Illegal to transport firearms on fwy 280 between mountain view and menlo park?

[DSB]

The original post is easily one of the most illogical questions I have seen on this site.

[Decoligny]

(i) Notwithstanding Section 25605, any person who brings or possesses a firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or administration by, a public or private university or college, that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it is with the written permission of the university or college president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college authority, shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for one, two, or three years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.

Breaking this down into its component parts:

the grounds of a campus of a public or private university or college that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property

or

buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or administration by, a public or private university or college, that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property

Not all the land owned by the college is considered "the campus".

[dwtt]

Actually my intent is to show that the extent and the ramifications of the law are orders of magnitude worse than most people, even calgunners, believe, and they must be shot down.

If what I say is true, I think it is a lot easier to explain to the common person why this is crazy, than trying to explain why a "safe handgun roster" is a bad thing, or a magazine capacity limit is bad.

OK, let's say your command of legal concepts of land rights is above anyone else in the state of California and it is illegal to transport firearms on 280 through the part that qualifies as college property (which is completely without merit since you don't understand the law). What are you going to do about it?
Are you going to hold a protest at Stanford?
Are you going to write up a website to "raise awareness" to this problem?
Are you going to write to your legislator to have the laws changed?
Are you going to raise money to buy the land from Stanford to take it out of the hands of the college?

I know the answers to those questions; you're going to do nothing. This thread is just an exercise in vanity for you. You're not the first and will not be the last to do so.

[Jimi Jah]

Just drive quickly, do not pass go and pay those railroads if you land on one.

[TheShagg]

I know the answers to those questions; you're going to do nothing. This thread is just an exercise in vanity for you. You're not the first and will not be the last to do so.

[sfpcservice]

Has anyone else noticed the group of new people with low post counts posting a bunch of really stupid questions in the 2nd A forums then trying to back them up with their own "research" that is flawed?
I sense the antis are trying to spread FUD by appealing to two groups of gunowners; the wacko fringe types who believe conspiracies everywhere and the naive ones who aren't knowledgable about the laws and susceptible to FUD.

I think what is really happening is we gladly give them all the information they need to more effectively ban things. After a quick question here, we tell them EVERY law they need to change in order to outlaw what they wanted to all along.

[TheShagg]

(i) Notwithstanding Section 25605, any person who brings or possesses a firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or administration by, a public or private university or college, that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it is with the written permission of the university or college president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college authority, shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for one, two, or three years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.

Breaking this down into its component parts:

the grounds of a campus of a public or private university or college that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property

or

buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or administration by, a public or private university or college, that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property

Not all the land owned by the college is considered "the campus".

It's the part (k) that makes me doubt, since it says "property", in general. I would hope you get a jury and the jury has brains.

[Tincon]

It's the part (k) that makes me doubt, since it says "property", in general. I would hope you get a jury and the jury has brains.

Juries don't decide issues of law.

[-hanko]

The original post is easily one of the most illogical questions I have seen on this site.

Maybe only second to bear threads?

[-hanko]

It's the part (k) that makes me doubt, since it says "property", in general. I would hope you get a jury and the jury has brains.

I would submit the "has brains" part would be more applicable to the original post.

[aBrowningfan]

Huh, I am pretty sure that map is not disclosing everything. For instance, I think SLAC, which is shown on that map, is owned by the university, and you can clearly see where it goes under the freeway.

At the other extreme, there is this:

http://campus-map.stanford.edu/

But I think that might be including the entire county. I doubt some of that is owned by stanford.

Ummm. There is a sign at the Sand Hill Road entrance to SLAC that states that Stanford U. operates SLAC for the U.S. DOE. SLAC is owned by the Federales.

[taperxz]

Ummm. There is a sign at the Sand Hill Road entrance to SLAC that states that Stanford U. operates SLAC for the U.S. DOE. SLAC is owned by the Federales.

The land it sits on belongs to Stanford though. They still don't own 280 though.

[Flintlock Tom]

I suspect that if Stanford "owned" that section of 280 there would be a tollbooth there.