School Zone Map?

[smithman]

imported post

And I am sure that nobody on this forum or any law abiding gun owner wants to become a test case to your sidewalk point Lammie.... risk never owning a gun again if convicted or get one BS restriction overturned. Likely a lengthy appeals process after being convicted once that would consume great money and leave you defenseless in your home when the state confiscates all your firearms after first being convicted. Call me cynical but I don't have that much faith in our system to get stuff like this right.

If only our state reps and senators could be encouraged to fix $hitty laws already on the books like this one. A 1000' violation IS unconstitional, but DA's will still prosecute for it! There are already so many unconstitional laws on the books all over the US that people are convicted of all the time.

 

[Lammie]

imported post

Because if the severe personal and financial risk involved in contesting the statue it isprobable that the only way the school zone statute will get fixed is if law enforcement contests it as unworkable. Someone in law enforcement will need to "shake things up" through the enforcement channels. That is why members such as PKBites and My Perspective are so important to this forum.

A similar situation happened some years ago when the new trespass law was passed. As originally structured even conservation officers could not enter onto private property without owner permission or a search warrant. It didn't take the DNR long to get that changed.

If law enforcement can convince the legislature that the statute as presently written presents more risk to school and public safety than it solves, then perhaps the legislature will draft a bill to correct it. If the legislature does take such action then perhaps other problem areas can be fixed. As a minimum make violations subject to a conditional penalty. That is, make the penalty fit the seriousness of the crime. Change the statute so that it doesn't brand all violators as a felon. A person who unknowingly infringes on a statute should not have his constitutional rights permanently voided nor should they lose such things as their right to vote. On the other hand a person(s) that commits a crime of violence should suffer the full consequences of the law. Additionally a police officer that is trained to serve and protect the public should not be put in a position that they can not use their firearm to come to the aid of a person because doing so may get them charged with a career ending felony.

Under today's atmosphere it is unlikely that the legislature will take any action on it's own. It will only do so when subjected to political pressure or state supreme court decision. It is unlikely that there would be a supreme court decision in the foreseeable future. As previously mentioned it is unlikely that any individual is willing to risk his future firearm ownership and endure the personal and financial pain to contest the constitutionality of the statute.

Where is the NRA and WGO when we need them?

 

[Pointman]

imported post

I'm thinking of the Legba case.

 

[Shotgun]

imported post

Pointman wrote:

I believe the NRA is most of the reason we're in this mess. The sad part is if we were pulled over by an officer in a school zone (the street), and were properly transporting a firearm encased and unloaded, there is a chance we'd be arrested for being in possession of a firearm within 1000' of a school zone, given that open-carrying in your car is interpreted as "concealed carry."

Edit: I'm thinking of the Legba case of claiming "ready at hand = CC."

Not sure I follow the reasoning here. Remember the "school zone" statute doesn't prohibit guns within 1000' of the school property if they are unloaded and encased. And how is an unloaded and encased gun "open carry?"

 

[Pointman]

imported post

My comment is really about another side of School Zones.

 

[Shotgun]

imported post

Pointman wrote:

it's not much of a stretch for a law enforcement officer (officer of the court) to consider any gun possession within a school zone wrongful

Well, then they would simply be mistaken. The law isn't particularly vague about what is allowed and what isn't.

But I agree, any uncontrolled "no gun zone" is stupid and dangerous.

 

[Lammie]

imported post

As pkbites correctly states statute As statute 948.605(2)6 is currently written A law enforcement officer must be on duty before they can open carry a firearm within 1000ft of school property boundaries. They can carry one if it is unloaded and enclosed in a case just as we private citizens can. A quick call to their supervisor would probably put them "on the clock" in a hurry, but how much time would be wasted in preventing a crime or act of violence?

Another interesting situation concerning the "school zone" statute is that the federal LESOA (HR218), as well as pending state legislation ,attempts to give retired law enforcement officers the right to carry a concealed weapon. So now we have retired cops that have no more law enforcement authority than private citizens and who are certainly not "on duty" carrying concealed weapons. How many of them will be subject to a felony charge because they entered into the prohibited sanctuary of a school zone? And, that brings up another interesting point. A law enforcement officer who is off-duty has no more constitutional or legal rights or authority than a private citizen, Statute 948.605 implies as much. So does that also imply that an actively employed law enforcement officer that is "off duty" also does not have the authority to carry a concealed weapon while "off duty"? The concealed carry prohibition statute 941.23 doesn't specify one way or another, but the statute has strict liability with no exceptions. So, if a peace officer is "off duty" with no law enforcement authority, is he really a peace officer at that point in time? 948.605 would imply that he is not. I suspect that there are strong opinions on both sides of that question but it is something to ponder.

 

[smithman]

imported post

Lammie, excellent points. This goes back ultimately to the "equal protection under the law" idea. Off duty LEOs who can CC but regular citizens who can't CC at all...this is NOT equal protection under the law. This should also apply to OC in a car...except OC in a car is classified as CC for a citizen and therefore illegal.

I believe my_perspective made reference in another thread to the fact that most DAs know that the prohibition on CC is unconstitional (but of course they will still prosecute you!). This is one way in which the law is unconstitutional.

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

Pointman wrote:

law enforcement officer (officer of the court)

No. Only incidentally. Officers of the court are judges, juries collectively, attorneys and [font="arial, helvetica, swiss"]bailiffs.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA LEO FOAD
[/font]

 

[pkbites]

imported post

Lammie wrote:

A quick call to their supervisor would probably put them "on the clock" in a hurry, but how much time would be wasted in preventing a crime or act of violence?

In times of extreme emergencies one need not call to be placed on duty. There are state statutes that cover this. In other circumstances one can call to put himself on duty, but most deparments written policies only allow officers to put themselves on duty in cases of extreme emergencies. Getting yourself out of a felony doesn't count.

Not only that, but, (with the exception of certain circumstances which appear in state statutes) most departments will only allow this if you're within your jurisdiction.

I happen to live 1 block away from the border of another city. I routinely cross into another jurisdiction whenever I walk my dog. If I were to walk a few blocks in one direction instead of the way I usually go, I would find myself in a school zone. And it doesn't matter whose jurisdiction I'm in. Off-duty doesn't count under the law!

Believe it or not, it is this situation (walking my dog) that prompted me to contact the A.A.G. in the first place. He confirmed my fears about not being exempted.

 

[Lammie]

imported post

Now isn't that stupid!! The State is trying to pass legislation that will allow retired cops to carry concealed weapons statewide without having to have any regard for jurisdiction, yet an actively employed peace officer, the ones we expect to protect us, has to worry about whether or not he is in the proper jurisdiction before getting involved officially. Any assistance he gives is restricted to that of a private citizen. Go figure. I'm beginning to understand more and more why my brother was counting the days before he retired from law enforcement.

 

[GRB]

imported post

I went to my local police station and asked for a copy of a school zone map thinking they would have to enforce the law, of course they have no such map. I am going to write the cheif a letter asking him how his department can enforce this law without knowing where the school zones are or do they all just know where the school zones are in the heads.

 

[smithman]

imported post

It is to the benefit of people who OC that LEO's don't enforce this by nitpicky details.AnLEO-controlled mapclearly showing down to the foot where school zones aredoes not benefit gun ownerslooking to carry. It would be too easy to walk 998' away and having an LEO see, and then you are dealing with a felony case.

If you look at a map of a typical city, it will appear that there aren't many schools. However, add up elementary, middle, high schools, and all parochial schoools, this statue is actually pretty restrictive for people walking on non-private property (such as streets and probably sidewalks). Also, unencase or load your firearm in your car within 1000' and you are now a felon.

Don't give the LEOs any more tools to enforce this tyranny than they already have.

 

[Lammie]

imported post

Good points Smithman. Having a map of school zones on you, if stopped, shoots down any defense a person would have in declaring he\she was unknowingly in a school zone. Also having unmarked school zone boundaries also provides a defense of vaqueness. School properties have irregular borders so where is the 1000' mark from each and every point of the property? and how is it measured? and by whom? GPS? surveyor? Law enforcement? Public works? Where is the start point on the school property? edge of school side of the sidewalk? the curb? the middle of the street? All those arguments would be worthless as a defense if there was a published map.