Gun group sues over school zone restriction

[Al Norris]

Skillet, Idaho has no 1000 foot law.

There are statutes regulating how, when and where you can carry, but there is no blanket "Gun Free School Zone" within the State of Idaho.

 

[ATBackPackin]

For one minute lets forget about guns on school property and the argument that would ensue from that, but focus on the 1,000 ft from the school's boundary. What is the purpose of this law (other than getting legally owned guns off the street)?

For example close to me is a small elementary school that is positioned on a small block that is lets say 300 ft X 300 ft. That is 90000 square ft. Now add 1,000 ft in all directions and you have 5,290,000 square ft in which there is probably close to a couple hundred homes in that area (I live in an older town).

So I guess my question is why the 1,000 ft? What purpose is this law to serve?

 

[Mousegun]

Gun laws regarding schools are the most perfect example of "feel good, soccer mom, nanny legislation" there has ever been.

Written and passed by those who have to show that they have done something to stop the violence.

Take a look at the recent episodes of school shootings just to see how much it has done.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Simply driving past a school through a school zone on a public thoroughfare could put you within that 1000 feet.

 

[mboylan]

I disagree. In most states you can drive by a school, with a firearm in you vehicle, as long as the firearm is unloaded and encased.

The issue here is possession of a loaded firearm with the 1,000ft zone. In that case, mboylan is correct, in the 48 states with carry permitting systems, only those with carry permits are able to possess a loaded firearm within the GFSZ. In Wisconsin however, there is no permitting system of any kind that would allow for carry within the school zone.

In addition, we aren't talking about ON school grounds here, we are talking about the guy who lives down the street and cannot step out of his yard without risk of a felony arrest.

Right. I said in control of. To me, that's loaded and immediately accessible. Unloaded and cased is OK, but won't do much good.

 

[Dokkalfar]

but there is no blanket "Gun Free School Zone" within the State of Idaho.

Yes there is. Federal law. There may be no blanket GFSZ within Idaho law, but the federal one is still legally active.

And like Mousegun said, 'feeling' good is the only purpose for these laws, and the little kiddies is a scare factor that helps them to actually be passed. If it was up to Brady, everything outside of police stations would be a GFZ.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Yes there is. Federal law. There may be no blanket GFSZ within Idaho law, but the federal one is still legally active.

I think there is solid grounds to say that the federal law is unconstitutional based upon a decision by SCOTUS...

Here is the case... United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995).

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1260.ZS.html

IIRC, the timeline of this litigation was something like this:

1.) Ct. of Appeals found law unconstitutional because Congress had made no findings that school violence impacted interstate commerce.

2.) SCOTUS grants cert.

3.) Congress critters amend statute to include a finding that school violence impacts interstate commerce.

4.) SCOTUS issues ruling finding the original law unconstitutional and noted that it could not be cured by congessional findings...

here is the language:

Section 922(q) is a criminal statute that by its terms has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly one might define those terms. [n.3] Section 922(q) is not an essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity, in which the regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate activity were regulated. It cannot, therefore, be sustained under our cases upholding regulations of activities that arise out of or are connected with a commercial transaction, which viewed in the aggregate, substantially affects interstate commerce.

To cut through the legalese... What the court is saying is that when Congress enacts legislation involving the economy, the commerce clause is valid exercise of federal power to reach just about everything, but you can not use the commerce clause to justify laws which are not primarily economic in nature, because if you allow that, there is absolutely no limit to federal power... they would be able to regulate divorce, child custody and all aspects of criminal law. A clear violation of the the Constitutional ideal that the feds are limited to certain specific enumerated powers...

Following the decision by SCOTUS, our congress critters decided to try a different tact. They tied federal school funding to a requirement that the states pass a law creating a gun free zone at schools. So while the law is still on the books, I do not believe that it has been enforced. In lieu thereof, state laws are invoked.

 

[Dokkalfar]

That would seem to be the case. The problem, however, is with most gun laws: who has the time and $$ to be a test case?

 

[SilverDragn]

In Ohio with the passing of Sub SB 184 that went into effect on September 9, 2008.
Picking Up or Dropping Off at School
Decriminalized ccw in a school safety zone while immediately in the process of picking up or dropping off kids at school provided the CHL holder remains in the vehicle.

 

[Al Norris]

Yes there is. Federal law. There may be no blanket GFSZ within Idaho law, but the federal one is still legally active.

And?

Years ago, while working for a different retailer, I was in charge of handling all of the companies charge accounts, many of which were local Schools. When discrepancies came up. it was easier on everyone if I went to the school to correct any mistakes.

I went to the School Board, stated my case (having to visit the school to settle accounts; having to park off the school property; having to disarm before leaving my vehicle; re-arming upon entering vehicle; chance of a ND happening with all the firearms handling... etc.) and was granted written permission to carry concealed on school properties while conducting business.

This is all per Idaho law.

If Idaho thought some Federal statute took precedence, then I should be behind bars, yes? They don't. I'm not.

922(q) does not take precedence over State law to the contrary. The State regulates its own schools, not the Feds.

 

[wishin]

^ +1
Georgia's law, which mimics federal law on firearms and schools, is currently undergoing a proposed bill change to get away from the 1,000 ft requirement. TBD.

 

[legaleagle_45]

18 USC 922(q)(B): Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of 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;

 

[agent slice]

THIS LAW ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE A GUN WITHIN 1000FT OF A SCHOOL IS A VIOLATION OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT!

 

[Bhamrichard]

Fortunately, as far as I can find (I'm no attorney!), Alabama's law only restricts Concealed Carry with "intent to do bodily harm". So from what I gather, if you aren't there to "do bodily harm", your CC license, and right to carry, is perfectly legal under the State law anyway.. http://www.ago.alabama.gov/issue/Alabama_Weapon_Law.pdf and there is no GFZ. But apparently the State College's prefer to present prey for target practice..

 

[wishin]

^^
LOL. That sign photo needs to be enlarged for full appreciation.