get trespass orders for parents that wear sneakers? Another legal activity. I would contact the nra & aclu. They want to get you charged so they can make an example of you. One thing that is known about school admins, they hate to be proven wrong. They would rather spends tens of thousands in court, than confirm you are acting within the law.

 

[HKcarrier]

Had a phone call from a Superintendent of the district that If I were to open carry at the school I would be asked to leave and if I did not leave they would then go after trespass. I requested this in an email from the superintendent and will likely post that as soon as it is received.

No surprise there... :/


So where does that leave you.... 5-10k for a lawsuit?

 

[Raggs]

'fraid I don't have that laying around
from the Superintendent


Dear Raggs

My first attempted email missed the "." in your email address; sorry about that.

I appreciated your time on the phone today.

I am sure you understand that the safety and security of our students is our number one priority, and we are asking you not to bring a weapon on school property. District is a weapons free zone as designated by BOE policy 7217 and also a "Pistol Free Zone" as designated by Michigan State Law.

this district understands you have the right to open carry in public with his CPL license, but we are notifying you that he is not to be on school grounds with a weapon, whether concealed or carried openly. We are glad that you are interested in his your child's education and welcome you to confer with your children's teachers.

As a school district, we have the right to determine who is on our property and who is not, and we have the right to prohibit certain individuals from stepping on school property. Because of the distraction to the school environment this will cause, you will be asked to leave if you arrive on school property or to any school event with a firearm. If Mr. you refuse to leave, local law enforcement will be notified and trespassing charges will be served.

We appreciate your willingness to consider the school community as a whole and respect our wishes to keep our schools free from weapons. I also appreciate your willingness, at the time of our conversation, to commit to not bringing a weapon to school tonight.

If you would, please confirm receipt of this email. Again, thank-you for your time,

No surprise there... :/


So where does that leave you.... 5-10k for a lawsuit?