Get rid of the no gun zones around schools

Status
Not open for further replies.
I saw the taped interview with shep. They mentioned the first gun free zone law being overturned by the scotus and the second one being so far unchallenged.

Funny thing was they brought an anti-gun on and he said "We've had this debait, its over!".


:scrutiny:
 
This has entrapped home owners and people who have a CCW license who happen to be driving past a school.
Click to expand...

Entrapped?

Please. The only thing worse then their paranoia, is pro-CCW paranoia.

Pro-CCW paranoia makes us look like asses. :barf:

If you carry a gun, you should know the rules.
 
If they want to play that way, the law should involve school property itself. Firing a gun from anywhere other than school property to anyplace within that property line should carry a stiff penalty, too (especially if some kid gets hit). But the feds do not have the right to dictate what I do on my property or on the state/county/town road a block away (1000 feet!) from a school.

Period.

How the heck do they define 1000 feet, anyway? Center of the school? Edge of the building? Edge of the property line?
 
If you carry a gun, you should know the rules.
Click to expand...

GFSZ%20Cleveland.jpg

Well according to "the rules", your not allowed to carry a weapon in many places you should otherwise have the right to. Like while driving, in your home, or walking down the street to the corner store.
That "paranoia" is based on the fact that any cop looking to fill his quota can yank you on the side and charge a felony based on his mood that day.

So here I am, a law abiding citizen whos done nothing wrong, looking over my shoulder and dodging Jhonny law the same as a criminal.

This law does not have much use other than to make ccw holders paranoid. I dont see where its prevented a gun from being brought on school property to harm someone, more than likely its attracted many of those attacks by keeping the staff unarmed.
"Gun free zone" is an advertisement to every miscreant that sees it, the intent of the law noble but very poorly aimed.
 
The law is wrong on three levels. Firstly, it violates the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Secondly, it makes mass murderers feel secure that if they choose a school to do their thing on, no one will have the means of putting a stop to it until they're out of ammo. If they have lots of ammo, that's lots of dead kids because of this law. And don't bother pointing out to me that there are cops assigned to schools. History has shown us time and again that cops do what they're trained to do is such situations, i.e., make damned sure they get home safely, i.e., they get the heck out of there, pronto, and call for SWAT. Thirdly, it is a despotic law, i.e., it's an exercise of Federal power not delegated. The Constitution nowhere authorizes Congress to pass laws regarding guns near or in school zones. This law is an exercise of police powers, which powers belong exclusively, according to the US Constitution, to the States.
 
So here I am, a law abiding citizen whos done nothing wrong
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

You've shown great knowledge of the law through visual example. Failure to comply is your "choice."

Such is not "law abiding."

There are a million things you can do to change, modify or otherwise affect the law: but non-compliance is not singularly intelligent.

Nice point with the dots, however.
 
Ezekiel, you miss the point. He is not arguing mistake of law, but mistake of fact, i.e., you never know when you are within a thousand feet of a school as you drive through unfamiliar territory.
 
The ban makes no sense to me in the first place. Again the only ones who will obey it are the ones that are no threat in the first place. Guys who are going to shoot up a school aren't going to stop at the 1000 foot mark, say shucks, and go put their guns and bombs away. It's complete mental masterbation for the gun paranoid. If I'm in that school unarmed, because I obeyed the law, and someone starts shooting the place up, I'm gonna be praying another guy like me broke that law and takes this shooter down. But 1000 feet around, makes even less sense.

This definately needs to be struck down.

Entrapped?

Please. The only thing worse then their paranoia, is pro-CCW paranoia.
Click to expand...

Not really entrapped. But if you live within 1000 feet of a school even with a permit you cannot have a gun on your own property. It's not paranoia, it's fact. Not to mention driving in an unfamaliar area and stumbling into a school zone. Get in a fender bender and you could be going to jail without even knowing you are within 1000 feet of a school.
 
Ezekiel, you miss the point. He is not arguing mistake of law, but mistake of fact, i.e., you never know when you are within a thousand feet of a school as you drive through unfamiliar territory.
Click to expand...

"Point taken."

Thanks.
 
So which applies?

This Federal Law?

http://www.state.de.us/attgen/main_page/teachers/laws/gunfree.htm

Or this State Law?

http://www.legis.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/gl_codes_detail.pl?code=16-11-127.1

I always thought as long as I didn't step onto school property I was legal (assuming I'm conducting lawful business -whatever that is). The federal law leaves open to the states to enact statues. Sounds like Georgia did and it seems fair enough.

I'm sure glad Georgia is a non-notify state (I don't have to tell police I'm carrying).
 
And again 1000' from what exactly? Center of the building? Center of the property? Edge of the building? Edge of the property? Nearest point of the property? Nearest point on the building? This could become VERY significant if you live roughly 1000' "from a school" or get busted roughly 1000' "from a school".
 
I live right next to a school. How, exactly, can I obey a gun free zone law and still own firearms?
 
"Gun Free Zones" are a REALLY bad idea anyway. Ever notice that most 'mass shootings' are done within these 'Unarmed Victim Zones'?

Stiffer penalties for the UNLICENSED carry of a firearm ON SCHOOL PROPERTY works for me. Any law that limits the personal freedom of the law abiding is a bad law and should be struck down.

We fear violence in our schools, so we disarm the law abiding. Bad idea.
 
How the heck do they define 1000 feet, anyway? Center of the school? Edge of the building? Edge of the property line?
Click to expand...

TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 44 - FIREARMS
Sec. 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.
...
 
We should get an NRA lawyer to sue the state governments (because that is who will likely arrest you and possibly prosecute you) to demand that signs are put up on every street that crosses the 1000 ft mark from any school. As pointed out above, it is unreasonable to expect someone to know where every school is. It should be the State's duty to inform the public when they might be about to unwillingly break the law. To do otherwise is no better than entrapment.

I thought that to prossecute some one for tresspassing the property owner had to reasonably attempt to notify the person that their pressence was not permitted (either through signs or verbal warnings).
 
The guy said that the law does not apply to CCW carriers,which he said amounts to about 1% of gun oweners nation wide. He is pushing to get the same rights to apply to all gun owners.
 
But if you live within 1000 feet of a school even with a permit you cannot have a gun on your own property.
Click to expand...

TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 44 - FIREARMS
Sec. 922. Unlawful acts
...
(q)
...
(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;
(iii) that is -
(I) not loaded; and
(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.
...

Has Mr. Korwin even read this law???
 
Dammit wdlsguy, there you go, applying logic, reason and the facts to an otherwise perfectly good paranoid rant. :cuss:

I don't know how you can sleep at night.
 
Thanks for posting that wdlsguy

After reading that it seems like it really only effects those who are carrying illegally, and if they are allready breaking the law, whats to stop them from breakin another?

Also how does this apply
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...

that allow CCW without a license?
 
it seems like it really only effects those who are carrying illegally
Click to expand...

Pretty much. It does seem like it could present problems for residents of Vermont and Alaska which allow CCW without a permit though.
 
Montana has a law that steps around this Federal law:

"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."

Emphasis mine.
 
We establish a "Gun-Free Zone" and then marvel at how long it takes for a mass killer to be stopped when he enters one with a gun and starts killing people like it's free. It always seems that the killer surrenders or kills himself prior to the police arriving. Personally if I am not armed I would rather catch a stray bullet from someone trying to stop the killer than wait my turn to be executed.

Of coarse being armed myself would insure I am not going to wait my turn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Gun Free School Zone: "You can't get there from here"
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
publius
P
K
  • Locked
Guns in a school zone?
Replies
11
Views
731
SteveS
S
B
  • Locked
School Free Gun Zones
Replies
17
Views
1K
howlnmad
howlnmad
Z
  • Locked
Gun Free School Zones?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
NavyLCDR
N
D
  • Locked
Idaho State Statutes vs. Fed Gun free School Zone Act
Replies
23
Views
2K
Jeff H
Jeff H
Back
Top