PDA

View Full Version : GFSZ Map - project cancelled.


obeygiant
08-22-2009, 1:12 PM
Based on the thread below and others it appears that most of us would like to have a GFSZ map as a resource. The apparent problems with the existing one that was created are:


Missing or incomplete School information.
Lack of property boundaries
Accurately measuring the 1000 ft. radius of the property.


I think that it is possible to create the GFSZ map using Google Earth,County GIS shape files and the freely available School data that is online.

I'm trying to gauge interest in starting a project like this up. Would you be interested in helping to create this?


Too much potential liabilty, project abandoned.

In response to discussions about this map kinda threadjacking another thread, I am starting it here to keep that one cleaner.

I am friends with the person that is doing the map, I will be passing along any comments or suggestions about it to him.

http://www.0xdecafbad.com/gfsz has Google Map integration and is trying to get all the schools that qualify in the state of California plotted on the map.

Currently it only has private schools due to a lack of a suitable source for charter and public schools. He has contacted the Dept of Education for the state to try to get an address listing of all the missing schools.

This map is a work in progress, its also the first one he has done so expect bugs to be present.

Any comments, suggestions, etc would be passed on to the author of the page.

Resources:

CALIFORNIA GIS MAP & INFORMATION SITES (http://www.coordinatedlegal.com/gis.html)
Method for converting GIS data to KML for Google Earth -1 (http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1245504)
Method for converting GIS data to KML for Google Earth -2 (http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1248943)
Recap of exporting shape files to Google Earth (http://freegeographytools.com/2007/recap-of-exporting-shapefiles-to-google-earth-series)
Shapefile to KML using Open Source GIS (http://interactiveearth.blogspot.com/2006/02/shapefile-to-kml-using-open-source-gis.html)
County GIS (http://www.earthpoint.us/GIS.aspx)
Tools for Google Earth (http://www.earthpoint.us/)
Shape2KML (http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=14254)
GSpatial (http://gspatial.relationallogic.net/)

Theseus
08-22-2009, 6:10 PM
I think it is a rediculous and potentially a dangerous idea.

Right now you have a reasonable argument about not knowing the school zone. It is easy to claim that a person can not reasonably know the full proper dimensions of the grounds of a school and that arguing a person should have to go through such ridiculous investigation, cost and investment that the law is obviously ridiculous.

The other issues you are working with is definitions and logics...

Is the sidewalk part of the grounds? Argument could easily be made that if a sidewalk subject to an easement is not private property for the purposes of 626.9 as ruled in Tapia, then it is not part of the school grounds either.

What about situations like my local high school where there are some sports facilities that are open for use by the public? Are they part of the school grounds since they are still open and available to the public but perhaps not actually part of the actual school, and in fact are across the street from the school?

swaits
08-22-2009, 8:12 PM
The flip side is that the availability of an accurate map makes it easier to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the current laws, or to demonstrate the massive impact 1500' has over 1000'.

obeygiant
08-22-2009, 9:59 PM
I think it is a rediculous and potentially a dangerous idea.

Right now you have a reasonable argument about not knowing the school zone. It is easy to claim that a person can not reasonably know the full proper dimensions of the grounds of a school and that arguing a person should have to go through such ridiculous investigation, cost and investment that the law is obviously ridiculous.

That is a point worth considering and if the right people are of the opinion that it could be detrimental in any way to anyone with a case currently or in the future I'd be happy to abandon the project.

The other issues you are working with is definitions and logics...

Is the sidewalk part of the grounds? Argument could easily be made that if a sidewalk subject to an easement is not private property for the purposes of 626.9 as ruled in Tapia, then it is not part of the school grounds either.

I agree that having the proper definitions to what is and what isn't school property would be an important factor in determining the accuracy of the map.

What about situations like my local high school where there are some sports facilities that are open for use by the public? Are they part of the school grounds since they are still open and available to the public but perhaps not actually part of the actual school, and in fact are across the street from the school?

The law reads "grounds of" which I would take as "property of" and in that case it would seem to apply to the property across the street as well. Maybe bwiese, gene or oaklander could shed some light on the subject.


PC 626.9 (e) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) "School zone" means an area in, or on the grounds of, a public
or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1
to 12, inclusive, and within a distance of 1,000 feet from the
grounds of the public or private school.

sierratangofoxtrotunion
08-23-2009, 8:06 PM
The flip side is that the availability of an accurate map makes it easier to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the current laws, or to demonstrate the massive impact 1500' has over 1000'.

The effort that has to go into making such a map, just in order to comply with the law, is another demonstration of how ridiculous the law is.

Theseus
08-23-2009, 8:21 PM
The effort that has to go into making such a map, just in order to comply with the law, is another demonstration of how ridiculous the law is.

"But if the life of just one child is saved by this law, it would be worth the trouble."

obeygiant
08-23-2009, 8:28 PM
"But if the life of just one child is saved by this law, it would be worth the trouble."
Which as we have all heard and read is the exact reason why it is necessary in their eyes, yet it has done nothing to prevent any of the school shootings.

Theseus
08-23-2009, 9:13 PM
But you can't prove that it hasn't saved lives, and that is why it works!

What I wonder is why I am not allowed to protect my school children that I may have with me. . . if the intention is to keep them safe from crime, then why am I not allowed a self-defense exemption that would allow me to protect myself against crime.

coolusername2007
08-23-2009, 10:48 PM
But you can't prove that it hasn't saved lives, and that is why it works!

What I wonder is why I am not allowed to protect my school children that I may have with me. . . if the intention is to keep them safe from crime, then why am I not allowed a self-defense exemption that would allow me to protect myself against crime.

Because the anti-gunners are incapable of thinking in terms of "freedom" and "protection". They are only capable of thinking in terms of "control" and "regulating". Its a mental disease, parasitic I'm sure. If you are truly pro-gun, and truly believe guns provide protection, and you believe the defenseless require defending, and you have kids, then you should not be putting them in public schools. Period. IMHO, its not a very big leap at all to suggest that the pro-gun movement needs to completely abandon the public carnage zones.

Asphodel
08-23-2009, 11:52 PM
Actually, whilst such a law is simply 'unreasonable' at best, if it is to be a law, and enforced as such, then the obvious requirement is for the school district management to 'post' the boundaries of the '1000' feet from school property' (or 1500 feet, if such is to be the revised law) zone, to clearly identify the extent of the 'zone' to the public.

Presumably, one of the 'right people' could file a suit at an appropriate level, on the grounds that, were a member of the public subject to arrest for violation of such a law, the public is entitled to accurate and complete information as may be needed for compliance with the law.

There should be some very large number of precedent items which are, or should be, applicable.

One class of those goes back to the earliest days of motor vehicles, in which the state vehicle codes specified that municipalities, however small, were entitled to set a specific 'speed limit' for motor vehicles running through the boundaries of such cities or towns, on existing county or state-maintained roads or highways.

This led to the famous 'speed trap' concept, as we all know, such as placing 'City Limits' or 'Speed Limit' signs in such a way that they would soon be obscured by growing vegetation, or similar signs immediately past blind corners, etc.

Victimisation of the public by such practices led to a demand for 'reforms'. amongst which was a requirement for clear posting of speed limits on roads.

cheers

Carla

Librarian
08-24-2009, 9:34 AM
Actually, whilst such a law is simply 'unreasonable' at best, if it is to be a law, and enforced as such, then the obvious requirement is for the school district management to 'post' the boundaries of the '1000' feet from school property' (or 1500 feet, if such is to be the revised law) zone, to clearly identify the extent of the 'zone' to the public.

This is my thought as well. A web-accessible tool is an interesting project, but I don't think it should be a thing to be relied upon when calculating risk. Enforcement, in my opinion, requires the notice of signs and other markings physically present at the boundaries - and the cost of surveying and marking should be borne by the agencies who wish to enforce this ill-conceived law.

Theseus
08-24-2009, 10:33 AM
626.9 (k) This section does not require that notice be posted regarding the proscribed conduct.

The law says they don't have to post regarding proscribed conduct. . . But it doesn't say that they don't have to notify the bounds of the school zone.

Librarian
08-24-2009, 11:01 AM
The law says they don't have to post regarding proscribed conduct. . . But it doesn't say that they don't have to notify the bounds of the school zone.

True. As you have ample reason to know, that makes it difficult for (b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, to be reasonable, or enforced rationally.

obeygiant
08-25-2009, 12:40 AM
This is my thought as well. A web-accessible tool is an interesting project, but I don't think it should be a thing to be relied upon when calculating risk. Enforcement, in my opinion, requires the notice of signs and other markings physically present at the boundaries - and the cost of surveying and marking should be borne by the agencies who wish to enforce this ill-conceived law.

I agree that the burden should be borne by the enforcing agencies but the likely hood of that happening anytime soon is very slim. In the mean-time how does one abide by the

(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone,

It would seem to me that having an accurate map, well at least to the degree that is available to the public, would equip gun owners far better than resting in the shadows of the vagueness of the law.

TheBundo
08-25-2009, 1:35 AM
I think it is a rediculous and potentially a dangerous idea.

Right now you have a reasonable argument about not knowing the school zone. It is easy to claim that a person can not reasonably know the full proper dimensions of the grounds of a school and that arguing a person should have to go through such ridiculous investigation, cost and investment that the law is obviously ridiculous.

The other issues you are working with is definitions and logics...

Is the sidewalk part of the grounds? Argument could easily be made that if a sidewalk subject to an easement is not private property for the purposes of 626.9 as ruled in Tapia, then it is not part of the school grounds either.

What about situations like my local high school where there are some sports facilities that are open for use by the public? Are they part of the school grounds since they are still open and available to the public but perhaps not actually part of the actual school, and in fact are across the street from the school?

I agree, it's a ridiculous idea. I just saw a car in the garage across the street with a private school sign in the back window, It's not on any list yet, nor do I know if the school is there or somewhere else. This open carry thing is the WRONG way to go. Why can't people understand that? We have the law because of the Black Panthers open carrying, and the Open Carry people are TOTALLY diverting attention from the real issues, and giving a "cause" to the anti's.

TheBundo
08-25-2009, 1:41 AM
The flip side is that the availability of an accurate map makes it easier to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the current laws, or to demonstrate the massive impact 1500' has over 1000'.

They WANT the impact of the increased distance. They don't want people walking around with guns in holsters. And frankly, if they allow that, it applies to everyone, including bad guys. Do you really want bad guys walking around with guns in holsters? I don't. CCW is where it's at. Open carry, despite what you read, is NOT something that will not attract LEO attention in Nevada, Wyoming, or wherever. Yes, in some isolated spots in those states, but not in populated areas. Cops don't want it, neither does the public. I know, I've done it, talked to people in those areas, etc. It's all about CCW, NOT open carry.

TheBundo
08-25-2009, 1:48 AM
Actually, whilst such a law is simply 'unreasonable' at best, if it is to be a law, and enforced as such, then the obvious requirement is for the school district management to 'post' the boundaries of the '1000' feet from school property' (or 1500 feet, if such is to be the revised law) zone, to clearly identify the extent of the 'zone' to the public.

Presumably, one of the 'right people' could file a suit at an appropriate level, on the grounds that, were a member of the public subject to arrest for violation of such a law, the public is entitled to accurate and complete information as may be needed for compliance with the law.

There should be some very large number of precedent items which are, or should be, applicable.

One class of those goes back to the earliest days of motor vehicles, in which the state vehicle codes specified that municipalities, however small, were entitled to set a specific 'speed limit' for motor vehicles running through the boundaries of such cities or towns, on existing county or state-maintained roads or highways.

This led to the famous 'speed trap' concept, as we all know, such as placing 'City Limits' or 'Speed Limit' signs in such a way that they would soon be obscured by growing vegetation, or similar signs immediately past blind corners, etc.

Victimisation of the public by such practices led to a demand for 'reforms'. amongst which was a requirement for clear posting of speed limits on roads.

cheers

Carla

I think a lot of people are forgetting Federal law. Federal law requires lock unloaded longguns within 1000' of schools. How many of us lock our handguns while driving to the range, but not our longguns? Local LEO don't tend to enforce that, any more than they enforce immigration law. But to blame this all on CA law is wrong. The 1000' limit would still exist by Federal law, and includes longguns.

This Open Carry is a waste of time and money, and CGF shouldn't support any more people caught up by the cops, whether they are in the right or not. It's just ammo for the anti's

obeygiant
08-25-2009, 7:00 AM
I agree, it's a ridiculous idea. I just saw a car in the garage across the street with a private school sign in the back window, It's not on any list yet, nor do I know if the school is there or somewhere else. This open carry thing is the WRONG way to go. Why can't people understand that? We have the law because of the Black Panthers open carrying, and the Open Carry people are TOTALLY diverting attention from the real issues, and giving a "cause" to the anti's.

I started this thread to find out if there was enough interest in creating a resource for calgun members and other firearm owners in California. My focus is not ,nor will it be, the issue of OC'ing. My focus is strictly along the lines of

(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone,

and how to keep one's posterior out of the frying pan when a firearm is in involved. I'm sure that should a map such as the one I'm suggesting be created it would be a tremendous resource for those wishing to OC but it would also equally serve the wider community of Gun Owners.

TheBundo
08-27-2009, 12:47 AM
Since you want to stress the issue of "knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone", then maybe we should hold you to the same criteria of "knows, or reasonably should know whether it is a good idea, or counter-productive to the cause. And you better have the money to defend yourself, because I think the CGF should have a way to EXCLUDE donations from being used to defend these cases.

Theseus
08-27-2009, 9:42 AM
Since you want to stress the issue of "knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone", then maybe we should hold you to the same criteria of "knows, or reasonably should know whether it is a good idea, or counter-productive to the cause. And you better have the money to defend yourself, because I think the CGF should have a way to EXCLUDE donations from being used to defend these cases.

I believe what you are doing is thread crapping. We are discussing a map and not whether we should OC or be supported by CGF.

We don't need this. Whether you agree with it or not there are quite a few people, members of Calguns even, that are going to OC. The numbers may grow, they may dwindle, but it is a fact that you and Calguns will have to face eventually.

As to the issue at hand, 626.9 (k) This section does not require that notice be posted regarding the proscribed conduct.

I argued that they are not required to post signs about what is poscribed conduct, but where. . . I have to look for it, but I now vaguely remember a case that said that knowing what behavior is proscribed is sufficient, the person not need know where the conduct is proscribed. . . IIRC it is a 626.9 case.

ripcurlksm
08-27-2009, 12:14 PM
I would be glad to help with this, I have a script that I created myself that can dynamically plot points on google maps.

If you give me a list of the longitude and latitude for every school I can turn it around in 24 hrs easy.

obeygiant
08-27-2009, 8:33 PM
I would be glad to help with this, I have a script that I created myself that can dynamically plot points on google maps.

If you give me a list of the longitude and latitude for every school I can turn it around in 24 hrs easy.

I do have an excel spreadsheet with the long/lat for each address that was not a P.O. Box. I ran it through a couple of online geocoders to verify the accuracy.

I'll get all of the data that I have and post a link up here for you to give it a try.

obeygiant
08-27-2009, 11:55 PM
ripcurlksm,

Here is what I've put together so far. The public schools tab in the "CA Public and Private Schools" spreadsheet needs some cleanup but this will get you started at least.

CA Public and Private Schools (http://www.4shared.com/file/128311447/4c1d3949/CaSchools-final.html)

CA Public School Source Data (http://www.4shared.com/file/116463401/1a8e01e5/ncesdata_C9DB9DF3_Public.html)

CA Private School Source Data (http://www.4shared.com/file/116462789/6676dae3/ncesdata_656B2DD0_Private.html)

artherd
08-28-2009, 12:53 AM
do not underestimate the liability you would incur should you make such a map. and it turn be wrong. and someone gets pinched.

rynando
08-28-2009, 1:05 AM
This is a very, very bad idea. Please, invest your time elsewhere. Anyone associated with this project is exposing themselves and their dependants to a lot of unnecessary liability (the life ruining kind).

R

ripcurlksm
08-28-2009, 7:54 AM
Well thats a party crasher..

obeygiant
08-28-2009, 10:22 AM
do not underestimate the liability you would incur should you make such a map. and it turn be wrong. and someone gets pinched.

Good enough for me, I'll cease working on this and let it die. Thank you for the input.

ripcurlksm
08-28-2009, 12:39 PM
it does seem like this map would be a good starting point for people, I can easily extend the radius out to 1500' as well.... whats the alternative? download and research it for yourself? how do you get your school zone information, from your county? couldnt you sue them too?

obeygiant
08-28-2009, 1:37 PM
it does seem like this map would be a good starting point for people, I can easily extend the radius out to 1500' as well.... whats the alternative? download and research it for yourself? how do you get your school zone information, from your county? couldnt you sue them too?

do not underestimate the liability you would incur should you make such a map. and it turn be wrong. and someone gets pinched.

Artherd brought up a good point in that if the map is created,distributed to members and there is even a slight margin of error, some gets arrested for having a firearm in a GFSZ we would be opening up ourselves and/or CGN/CGF to potential litigation.