School property vs school zone

[USAF05]

Last thing derailing his thread.

When I was there a local middle school had SRO that was stretched thin. The principal instituted a program called Watch DOGS (Dads of Great Students). I didn’t have a child at the school but needed volunteer hours. Basically dads would come in during school hours and have a presence. We were encouraged to carry. It was a great idea. Except playing basketball with a P229 in your jeans is not advisable

 

[teratos]

However, under Maryland STATE law, possession of a firearm on public school property is a crime as a permit holder (or non-permit holder for that matter. Only LEO can).

Just to highlight how dumb our legislators in MD, in 2013, they also wanted to ban off-duty LEO from carry on school property for fear they may use their guns to intimidate teachers. Not even lying.

 

[lazarus]

I want to go to Full-Auto Zone.

Slow down buck'o. Maybe start AROUND the zone before you just go diving right into the zone.

Have you never learned 2A foreplay?

 

[teratos]

Slow down buck'o. Maybe start AROUND the zone before you just go diving right into the zone.

Have you never learned 2A foreplay?

I never stampede toward the clitoris.

 

[USAF05]

Federal law exempts permit holders. UT's law doesn't contradict the Federal gun free zone law for schools.

The feds can't and won't charge me with anything for carrying a firearm into a school since I have a permit. Or if I get pulled over in the school parking lot. Or picking my kids up from school. Supposing anyone ever reported me or caught me.

However, under Maryland STATE law, possession of a firearm on public school property is a crime as a permit holder (or non-permit holder for that matter. Only LEO can).

md_rick_o. The law says park off school property, leave it in your vehicle and walk over and get your kid. Or stop by the house and leave it there. I work in a federal building (well, actually mostly from home). I need to leave it at home if I want or need to go in to work. Unless or until state laws get changed, you have to make accommodations for said laws.

One of the two ways out of my neighborhood go through a state park. So, if I ever am transporting/carrying, I can only go ONE way out of my neighborhood. Unless or until that law gets changed. Though there are exceptions in the law for transporting through a state park or forest (I forget what it says, but IIRC unloaded and cased, or unloaded and action open IIRC). Even in central Maryland there are plenty of big state parks you are likely to be driving through technically or in reality. Being in Western Howard county, unless you are sticking to I70, a lot of the ways north and south from Howard county lead through Patapsco state park or Patuxent state parks. Is a bridge "over the park" actually not in the park? It is within the boundaries of the park...

Just as one example of the stupid. I am not going to let that one keep me up at night. Though I am not going to deliberately drive through the park to get out of my neighborhood or go down fishing to the river while packing. Nor pick my kids up from school with a firearm with me.

My point this whole time is that Maryland could allow it and it wasn’t the feds holding it back.That’s all, maybe in the future Cyberalex can draft us up something. Just trying to contribute something and not be a “22er” just here for the permit.

Good morning

 

[USAF05]

Just to highlight how dumb our legislators in MD, in 2013, they also wanted to ban off-duty LEO from carry on school property for fear they may use their guns to intimidate teachers. Not even lying.

I thought it was laughable that my trooper buddy has to choose to get a wear and carry to be covered in the event of injury or suspension. He’s still waiting. No skipping the queue not even for their troopers lol

Fixed it blaster! Thanks!

 

[lazarus]

My point this whole time is that Maryland could allow it and it wasn’t the feds holding it back.That’s all, maybe in the future Cyberalex can draft us up something. Just trying to contribute something and not be a “22er” just here for the permit.

Good morning

That would be nice, but I don't see that happening in my lifetime in Maryland. And honestly, I highly doubt that the Supreme court will strike that down. It is possible an appeals court might and a state might not appeal that to SCOTUS and maybe that'll happen in our circuit. But I also doubt it.

Many of the other place restrictions are just damned gimmes. Like on public transportation. Or in parks and forests. Stuff like that. Or most of the new restrictions that NY passed and NJ is trying to do.

But places like prisons and jails, courthouse, government buildings, schools and hospitals. I can see SCOTUS deciding to allow states to control that.

At some point I do see SCOTUS writing a much clearer opinion on WHAT a GFZ to be allowed must have. And I suspect it'll be things like (generally) controlled access, and security. I can still see them deferring to the states to write laws along those lines.

"Well hospitals generally have security. Oh schools often have an SRO. So that's all fine. Oh a sports stadium screens people and has security, so that's okay".

Maybe they'll be a lot more jaundiced than that and the controlled access and security must ALWAYS be in place. I don't know. I just don't think SCOTUS is going to be nearly as absolutist as I think we are all hoping they will be. But they've also been stinking clear that what MD has on the books is too expansive (forests and parks, public transportation are certainly not okay to ban carry). And they've made clear banning carry in some sensitive locations is just fine.

Just like the permit restrictions. Permits are facially okay to be required, but unlimited restrictions to get one are not okay. NY is certainly in bad boy land with their requirements. MD very well might be too. Any training requirement might be too much. Or maybe it won't be.

We'll have to wait and see where it all lands.

 

[USAF05]

That would be nice, but I don't see that happening in my lifetime in Maryland. And honestly, I highly doubt that the Supreme court will strike that down. It is possible an appeals court might and a state might not appeal that to SCOTUS and maybe that'll happen in our circuit. But I also doubt it.

Many of the other place restrictions are just damned gimmes. Like on public transportation. Or in parks and forests. Stuff like that. Or most of the new restrictions that NY passed and NJ is trying to do.

But places like prisons and jails, courthouse, government buildings, schools and hospitals. I can see SCOTUS deciding to allow states to control that.

At some point I do see SCOTUS writing a much clearer opinion on WHAT a GFZ to be allowed must have. And I suspect it'll be things like (generally) controlled access, and security. I can still see them deferring to the states to write laws along those lines.

"Well hospitals generally have security. Oh schools often have an SRO. So that's all fine. Oh a sports stadium screens people and has security, so that's okay".

Maybe they'll be a lot more jaundiced than that and the controlled access and security must ALWAYS be in place. I don't know. I just don't think SCOTUS is going to be nearly as absolutist as I think we are all hoping they will be. But they've also been stinking clear that what MD has on the books is too expansive (forests and parks, public transportation are certainly not okay to ban carry). And they've made clear banning carry in some sensitive locations is just fine.

Just like the permit restrictions. Permits are facially okay to be required, but unlimited restrictions to get one are not okay. NY is certainly in bad boy land with their requirements. MD very well might be too. Any training requirement might be too much. Or maybe it won't be.

We'll have to wait and see where it all lands.

Understood that it’s not likely. Neither were permits to carry for everyone not so long ago. Thanks for your response

 

[swinokur]

The MGA does not exist to give more freedom. They are here to take it away


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[USAF05]

The MGA does not exist to give more freedom. They are here to take it away


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t disagree with you there.

 

[Slhaney]

Its really a ridiculous law. If your not familiar with an area and your driving down a main rd but there is a school just on a side street, how would you possibly know. 1000 feet is a rather long distance for something like that. Its in excess of 3 football fields and you could easily be within that distance yet still not see the school.

 

[swinokur]

The law says “knowingly”

That’s your Trump card

So to speak


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swinokur]

The entire law is more feel good legislation from the libs

“Look we did something. It’s for the children”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[USAF05]

The entire law is more feel good legislation from the libs

“Look we did something. It’s for the children”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What they really said is F those kids

 

[RFBfromDE]

Which is why it isn’t prosecuted except as an add on charge.

There are not enough lawyers to chase all of us


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

They will submit a list to a court. There may be dozens on the list along with a $25 filing fee.

After the court rules you are guilty, it is up to you to prove you are innocent to have the charge/easement removed.

This is how we filed mass judgements of credit card defaults.

Different application/State/Court but the concept suits how they think.

 

[Blaster229]

I thought it was laughable that my trooper buddy has to get a wear and carry. He’s still waiting. No skipping the queue not even for their troopers lol

Why does he "HAVE" to get one?
Really the only need for an active LEO to get one is if in a case of injury and during treatment/recuperation an agency has a policy that they "neuter"(take creds and gun away temporarily) so that he could still legally carry.

 

[USAF05]

Why does he "HAVE" to get one?
Really the only need for an active LEO to get one is if in a case of injury and during treatment/recuperation an agency has a policy that they "neuter"(take creds and gun away temporarily) so that he could still legally carry.

You are correct I misunderstood and your statement is the exact reason why. Thanks for jumping in there.

I still however think it’s dumb to have to do to still be able to carry

 

[swinokur]

Does someone write down all our license plates?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MichTR]

Federal law exempts permit holders. UT's law doesn't contradict the Federal gun free zone law for schools.

The feds can't and won't charge me with anything for carrying a firearm into a school since I have a permit. Or if I get pulled over in the school parking lot. Or picking my kids up from school. Supposing anyone ever reported me or caught me.

However, under Maryland STATE law, possession of a firearm on public school property is a crime as a permit holder (or non-permit holder for that matter. Only LEO can).

md_rick_o. The law says park off school property, leave it in your vehicle and walk over and get your kid. Or stop by the house and leave it there. I work in a federal building (well, actually mostly from home). I need to leave it at home if I want or need to go in to work. Unless or until state laws get changed, you have to make accommodations for said laws. This worries me because I would like to stick to the law and not break it. I respect the rules of the school and would not like to break the law on the school grounds. This is the way I teach my children. When my son was writing his essay on the American Revolution https://studydriver.com/american-revolution-essay/ and analyzing its causes and consequences, I advised him to describe the main thoughts about how the laws changed and why people demanded it. But despite this, I would not want to leave the car a few blocks from the school. I hope I can find information on this forum about how I should proceed.

One of the two ways out of my neighborhood go through a state park. So, if I ever am transporting/carrying, I can only go ONE way out of my neighborhood. Unless or until that law gets changed. Though there are exceptions in the law for transporting through a state park or forest (I forget what it says, but IIRC unloaded and cased, or unloaded and action open IIRC). Even in central Maryland there are plenty of big state parks you are likely to be driving through technically or in reality. Being in Western Howard county, unless you are sticking to I70, a lot of the ways north and south from Howard county lead through Patapsco state park or Patuxent state parks. Is a bridge "over the park" actually not in the park? It is within the boundaries of the park...

Just as one example of the stupid. I am not going to let that one keep me up at night. Though I am not going to deliberately drive through the park to get out of my neighborhood or go down fishing to the river while packing. Nor pick my kids up from school with a firearm with me.

The law prohibits the carrying of weapons in public schools. Therefore, I prefer to leave the weapon in the car if I took it with me and do not drive the car into the school parking lot, in my opinion this is the easiest way.