Constitutional Carry "trap"

[jc1240]

In another thread I was confused about constitutional carry vs the federal gun free school zone act. I thought if a state didn't issue permits (meaning there are none that could be had), that satisfied the fed law. Nope. I get it now. Stupid me thinking any anti-2A law would have logic.

 

[press1280]

I think some states are trying to put into law that anyone who qualifies for CC is essentially deemed as having a license. Whether the Feds would honor that I don’t know.
Best to have the permit just in case I suppose.

 

[Allen65]

I think some states are trying to put into law that anyone who qualifies for CC is essentially deemed as having a license. Whether the Feds would honor that I don’t know.
Best to have the permit just in case I suppose.

It would be pretty tough for an AUSA to get a conviction for a supposed GFSA violation for carrying w/o a license if the defense could simply introduce as evidence a state statute that says "every non-prohibited person is hereby granted a license by default". Even hardcore Antis would be CCW license holders.

 

[lazarus]

It would be pretty tough for an AUSA to get a conviction for a supposed GFSA violation for carrying w/o a license if the defense could simply introduce as evidence a state statute that says "every non-prohibited person is hereby granted a license by default". Even hardcore Antis would be CCW license holders.

Just keep in mind, the language of the GFSZ, I don't have it handy, refers to needing a permit from that state. Reciprocity will NOT cover you. I can't recall if a non-resident permit covers you based on the language or not.

An issue, if you want to call it that, is what about for serious felons in possession? Okay, sure, you can charge them for possession, but don't you want to throw ALL the things at them? (I am being snarky), and you can't add on a federal GFSZ violation, only federal prohibited person charges, because that state gave EVERYONE a permit!!!

 

[Allen65]

Just keep in mind, the language of the GFSZ, I don't have it handy, refers to needing a permit from that state. Reciprocity will NOT cover you. I can't recall if a non-resident permit covers you based on the language or not.

If I've drawn the attention of an AUSA to the extent they're even looking at GFSZA as an add-on charge, odds are I have much bigger legal problems to worry about. Has GFSZA ever even been successfully prosecuted as a standalone charge, or only in conjunction with other felonies? It's not as if 1811s sit around with their feet up on their desks waiting for someone to drop a file on their desks with a single de minimis charge inside, while thinking "Well, it's not as if I don't have anything else to work on..."

 

[jrumann59]

Just keep in mind, the language of the GFSZ, I don't have it handy, refers to needing a permit from that state. Reciprocity will NOT cover you. I can't recall if a non-resident permit covers you based on the language or not.

An issue, if you want to call it that, is what about for serious felons in possession? Okay, sure, you can charge them for possession, but don't you want to throw ALL the things at them? (I am being snarky), and you can't add on a federal GFSZ violation, only federal prohibited person charges, because that state gave EVERYONE a permit!!!

I believe some states have put in language that NR Permits are to be treated as Resident in regards to GFSZ. That was one reason I got a VA one when I was renting a place to stay in NoVA, there was confusion and there seems to be schools everywhere like there is in the heavily populated areas in MD.

 

[Mister F]

I expect the 1000 foot boundary would fail under Bruens test. But one needs standing to challenge. Standing gained by being charged and convicted. Standing nobody has, because basically nobody has been charged under this law without some other aggravating factor being in play. FIP, drugs, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[press1280]

Just keep in mind, the language of the GFSZ, I don't have it handy, refers to needing a permit from that state. Reciprocity will NOT cover you. I can't recall if a non-resident permit covers you based on the language or not.

An issue, if you want to call it that, is what about for serious felons in possession? Okay, sure, you can charge them for possession, but don't you want to throw ALL the things at them? (I am being snarky), and you can't add on a federal GFSZ violation, only federal prohibited person charges, because that state gave EVERYONE a permit!!!

The way constitutional carry laws are written basically says if you are not prohibited under state or federal law from possessing then you are allowed to conceal carry without a permit.
That’s why criminals can still be charged for concealed carry even in a constitutional carry state. The statutes are usually still in place with the exception that you’re not prohibited.

 

[CrueChief]

If I've drawn the attention of an AUSA to the extent they're even looking at GFSZA as an add-on charge, odds are I have much bigger legal problems to worry about. Has GFSZA ever even been successfully prosecuted as a standalone charge, or only in conjunction with other felonies? It's not as if 1811s sit around with their feet up on their desks waiting for someone to drop a file on their desks with a single de minimis charge inside, while thinking "Well, it's not as if I don't have anything else to work on..."

This should be the end of this entire conversation.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

Last I checked, WV had a pick up/ drop off exemption in state law for CCW on school property, and lawful carry doesn't violate the GFZA.

 

[pcfixer]

What would be NICE to have is a Federal Carry Permit.

 

[Allen65]

What would be NICE to have is a Federal Carry Permit.

Be careful what you ask for. Do you want CA, NY, MD, and NJ determining conditions of carry when Dems control the House, Senate, and WH?

 

[pcfixer]

Be careful what you ask for. Do you want CA, NY, MD, and NJ determining conditions of carry when Dems control the House, Senate, and WH?

Yes, Already thought of that too. Become a Federal Law Enforcement Officer, Not likely in my lifetime.