Doc with carry permit charged: had gun in Pa. school while picking up child [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Doc with carry permit charged: had gun in Pa. school while picking up child


RussP
01-03-2013, 20:39
Doctor with concealed-carry permit charged for having gun in Pa. school while picking up child (http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/f00fd0a834d6406eac63c9b7624cadde/PA--Weapon-On-School-Property)

Bruce M
01-03-2013, 21:00
Interesting both that he was not placed in custody and that it took three weeks. Also my guess is that he is perhaps slightly better positioned than many financially to mount a defense and may be a more sympathetic and better spoken defendant. But maybe I am reading too much into this.

DevilDocsGlocks
01-03-2013, 21:06
Guess it was not " concealed " very well...

xmanhockey7
01-04-2013, 05:12
I wonder if state preemption will come into play
§ 6120. Limitation on the regulation of firearms and ammunition.
(a) General rule.--No county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.

Possession of Weapon on School Property.
(a) Definition.--Notwithstanding the definition of "weapon" in section 907 (relating to possessing instruments of crime), "weapon" for purposes of this section shall include but not be limited to any knife, cutting instrument, cutting tool, nun-chuck stick, firearm, shotgun, rifle and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.
(b) Offense Defined.--A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.
(c) Defense.--It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.

fuzzy03cls
01-04-2013, 09:10
Guess it was not " concealed " very well...
+1
If your goign to carry into a place that may be illegal & can't do something as simple as conceal it right to not get caught, you deserve what you get.

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 11:26
There have a few incidents of this type over the years, however you never hear the out come. Seems no one wants to address the "for other lawful purpose" as far as defining exactly what that means. They probably agree to some lesser charge like disorderly conduct in order to make the whole thing go away and still keep their firearm privileges.

tpw108
01-04-2013, 11:28
Doesn't the Hippocratic Oath create a dilemma for doctors?:
"In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art."
"I will... never do harm to anyone."

These passages are from separate translations, but everyone is familiar with the "First, do no harm" concept.

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 11:30
It should also be pointed out that because he had a license to carry firearms (LTCF) which is PA's version of a carry permit, and thus under went a background check, the doctor is NOT in violation of the Federal Gun Free School Zone law.

SCmasterblaster
01-04-2013, 11:42
I have always understood that it is against federal law to possess a firearm on school property.

Leigh
01-04-2013, 11:44
...and thus under went a background check, the doctor is NOT in violation of the Federal Gun Free School Zone law.

That all depends on the statutes of the state in question.

Kentucky is a Commonwealth like PA...but if you carry on to school property and are caught, you WILL be convicted of a crime and lose the weapon for good. Period.

However, armed IN your vehicle is excluded as long as weapon is not brandished or displayed.

Bottom line; know and abide by the CCW laws of your state.

countrygun
01-04-2013, 11:45
+1
If your goign to carry into a place that may be illegal & can't do something as simple as conceal it right to not get caught, you deserve what you get.

very nice self-serving "holier than thou it would never happen to me because I am smarter than that" position there Skeezix.

Things happen in the real world that don't in the theoretical one. To be useful a gun has to be accessible. Now, if you want to go really "deep cover" you could put it in the bottom of your "Fruit of the Looms" and walk around pretending you were glad to see everyone, but it might be a bit slow to get out of there.

Granted, the DR. in question probably could have done better job but sometimes, in the real world, people who have become accustomed to being armed, don't walk around all day thinking about it.

Don't be too quick to judge, and pat yourself on the back because it hasn't happened to you----yet.

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 11:52
Like I said, because the doctor is "licensed" by the State (PA) in which the school is located and was qualified to be issued said license, he is NOT in violation of the GFSZ.



(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) shall 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;

RussP
01-04-2013, 11:55
+1
If your goign to carry into a place that may be illegal & can't do something as simple as conceal it right to not get caught, you deserve what you get.Actually, it should be if you are stupid enough to carry into a prohibited place you deserve the penalty set by law.

There is no do something to not get caught.

Is your comment based on personal experience, you carry into prohibited places, you're just careful to not get caught?

Don't answer that.

fuzzy03cls
01-04-2013, 12:02
Oh I will. No I don't. I have enough sense to not carry where it's not leagl & IF i ever had to break that I certainly would make sure I did it in a way to not get caught. It's not hard to conceal a gun. Criminals do it all the time.
very nice self-serving "holier than thou it would never happen to me because I am smarter than that" position there Skeezix.
Yes it is. Bottom line you break the gun laws that are in place you make us ALL look bad.

Gunnut 45/454
01-04-2013, 12:03
So according both State and Federal law he didn't break the law? So why was he charged?:dunno:

SCmasterblaster
01-04-2013, 12:04
Actually, it should be if you are stupid enough to carry into a prohibited place you deserve the penalty set by law.

There is no do something to not get caught.

Is your comment based on personal experience, you carry into prohibited places, you're just careful to not get caught?

Don't answer that.

So true, Russ. It is against Federal law to CCW on any school property.

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 12:09
So true, Russ. It is against Federal law to CCW on any school property.

Read the part of the Federal Law I posted. It is NOT against the law if you fall into the exception.

And PA law has a clause in their law about weapons on school property. The clause states that it shall be a defense to the charge if the weapon is possessed for "other lawful purpose".

The problem with the PA law is that there has never been a definitive answer as to what constitutes "for other lawful purpose".

countrygun
01-04-2013, 12:11
So true, Russ. It is against Federal law to CCW on any school property.

How do you reconcile that with the information "Steve in PA" posted?

SCmasterblaster
01-04-2013, 12:16
Read the part of the Federal Law I posted. It is NOT against the law if you fall into the exception.

And PA law has a clause in their law about weapons on school property. The clause states that it shall be a defense to the charge if the weapon is possessed for "other lawful purpose".

The problem with the PA law is that there has never been a definitive answer as to what constitutes "for other lawful purpose".

Interesting -- I wasn't aware that there are exceptions written right in the law. Maybe I'll take my G17 CCW to the high school hockey game tonight.

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 12:19
He is being charged with a violation of PA Law because someone finally wants an answer as to whether or not a LTCF = carrying for other lawful purpose.

I cover this every year during our departments firearms training and qualification. I point out the discrepancies or conflicts between Federal and PA laws and there is a ton!

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 12:21
Interesting -- I wasn't aware that there are exceptions written right in the law. Maybe I'll take my G17 CCW to the high school hockey game tonight.

You'll be okay as far as the Feds are concerned, however what does your state law say? You could end up in the same situation as the doctor.

Steve in PA
01-04-2013, 12:25
This is the violation of PA law that the doctor is being charged with;

§ 912. Possession of weapon on school property.
(a) DEFINITION. — Notwithstanding the definition of “weapon” in section 907 (relating to possessing instruments of crime), “weapon” for purposes of this section shall include but not be limited to any knife, cutting instrument, cutting tool, nun-chuck stick, firearm, shotgun, rifle and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.

(b) OFFENSE DEFINED. — A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.

(c) DEFENSE. — It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.
Act 1980-167 (S.B. 544), P.L. 978, § 1, approved Oct. 16, 1980, eff. in 60 days.

SCmasterblaster
01-04-2013, 13:00
You'll be okay as far as the Feds are concerned, however what does your state law say? You could end up in the same situation as the doctor.

I'll see what the VT law book says.

fuzzy03cls
01-04-2013, 13:56
It's a good test case. The guy likely has the $ to defend.

HKLovingIT
01-04-2013, 14:13
Yes the law there is vague on a number of items:

and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.

This could technically mean a hammer in the toolbox of your truck, or a set of golf clubs, fingernail file.

There was one case in PA that I am aware of. A guy had a pistol in his car. The school he was at held adult classes. (VoTech) He was a student of those classes. The defendant mentioned he always carried to another adult student. (dumb) So the jollies began...

Here is the court transcript:

http://paopencarry.org/Anfuso/

About page 26 of the court transcript you can read where one of the teachers and a student got a funny feeling about the defendant and the search for a weapon was on. (Incidentally the student that got a funny feeling has a long and glorious criminal history - just a side note- she testified for the prosecution at the trial.)

Here is a thread where the lawyer who represented him (I believe it is him), and won, talks

http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-open-carry-121/122424-gun-school-property-page-5.html

Post 218 on this page (different thread) the lawyer gives the final disposition. Judge came back and said Not Guilty. That's it. No other explanation from the court.

Go to the next page on post 221 for some more commentary from the lawyer.

http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-open-carry-121/76949-man-arrested-having-gun-school-property-page-22.html#post1276683

Apparently this did not set a precedent that the rest of the courts should follow.

steveksux
01-04-2013, 14:22
Typically you can carry in the car picking up kids with a permit, sounds like he exited the car, entered the school. Either would be a violation in MI.

Randy

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

steveksux
01-04-2013, 14:23
Give him credit for having the balls to be a test case, unless he was just careless and forgot.

Randy

HKLovingIT
01-04-2013, 14:30
Typically you can carry in the car picking up kids with a permit, sounds like he exited the car, entered the school. Either would be a violation in MI.

Randy

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Not in PA. Some states have written in that you can have it in the car when picking up or dropping off, but not there.

steveksux
01-04-2013, 14:34
Not in PA. Some states have written in that you can have it in the car when picking up or dropping off, but not there.

Gotcha, so he would be in just as much hot water either way.. Less likely to be caught in the car, I suppose.

Randy

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

racer88
01-04-2013, 14:47
"King merely had the gun with him when a school employee noticed and reported it."

How did THAT happen? Was he in his car? Out of the car? In the building?

HKLovingIT
01-04-2013, 14:55
Gotcha, so he would be in just as much hot water either way.. Less likely to be caught in the car, I suppose.

Randy

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Yep.

(b) OFFENSE DEFINED. — A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.

Cream Soda Kid
01-04-2013, 15:18
Too bad for the doctor, but if you choose to legally carry a deadly weapon then you are obligated to know the legalities of carrying that weapon


I do not carry where it’s not legal. That being said, yes, I could someday make a mistake and take a firearm where it’s not allowed, I’m not perfect. Neither is the good doctor. However, carrying a concealed weapon has consequences, good and bad. This is one of the bad ones, and the doctor brought it on himself. He should have been more careful.

HKLovingIT
01-04-2013, 15:32
Too bad for the doctor, but if you choose to legally carry a deadly weapon then you are obligated to know the legalities of carrying that weapon


I do not carry where it’s not legal. That being said, yes, I could someday make a mistake and take a firearm where it’s not allowed, I’m not perfect. Neither is the good doctor. However, carrying a concealed weapon has consequences, good and bad. This is one of the bad ones, and the doctor brought it on himself. He should have been more careful.

Possibly. It's rather vague as written as it does not explicitly state what "other lawful purpose" means.

I believe it is legal to do so, but who would want to be a test case? It depends on the interpretation of the law by the judge since the legislature has never clarified it.

Ze Law:

(c) DEFENSE. — It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.

Act 1980-167 (S.B. 544), P.L. 978, § 1, approved Oct. 16, 1980, eff. in 60 days.

I imagine the doctor's defense would be that it was for self defense purposes. As he is a holder of a LTCF in PA, the right to carry for self defense is lawful and approved by statute and is in fact a reason you can state on the application, therefore he will likely contend that he had it for "other lawful purpose."

Now the hard part, what will a judge say? Given recent events, not a good time to have to roll into court with this kind of charge, even in a generally gun friendly state like PA.

It's a 1st degree misdemeanor charge BTW.

(7) For a misdemeanor of the first degree, a fine of not less than $1,500 nor more than $10,000, or imprisonment not exceeding five years, or both.

If he has no priors, I'm only guessing, but I would expect a deal for a fine, some probation, loss of LTCF and then it gets expunged under ARD unless he decides to take it to court and can secure a Not Guilty as in the Anfuso case by getting the judge to essentially agree that it was possessed for "other lawful purpose." Roll them dice.

Cream Soda Kid
01-04-2013, 15:52
Possibly. It's rather vague as written as it does not explicitly state what "other lawful purpose" means.

I believe it is legal to do so, but who would want to be a test case? It depends on the interpretation of the law by the judge since the legislature has never clarified it.

Ze Law:

(c) DEFENSE. — It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.

Act 1980-167 (S.B. 544), P.L. 978, § 1, approved Oct. 16, 1980, eff. in 60 days.

I imagine the doctor's defense would be that it was for self defense purposes. As he is a holder of a LTCF in PA, the right to carry for self defense is lawful and approved by statute and is in fact a reason you can state on the application, therefore he will likely contend that he had it for "other lawful purpose."

Now the hard part, what will a judge say? Given recent events, not a good time to have to roll into court with this kind of charge, even in a generally gun friendly state like PA.

It's a 1st degree misdemeanor charge BTW.

(7) For a misdemeanor of the first degree, a fine of not less than $1,500 nor more than $10,000, or imprisonment not exceeding five years, or both.

If he has no priors, I'm only guessing, but I would expect a deal for a fine, some probation, loss of LTCF and then it gets expunged under ARD unless he decides to take it to court and can secure a Not Guilty as in the Anfuso case by getting the judge to essentially agree that it was possessed for "other lawful purpose." Roll them dice.


You make a good point regarding vaguely written laws. They can be a problem especially for those of us who are not schooled in the law.

And you’re right, I would not want to be a test case, I’m not that brave. I truly hope all goes well for the doctor.

Cool sig line, by the way.

xmanhockey7
01-04-2013, 16:05
Typically you can carry in the car picking up kids with a permit, sounds like he exited the car, entered the school. Either would be a violation in MI.

Randy

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Well in Michigan you can exit the car as long as you're in the parking lot. If you're open carrying you can carry anywhere on school grounds.

ETA: Assuming you have a CPL.

Comedian
01-04-2013, 21:00
So if your in one of these "gun free zones" and a kook comes in and starts shooting you and everyone else? What then? Will you be worried about breaking the law then? No and it will be too late.

plumbum2
01-06-2013, 12:24
am i missing something here? he was a chiropractor. not a real doctor in my neck of the woods..... lol

steveksux
01-06-2013, 12:57
Well in Michigan you can exit the car as long as you're in the parking lot. I'd have to check, I thought that was not true... You tend to be pretty thorough, so I'd be inclined to assume you are correct. Not sure where I read that.

ETA: This (MSP) (http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-1591_3503_4654-10947--,00.html) is where I read that... wonder if they're correct. Schools or school property but may carry while in a vehicle on school property while dropping off or picking up if a parent or legal guardian

Looking at the statute: mcl-28-425o (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(s3uvn555ilboci55rjvd0l45))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-28-425o)A school or school property except that a parent or legal guardian of a student of the school is not precluded from carrying a concealed pistol while in a vehicle on school property, if he or she is dropping the student off at the school or picking up the child from the school.

So looks like I was right, only in the car, only parent/legal guardian dropping off/picking up their kids...

ETA2: Except you may be right after all:
As used in subsection (1), "premises" does not include parking areas of the places identified under subsection (1).
So maybe parking areas are ok, the two sections seem to be in conflict. I would say the premises exemption is intended for storing the pistol in the car as you disarm, not for carrying in the parking lot, not when the first section clearly states "in the vehicle".

Looks like some grey area that needs some case law to clarify, but would not want to be the test case... Depends if the courts follow what they actually said (you win) or what they think the legislature intended (assuming I'm right about their implied intentions).



Regarding the other issue:
If you're open carrying you can carry anywhere on school grounds.

ETA: Assuming you have a CPL.You're correct, of course, I was thinking/referring to concealed carry. We almost lost that loophole if not for Snyder vetoing the gun bill, though we would have gained more overall, IMO had he signed it.

Randy

Ryobi
01-06-2013, 14:21
Idiot. Know the rules for ccw and follow them. Or face the consequences. Doctor with concealed-carry permit charged for having gun in Pa. school while picking up child (http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/f00fd0a834d6406eac63c9b7624cadde/PA--Weapon-On-School-Property)

UtahIrishman
01-06-2013, 14:49
So true, Russ. It is against Federal law to CCW on any school property.

This is simply not true. It's up to the individual states. Here in Utah anyone with a concealed weapons permit can carry on school property, including teachers and principles.

I'm not familiar with the laws in other states, so I can't comment there, but I wanted to clarify this.

jakebrake
01-06-2013, 14:51
I wonder if state preemption will come into play

they are very clear about this when you get your l.t.c.c. this point was hammered home with everyone in the office when i was getting mine.

steveksux
01-06-2013, 14:57
I have always understood that it is against federal law to possess a firearm on school property.
I believe there was an exception if your state allows it with cpl that includes background check.

Randy

ithaca_deerslayer
01-06-2013, 16:38
Laws are gray, and you, your lawyer, your local legislature, your senator, and your favorite Supreme Court justice's interpretation is not always the same as whatever governmental opinion of the day prevails.

Is that clear, and does everyone understand what I have said? I know some people do not like it, but laws are not black and white. They are always one justice away from meaning the opposite of what you think they mean.

Living in NYS, I take concealment very seriously while carrying. Many on GT have said concealment doesn't matter so much, or that printing doesn't matter. They carry fullsize Uberpistol OWB and nobody has ever noticed.

Fine, if you can carry it and conceal it, great. If your local laws are fine with a little printing, and ok with wherever you carry, that's wonderful.

Me, I still conceal with the assumption that printing equals getting to know the local LEO better than I want to :)

Pwhfirefighter
01-06-2013, 16:45
That all depends on the statutes of the state in question.....

.....Bottom line; know and abide by the CCW laws of your state.

^ This.

In MS perfectly legal by state law for a PARENT OR GUARDIAN to have a weapon in vehicle when picking up child, with or without CCW as long as you don't brandish.

Enhanced CCW can carry weapon on person out of vehicle on school property. Regular CCW can not.

jakebrake
01-06-2013, 16:54
and, in pa, they tell you up front, that if you are not active law enforcement, it is illegal for you to carry on a school grounds at any time, for any reason. no ifs, ands, or buts. when you are given your l.t.c.c. in pn, this is explained to you, right up front, before you leave the sherriff's office.

alba666
01-06-2013, 17:12
Legal in AL with a pistol permit unless issuing Sheriff places a restriction. I am not aware of any Sheriffs that use this restriction.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

alba666
01-06-2013, 17:16
I](7) For a misdemeanor of the first degree, a fine of not less than $1,500 nor more than $10,000, or imprisonment not exceeding five years, or both.


He is now barred from firearm purchase until charges are dropped since there is a maximum non-federal prison time of 2 years.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

BuckyP
01-06-2013, 20:13
Tag really interested how this will turn out. I think a laymen reading that "defense clause" would interpret it to be ok.
:dunno: :dunno: :dunno:

Breadman03
01-06-2013, 22:42
He is being charged with a violation of PA Law because someone finally wants an answer as to whether or not a LTCF = carrying for other lawful purpose.

I cover this every year during our departments firearms training and qualification. I point out the discrepancies or conflicts between Federal and PA laws and there is a ton!

It has been answered, repeatedly. PM inbound.

and, in pa, they tell you up front, that if you are not active law enforcement, it is illegal for you to carry on a school grounds at any time, for any reason. no ifs, ands, or buts. when you are given your l.t.c.c. in pn, this is explained to you, right up front, before you leave the sherriff's office.

And they are wrong. "Self defense" is a lawful purpose. I'll be researching the references again to post a few up. Though ignorant/uneducated institutions can certainly create quite a legal headache for you.

true believer
01-07-2013, 20:55
and, in pa, they tell you up front, that if you are not active law enforcement, it is illegal for you to carry on a school grounds at any time, for any reason. no ifs, ands, or buts. when you are given your l.t.c.c. in pn, this is explained to you, right up front, before you leave the sherriff's office.

thats funny, i live in pa (delaware county) and was never told that..never..
in fact, i just renewed, waiting to hear back to pick it up..had my permit since 83 back in the days when you had to put down what you carried..ie s/w #19 4in with seriel#..

Steve in PA
01-08-2013, 07:07
and, in pa, they tell you up front, that if you are not active law enforcement, it is illegal for you to carry on a school grounds at any time, for any reason. no ifs, ands, or buts. when you are given your l.t.c.c. in pn, this is explained to you, right up front, before you leave the sherriff's office.

So, exactly what law or reference do they use to back up this claim?

There is no PA Law that mentions anything about police officers being exempt from carrying on school grounds.

Here is the PA Law about weapons on school grounds. Show me where it says anything about "active duty law enforcement" (whatever that is) being exempt;

§ 912. Possession of weapon on school property.
(a) DEFINITION. — Notwithstanding the definition of “weapon” in section 907 (relating to possessing instruments of crime), “weapon” for purposes of this section shall include but not be limited to any knife, cutting instrument, cutting tool, nun-chuck stick, firearm, shotgun, rifle and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.

(b) OFFENSE DEFINED. — A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.

(c) DEFENSE. — It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.
Act 1980-167 (S.B. 544), P.L. 978, § 1, approved Oct. 16, 1980, eff. in 60 days.

Federal Law has the allowance for police officers in the performance of their duties. This does NOT include off-duty officers.

SCmasterblaster
01-08-2013, 13:38
Well in Michigan you can exit the car as long as you're in the parking lot. If you're open carrying you can carry anywhere on school grounds.

ETA: Assuming you have a CPL.

WOW, Mich laws are pretty lax on guns at school.

steveksux
01-08-2013, 19:39
WOW, Mich laws are pretty lax on guns at school.Its due to an apparently accidental loophole, actually. It's illegsl to possess a pistol on school property, so no open carry there, even though MI is open carry state. Schools area pistol free zone for concealed carriers.

The trick was that one of the exemptions for school possession was someone with a CPL, but that was written back when only cops and the connected could get CPL, before MI went shall issue. It was a little time bomb that went off when MI became shall issue, wasn't noticed for quire a while, well known until recently.

Randy

Lord
01-10-2013, 09:19
He is being charged with a violation of PA Law because someone finally wants an answer as to whether or not a LTCF = carrying for other lawful purpose.

I disagree. I believe he's being charged because the DA there doesn't want to look like a limp dick in light of the latest school shooting. At most, if the shooting had not occurred, I think it would be perfectly justified to charge him with two things: first, criminal trespass (for entering with a firearm where it is clearly posted for him not to), and (at least under TX law, I don't know about PA) failing to properly conceal.

"for other legal purpose" will probably be a good defense to prosecution, or they may even drop that charge later, but for now, the DA has to at least go with the current hooplah over gun control just to not look bad. If I were to make a prediction or take a bet... I would think the way it all plays out is that the law is too vague on that one part, and he perm loses his permit, and takes a fine and possibly probation for criminal trespass.

series1811
01-10-2013, 09:33
Doesn't the Hippocratic Oath create a dilemma for doctors?:
"In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art."
"I will... never do harm to anyone."

These passages are from separate translations, but everyone is familiar with the "First, do no harm" concept.

They had to get rid of the Hippocratic Oath. It specifically forbids abortions.

xmanhockey7
01-10-2013, 10:38
I'd have to check, I thought that was not true... You tend to be pretty thorough, so I'd be inclined to assume you are correct. Not sure where I read that.

ETA: This (MSP) (http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-1591_3503_4654-10947--,00.html) is where I read that... wonder if they're correct.

Looking at the statute: mcl-28-425o (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(s3uvn555ilboci55rjvd0l45))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-28-425o)

So looks like I was right, only in the car, only parent/legal guardian dropping off/picking up their kids...

ETA2: Except you may be right after all:

So maybe parking areas are ok, the two sections seem to be in conflict. I would say the premises exemption is intended for storing the pistol in the car as you disarm, not for carrying in the parking lot, not when the first section clearly states "in the vehicle".

Looks like some grey area that needs some case law to clarify, but would not want to be the test case... Depends if the courts follow what they actually said (you win) or what they think the legislature intended (assuming I'm right about their implied intentions).



Regarding the other issue:
You're correct, of course, I was thinking/referring to concealed carry. We almost lost that loophole if not for Snyder vetoing the gun bill, though we would have gained more overall, IMO had he signed it.

Randy

I think what it may have been was the fact that 1. Just because you're dropping your kid off at school (or picking them up) does not mean you're only in the actual parking lot, 2. When we get these silly "pistol free zones" parking lots were not specifically exempt (this is my understanding correct me if I'm wrong). It was not added in until later.

Regarding the "loophole" I don't totally see it as one. The state legislature set out to specifically regulate concealed carry. That's why it's a CONCEALED pistol license, the word conceal is used everywhere in those statues, and the Michigan legislature has never truly regulated "open carry". On a state level open carry has ALWAYS been legal in Michigan. Yes they almost did because Snyder is an idiot when it comes to gun laws in this country but that's another story.

SCmasterblaster
01-10-2013, 13:17
and, in pa, they tell you up front, that if you are not active law enforcement, it is illegal for you to carry on a school grounds at any time, for any reason. no ifs, ands, or buts. when you are given your l.t.c.c. in pn, this is explained to you, right up front, before you leave the sherriff's office.

I stay off school grounds at all times.

norm357
01-10-2013, 19:50
This is why he was charged.
*Taken from the posted article*

State police announced Wednesday they had charged 41-year-old chiropractor Charles King II, of Rockwood, because the state school code prohibits weapons on school property in most instances — though they are also hopeful a future court ruling will clarify the law.



The Staties are using him as a test case.

SouthernBoyVA
01-11-2013, 05:38
I have always understood that it is against federal law to possess a firearm on school property.

The wording of U.S. Code 18,922 is poor but is loosely taken to accept concealed carry permits as authorization to carry onto school property. It would then become a state issue.

In my state, we can carry a concealed firearm when picking up or letting off children, but we must stay in our vehicle when doing this.

OrangeJoe
01-11-2013, 06:20
My reading of PA state law (for all it's worth) is that LTCF holders are expressly exempted as we carry for a lawfull purpose; having said that Montgomery County gives you a letter along with your license which reads in part "pertmits you to carry....anywhere... Except those places which prohibit a firearm from being carried concealed, such as: State and Federal Buildings, Schools and Universities, and anywhere there is a sign posted..." so clearly Sheriff Whalon does not agree with my layman's reading of the law.

Steve in PA
01-11-2013, 07:13
By statute, universities are not included in "no guns on school property". Read the law I posted.

For example, PSU may have a policy against no firearms on their property, but it is just that, a policy violation, not a violation of law.

OrangeJoe
01-11-2013, 07:28
steve PA, if you are replying to Sherriff Whalon's 'welcome' message to LTCF holders, I agree it has multiple errors that are easily disputed by the law as written, even if untested in a court of law.

jbotstein1
01-11-2013, 07:36
Doesn't the Hippocratic Oath create a dilemma for doctors?:
"In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art."
"I will... never do harm to anyone."

These passages are from separate translations, but everyone is familiar with the "First, do no harm" concept.

I don't know if chiropractors take the Hippocratic oath.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

The Fed
01-11-2013, 08:12
Steve, I used to live in PA. I know this doesn't apply, but as I recall, this only applies to primary schools. Is there not something which states it's not illegal in secondary schools? I know I researched this years ago when I had to go into a college to buy some books in their book store. Since I was not yet a student I was not bound by their student handbook.

HKLovingIT
01-11-2013, 11:11
Steve, I used to live in PA. I know this doesn't apply, but as I recall, this only applies to primary schools. Is there not something which states it's not illegal in secondary schools? I know I researched this years ago when I had to go into a college to buy some books in their book store. Since I was not yet a student I was not bound by their student handbook.

The law as posted above also does not explicitly define what a secondary school is.

In regards to the Montgomery County sheriff, I posted links earlier to a case in that county where the defendant was found not guilty. Unfortunately it seems that was the extent of the judges commentary and the decision did not set any precedent for other courts to follow.

maestrogustav
01-11-2013, 16:10
Like I said, because the doctor is "licensed" by the State (PA) in which the school is located and was qualified to be issued said license, he is NOT in violation of the GFSZ.



(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) shall 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;



Does this not end the discussion?

faawrenchbndr
01-11-2013, 16:35
Doesn't the Hippocratic Oath create a dilemma for doctors?:
"In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art."
"I will... never do harm to anyone."

These passages are from separate translations, but everyone is familiar with the "First, do no harm" concept.


But it would just be plain stupid to not take steps to protect your
family & loved ones.

ChiTownPicaro
01-15-2013, 18:44
This will be an interesting case to follow.