Man brings gun to school board meeting

[Camp David]

Schools are very proactive about first amendment but rarely about second... If schools tell you you can't exercise 2nd, tell them they can't exercise 1st.

I think this issue is more about concealed vs. open carry; if you go to a School Board meeting conceal your gun, open carry it elsewhere! Simple as that.

However, any school which prohibits weapons is not paying due attention the Bill of Rights, and that should encourage more open discussion about it!

 

[Cacique500]

Medford wrote: "Our concern is for the safety and well being of the students present at this school-related activity

I don't have any kids...therefore haven't been to a school board meeting.

My question is are there kids present at these meetings normally? This just struck me as a really stupid statement from Medford.

"We're not infringing upon people's rights to bear arms," said board Chairman Mark Medford. "It's just a common-sense issue."

Someone is lacking their common sense...

 

[scout26]

Mr. Medford is obviously correct. Most homocidal nutjobs call the police and check to see if what they plan to do is legal, before they get angry and decide to snap.[/sarcasm]

Thankfully, nothing happened. But it would seem prudent to take action before a tragedy occurs."

Hmmmm.... Heellllllooooo Mr. Medford, it's the clue phone and it's for you. THAT's why Mr. Szymecki carries. He's taking action before a tragedy occurs and that PREVENTS tragedies from occuring !!!

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[Janitor]

...someone decided to snap ...

Ok. Quick informal poll -

How many of you have decided to snap in the last 12 months?

 

[Henry Bowman]

How many of you have decided to snap in the last 12 months?

Once or twice, but changed my mind soon after.

 

[Dannyboy]

OK, so the Principle guy essentially thinks that owning, or carrying, a gun makes someone a potential lunatic murderer.

The illogical extension of that would be to say that since this guy works around children all day then he is a potential child molester. Somehow, I don't think he would appreciate that thought and I wouldn't blame him. Of course, I think that when you make stupid remarks like he did, you get what you deserve.

 

[antarti]

Any takers?

How much do you want to bet that, deputies and all, that school meeting ran quicker, more efficiently, and more politely than all the others before it?

I bet nobody on the board tried to shout anybody down, berate them, or put on the elitist face and tell the people responding to the call for discussion that they "don't understand the issues" or that their "arguments are irrelevant".

Sounds like a good idea, and even better would be for all parents to show up armed. I bet the school boards would be more responsive to the opinions and standards of the community.

No lunatic (and I know a few) is crazy enough to call the police before showing up for a live broadcast show just for the pleasure of dropping some leech, no matter how deserving. Around here, that's what back-roads, salt marshes, and untethered & weighted crabtraps are for.

 

[MikeIsaj]

One more "NO" vote in the poll.

 

[svtruth]

Student Rights

Camp David, beg to differ.
Schools from colleges on down to kindergarten routinely act as if students have no first amendment rights, they limit/prohibit speeches, newspapers, tee shirts, religious symbols, etc.

 

[rmgill]

Yes, but was re-passed by Congress (and signed by Billy Boy) with a clause that says "because this relates to the regulation of interstate commerce... ." Has not been ruled on since, but newer SCOTUS law (Raich) says "it's interstate commerce if Congress says so."

But the original SCOTUS decision specifically stated that the connection is so tenuous that it more or less wipes away the Commerce Clause. If Congress only has to deem something interstate Commerce to make it so, it is no longer a limit on Congressional power.

From the court decision:http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1260.ZO.html

The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce. Respondent was a local student at a local school; there is no indication that he had recently moved in interstate commerce, and there is no requirement that his possession of the firearm have any concrete tie to interstate commerce.

To uphold the Government's contentions here, we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States. Admittedly, some of our prior cases have taken long steps down that road, giving great deference to congressional action. See supra, at 8. The broad language in these opinions has suggested the possibility of additional expansion, but we decline here to proceed any further. To do so would require us to conclude that the Constitution's enumeration of powers does not presuppose something not enumerated, cf. Gibbons v. Ogden, supra, at 195, and that there never will be a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local, cf. Jones & Laughlin Steel, supra, at 30. This we are unwilling to do.

I suspect that if it comes up again, it'll be over-turned.

 

[Henry Bowman]

If Congress only has to deem something interstate Commerce to make it so, it is no longer a limit on Congressional power.

That's what Justice Thomas pointed out in his dissent in the Raich case. But he was in the minority.

 

[Car Knocker]

Since we are now discussing Raich in connection with this topic, here's an excerpt from today's paper:

The opinion by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturns the dismissal last year by U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart in Salt Lake City of a count of sexual exploitation of children against Virgilio Jeronimo-Bautista.
The court said Stewart mistakenly decided that using a camera manufactured outside Utah and transported across state lines was too weak a factor to establish federal authority over the case through the Commerce Clause, which regulates economic activity among states.
In overturning Stewart, the 10th Circuit relied on a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that said Congress can regulate the purely local production and use of marijuana for personal medical purposes.
Locally produced images of child pornography can have a substantial impact on the market for that material when it is distributed and traded - sometimes ending up in other states - just as locally grown marijuana often can when it is used by the growers' friends and family members, the appeals court said.
"Congress' decision to deem illegal Mr. Jeronimo-Bautista's local production of child pornography represents a rational determination that such local activities constitute an essential part of the interstate market for child pornography that is well within Congress' power to regulate," the court said in its opinion, handed down Wednesday.

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3115622

Following this logic, a traffic offense now becomes a federal offense because the vehicle was manufactured out of state as was the fuel.

 

[MachIVshooter]

This is exactly the reason I obtained a CCW. It is perfectly legal to open carry anywhere in CO (except Denver), but I prefer to avoid the controversy.

Here in CO, you cannot legally have a firearm on school grounds unless you have a CCW. If you have a CCW, the weapon must still be locked in your car and out of site. Only LEO's or school security gaurds can carry into the school. Cilvilians may not, under any circumstances, carry on school property.

But that's OK, because we all know that this law means that no one can possibly be armed at a public school, right? rolleyes