PDA

View Full Version : Federal school zones and rifles


railroader
05-05-2010, 5:38 PM
In the city I live in seems to have schools everywhere. Both of my vehicles do not have a trunk. I know california law says I don't have to lock up my rifles on the way to range but the federal law does if I go through a school zone. Do local police enforce federal law? I know they don't enforce immigration laws and I don't think they mess with federal marijuana laws since people have prescriptions for pot. The reason I ask is because when I go shooting I might bring 4 or 5 rifles which I don't have locking cases for them all. I'm trying to avoid driving all over to get around the schools. Mark

Davidoff
05-05-2010, 5:48 PM
You don't need a special locking case, a simple padlock or combination lock through the zipper tabs on a soft case satisfies the "locked" requirement.

If you are pulled over with unlocked longarms in the bed of a truck and the officer is having a bad day you can be charged with violating the GFSZ. This is unlikely, but possible.

railroader
05-05-2010, 5:51 PM
You don't need a special locking case, a simple padlock or combination lock through the zipper tabs on a soft case satisfies the "locked" requirement.

If you are pulled over with unlocked longarms in the bed of a truck and the officer is having a bad day you can be charged with violating the GFSZ. This is unlikely, but possible.


That's the problem with my soft cases, when they are zipped closed there isn't anything to lock the zipper to. Mark

BKinzey
05-05-2010, 6:01 PM
Whatever the answer is are you confident the LEO who has pulled you over knows it?

I suggest you get enough cases to lock all your traveling firearms in.

Sorry I can't answer your question directly, and I do hope someone answers it, I'm just stressing why not avoid the hassle.

Whoa Nellie
05-05-2010, 6:33 PM
The federal gun free school zone was first ruled unconstitutional. It was then amended to add the specific clause the suspects gun had to affect interstate or foreign commerce. This new law was passed in 1996. As far as I know there hasnt been a single prosecution or conviction since that time.

Its very simple. The first law was unconstitutional and was signed to pander to the anti gun crowd during the Clinton years.

Even after the supreme court struck down the law it was changed ONLY to pander once again to the anti gun crowd.

Every politician and every federal prosecutor in America knows the law is so terribly written that they could never get a conviction from it.

I drive around with my Ruger MIni 30 on my front seat all the time. I dare the feds to arrest me.

18 USC 922(q)(1) Federal Gun-Free School Zones

(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;

Hoologan
05-05-2010, 7:01 PM
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.


Jeez what does that even mean and what do schools and foreign commerce have to do with one another?

pointedstick
05-05-2010, 7:33 PM
Jeez what does that even mean and what do schools and foreign commerce have to do with one another?

In practice, the commerce clause is read to mean, "congress can do whatever the hell it wants, so sit down, shut up, pay your taxes, and obey the regulations."

Whoa Nellie
05-05-2010, 7:39 PM
Jeez what does that even mean and what do schools and foreign commerce have to do with one another?

Nothing, which is why the first law was ruled unconstitional. However, congress, being as they are and not caring about rights or common sense passed the law again with that wording change.

The fact that no one in America has been convicted since it was re-written is proof of the stupidity.

Every prosecutor in America knows there is no way to prove someone with a gun within 400 feet a school is somehow affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

GrizzlyGuy
05-05-2010, 7:52 PM
Every prosecutor in America knows there is no way to prove someone with a gun within 400 feet a school is somehow affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

They don't have to prove that. All they have to prove is that the gun moved in interstate commerce (http://wise.fau.edu/~tunick/courses/conlaw/gunlaw.html):

The original act made it a Federal crime to knowingly bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a school or to fire a gun in these zones, with carefully crafted exceptions. The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1995 does exactly what the old act did. However, it adds a requirement that the prosecutor prove as part of each prosecution that the gun moved in or affected interstate or foreign commerce... By requiring that the prosecutor prove that the gun brought to school `moved in or affected interstate commerce,' the act is a clear exercise of Congress' unquestioned power to regulate interstate activities. In fact, the Lopez decision itself suggested that requiring an explicit connection between the gun and interstate commerce in each prosecution would assure the constitutionality of the act.


But you're right, this is really simple: really simple for a prosecutor to prove that a gun moved in interstate commerce since very few (any?) guns are manufactured in CA from 100% CA-manufactured parts.

Whoa Nellie
05-05-2010, 8:18 PM
They don't have to prove that. All they have to prove is that the gun moved in interstate commerce


.

I disagree. If it were that simple then all they would have to do is prove the simple charge of being within the 1000ft zone.

The gun itself has NOTHING to do with the prosecution of this statute.

Clearly the burden with this law is proving how the act of having the gun within 1000ft affected interstate commerce.

No prosecutor has been able to do it yet and as far as I know none have even tried despite many many many arrests.

Davidoff
05-05-2010, 8:37 PM
That's the problem with my soft cases, when they are zipped closed there isn't anything to lock the zipper to. Mark

Are there double zipper sliders? I usually just lock the two zipper tabs to each other. If your case doesn't have two sliders, you could sew a loop into one end of the zipper to lock it to. It doesn't have to be super secure.

Another member here offered a test that makes sense to me: "Can an average 10 year old without tools get the gun out from the container?"

Also, a member here (Thesus) was convicted of violating the GFSZ. Look up the ordeal that he had to go through, and he is currently prohibited from owning firearms. While this was a UOC related case, he was convicted on GFSZ charges alone, no other charges were brought.

kf6tac
05-06-2010, 12:10 AM
The federal gun free school zone was first ruled unconstitutional. It was then amended to add the specific clause the suspects gun had to affect interstate or foreign commerce. This new law was passed in 1996. As far as I know there hasnt been a single prosecution or conviction since that time.

Its very simple. The first law was unconstitutional and was signed to pander to the anti gun crowd during the Clinton years.

Even after the supreme court struck down the law it was changed ONLY to pander once again to the anti gun crowd.

Every politician and every federal prosecutor in America knows the law is so terribly written that they could never get a conviction from it.


Don't be so sure about that. The Ninth Circuit already upheld the re-written Gun Free School Zone act against a commerce clause challenge in 2005: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2005/08/10/0430152.pdf

The Eighth Circuit also reached the same conclusion in 1999: http://openjurist.org/221/f3d/1037/united-states-of-america-v-jordan-danks

There have also been plenty of Federal GFSZ convictions where the commerce clause argument wasn't presented on appeal. Most of them have taken place in federal jurisdictions like Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands, most likely since we don't have a whole lot of federal LE patrolling our local school areas. But there have been convictions, nonetheless. We're just fortunate that we don't have federal police prowling around our school zones.

http://openjurist.org/480/f3d/597/united-states-v-nieves-castao
http://www.vid.uscourts.gov/dcopinion/01cr4086p.pdf
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/circs/1st/052492p.pdf
http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2007/05/06-2277.htm

CaliforniaCarry
05-06-2010, 12:55 AM
Also, a member here (Thesus) was convicted of violating the GFSZ. Look up the ordeal that he had to go through, and he is currently prohibited from owning firearms. While this was a UOC related case, he was convicted on GFSZ charges alone, no other charges were brought.

Just FYI, Theseus was convicted of violating California's GFSZ law, which only applies to handguns and other concealable firearms. As far as I know, no Federal charges were pursued. Per CA law, you might be able to walk down the sidewalk adjacent to a school playground with an unloaded shotgun slung over your shoulder and technically be within state law.

626.9. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f).
(c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm
under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private
property, if the place of residence, place of business, or private
property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the
firearm is otherwise lawful.
(2) When the firearm is an unloaded pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed on the person and is in a locked
container or within the locked trunk of a motor vehicle.
This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
transportation of any other firearm, other than a pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed on the person, in
accordance with state law.
...

GrizzlyGuy
05-06-2010, 10:06 AM
Just FYI, Theseus was convicted of violating California's GFSZ law, which only applies to handguns and other concealable firearms. As far as I know, no Federal charges were pursued. Per CA law, you might be able to walk down the sidewalk adjacent to a school playground with an unloaded shotgun slung over your shoulder and technically be within state law.

You can, as long as you don't stop and hang out on public property. 626.9 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/626.9.html) actually does apply to long guns. It only exempts them while you are transporting them:

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

You correctly bolded the exemption for transportation of a long gun, but the exemption doesn't extend to mere possession.

Example: You decide to walk over to the publicly owned park that is adjacent to the school's playground for a day of sunbathing. You decide to bring along your unloaded shotgun for personal protection.

626.9 allows you to walk to the park and back with your shotgun (you are transporting it), but doesn't allow you to merely possess it while sunbathing. Note that you can't even get around this by locking it in a container, since the 626.9 locked container exemption only applies to handguns:

When the firearm is an unloaded pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed on the person and is in a locked
container or within the locked trunk of a motor vehicle.

The federal GFSZ law (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Gun_Free_School_Zones#Law) would allow you to do this, but only if it were in a locked container (or locked gun rack if you were traveling via motor vehicle) the entire time.

Ain't these ridiculously convoluted gun laws fun? :rolleyes:

boxbro
05-06-2010, 10:14 AM
Get one big duffel bag that you can lock them all in at once.
Probably can find one at a surplus store.

Whoa Nellie
05-06-2010, 10:26 AM
This shooting just occured right by my house. It was wthin 1000ft of a school zone. Think the feds will be investigating ?

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=7426295

IEShooter
05-06-2010, 10:34 AM
That's the problem with my soft cases, when they are zipped closed there isn't anything to lock the zipper to. Mark

Rather than join the chorus of folks who love to banter the law, I'll try to give you some useful advice.

I also have a soft case or two that doesn't have double zippers (if it does, just toss a small padlock on the two zippers), nor a place to lock the single zipper to.

My solution was to install a small metal grommet (10 cents at Michaels) on the side opposite the zipper. There's usually a tab or some other point there you can install the grommet in. This gives you a hard point to lock the zipper to so the case can't be opened.

If there isn't a nylon belt, tab thingie on the case, or if it's too small to install a grommet, just sew one on. Takes 10 minutes.

Besides rendering the whole legal point moot, having the guns inside a case serves a valuable second purpose of protecting them in case you have to slam on the brakes.

Regards,

John

Whoa Nellie
05-06-2010, 11:33 AM
A rifle doesnt need to be in a locked case.

toopercentmlk
05-06-2010, 11:41 AM
Bad Idea to designate an AK pattern rifle as a trunk gun? I know it shouldn't matter but higher risk of being "viewed" as a criminal with an illegal assault rifle?

GrizzlyGuy
05-06-2010, 11:50 AM
Bad Idea to designate an AK pattern rifle as a trunk gun? I know it shouldn't matter but higher risk of being "viewed" as a criminal with an illegal assault rifle?

Wisdom from the "right people": How NOT to get Arrested for your OLL!!!! (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=186405)

boxbro
05-06-2010, 4:31 PM
Wisdom from the "right people": How NOT to get Arrested for your OLL!!!! (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=186405)

You always seem to have the pertinent link to just about everything.
Thank you for your contributions here, they are immeasurably invaluable. (is that redundant ?)