Ccw holder traveling past schools in states where ccw holder is not resident

[KCD1974]

Kinda related:

Peter King, Leading Republican, To Introduce Strict Gun-Control Legislation

2 things about these people get me:

- is the idea to add more and more places like maybe churches, any place with a cash register, any place that sells alcohol, police stations until eventually there's only some outhouse in NE left that happens to be outside of all those zones? Or maybe later increase the radius?

- all of this is done under the pretense of PREVENTING gun violence. But simply by making a law nothing is prevented. So logically thinking you would either have to enforce it with searches or you have not changed a thing. There is no reason anybody who intends to do other people harm would worry about some law like this, he intends to violate much more important laws that carry stiffer penalties. The only real difference is that now you can add an additional charge if somebody actually does go crazy. But the claim was this would PREVENT the incident?

- all it really does is create more and more red tape and hassles for those of us who are responsible and law abiding carriers. As with the school zone act issue we probably end up having to rely on the good common sense of LEs and courts and the "spirit" of the law in order to not unintentionally do something wrong or get in trouble.

Exactly, people like this are not logical, I read one of the IA news paper clippings someone posted from my home town concerning their new carry laws and how the county court house was not on the "banned carry list" and how they wanted it to be "secure" and after all the ramblings, one of the officials involved FINALLY stated that a sign on the door would do nothing to stop an actual criminal. EXACTLY! Don't disarm or restrict the movement and actions of the law abiding to stop that of the non-law abiding as it has the exact opposite affect.

 

[njsportsman]

So bacisally what I am hearing here is that my Florida and Virginia non resident CCW's are worthless. Just let them expire is what I am hearing. What can I do as a resident of New Jerkistan? Who can I call? We need a license just to look at a gun.

 

[Eagle2009]

Try convincing 12 people that your INTENT was to cause trouble at the school and by a chance I mean sure some DA could charge you with that offense, but it is HIGHLY unlikely.

As the law does not require the prosecution prove any element of criminal intent, the jury would not be asked to determine it. It is the Jury's job to decide facts. The only facts they would be asked to decide is whether the evidence at trial shows the defendant possessed a gun within 1000 feet of a school. It is highly unlikely that the jury would ever know about a defendant's State issued CCW, as the U.S. attorney would immediately have this "extraneous" information suppressed.

It is the judge's job to decide a law's meaning... and if he somehow ruled the defendant's CCW permit exempted them, the case would never reach a jury. Since you are assuming a jury trial, we have to assume the judge already ruled the defendant's State-CCW meaningless in regards to the federal law.

 

[Eagle2009]

So bacisally what I am hearing here is that my Florida and Virginia non resident CCW's are worthless. Just let them expire is what I am hearing. What can I do as a resident of New Jerkistan? Who can I call? We need a license just to look at a gun.

They protect you from Fed GFSZA95 in the States that physically issued them, but not outside of those States.

 

[Shoegoo]

Kinda related:

Peter King, Leading Republican, To Introduce Strict Gun-Control Legislation

2 things about these people get me:

- is the idea to add more and more places like maybe churches, any place with a cash register, any place that sells alcohol, police stations until eventually there's only some outhouse in NE left that happens to be outside of all those zones? Or maybe later increase the radius?

- all of this is done under the pretense of PREVENTING gun violence. But simply by making a law nothing is prevented. So logically thinking you would either have to enforce it with searches or you have not changed a thing. There is no reason anybody who intends to do other people harm would worry about some law like this, he intends to violate much more important laws that carry stiffer penalties. The only real difference is that now you can add an additional charge if somebody actually does go crazy. But the claim was this would PREVENT the incident?

- all it really does is create more and more red tape and hassles for those of us who are responsible and law abiding carriers. As with the school zone act issue we probably end up having to rely on the good common sense of LEs and courts and the "spirit" of the law in order to not unintentionally do something wrong or get in trouble.

Our democratic republic is slowly being taken from us by dictators. Not dictators from some foreign land but by dictators from within.

 

[S&W645]

As the law does not require the prosecution prove any element of criminal intent, the jury would not be asked to determine it. It is the Jury's job to decide facts. The only facts they would be asked to decide is whether the evidence at trial shows the defendant possessed a gun within 1000 feet of a school. It is highly unlikely that the jury would ever know about a defendant's State issued CCW, as the U.S. attorney would immediately have this "extraneous" information suppressed.

It is the judge's job to decide a law's meaning... and if he somehow ruled the defendant's CCW permit exempted them, the case would never reach a jury. Since you are assuming a jury trial, we have to assume the judge already ruled the defendant's State-CCW meaningless in regards to the federal law.

Even though jury instructions say you have to decide on the issue by the laws as stated by the judge, you can thumb your nose at those laws and say no. If you can convince/be convinced by the other members of the jury that the law is unjust, you don't have to convict. And set a precedent. Or force the State/Feds to go to a higher court.

In this case, the person being from out of state would show up ( read as part of introduction of the defendant). As a very valid defense for "knowingly". And the case could be a test case with the judge not having any case law to guide him, he would not have to rule on the CWP. The Feds would of course try to block it. You can bet on that. Not bringing up a CWP in court could backfire on the Feds as it would look like they were trying to hide something from the jury. Juries I've sat on don't like that.

 

[KCD1974]

I guess my point is, drive around the school if you see it 1000 ft is not far, if you go through the school zone, don't do anything dumb to get pulled over, if you do get pulled over and you're just speeding, don't tell anyone you have a gun, what are the odd's you're going to actually get searched? (You may want to answer yes if asked or you could get in even more trouble) I'm saying I wouldn't offer it up on a platter.

I know the state laws from place to place change and it's our job to know those laws in the states we carry in weather we live there or not, so just because in MN and I don't have to offer up that I'm carrying, in others I'm supposed to. But I have a company car (plates come back to the lease company), MN is not linked to tags or DL and I drive a mini van with two car seats in it and NOT ONCE in my entire life have I ever been asked "Do you have any weapons in the car" while being pulled over for speeding or anything else. In fact with the 3 speeding tickets I've gotten in a company car, not even one time was I asked for insurance or registration, they know when it's a lease company they provide up to date information.

So to end the rambling (My own that is)...The odds of you actually finding yourself in a position for this to be enforced on you is SO LOW that it barely warrants concern, It is GREAT that we're discussing it and we are all aware of it, but just use COMMON SENSE...If you must travel though a school zone EVERY DAY, well buy a small gun case made for a single gun, I just got one at Cabelas $5.00, put a cheap keyed lock on it, as you get close to the school, lock it up quick, if you are that concerned. The odds are cop is not going to make you UNLOCK it to make sure it's unloaded, well you get the idea.

I really think if we all use the common sense we have, we all be just fine with this one. I don't like this law at all, I think ON SCHOOL grounds is far better than within 1000ft as that can cover a road as well, but that is the law. Be smart and cautious...

Have a great night everyone

 

[jg1967]

I am in state where I have to inform that I am carrying, I have a out of state permit since I can't get the local one and I have to drive past 2 schools every day to work. I do not think it wise to to try to pull over somewhere in a quiet spot in order to take the gun out of the trunk or lock it up there because I got my CCW permit in order to be allowed to keep it concealed. Handling the gun in that sort of fashion is bound to get you noticed sooner or later and while you are doing it because you try to comply with the law it just looks very awkward and misleading to an observer.

 

[Eagle2009]

Not bringing up a CWP in court could backfire on the Feds as it would look like they were trying to hide something from the jury. Juries I've sat on don't like that.

Some on the jury may feel bad, even sick, about convicting someone after they find out about the CWP. But that's the point... they wont find out about it until they've already convicted the person. All the jury is going to hear at trial, is how "someone from out of State was endangering the children by driving around with a fully loaded gun outside of a school."


Forty-Eight States currently have provisions for issuing CCW permits. Soon to be forty-nine after Wisconsin passes legislation. Most of these States enter into reciprocity agreements. This federal law needs to change, and it needs to change now. If we can get a big enough voice behind this, it shouldn't be too difficult to fix.

 

[S&W645]

Some on the jury may feel bad, even sick, about convicting someone after they find out about the CWP. But that's the point... they wont find out about it until they've already convicted the person. All the jury is going to hear at trial, is how "someone from out of State was endangering the children by driving around with a fully loaded gun outside of a school."


Forty-Eight States currently have provisions for issuing CCW permits. Soon to be forty-nine after Wisconsin passes legislation. Most of these States enter into reciprocity agreements. This federal law needs to change, and it needs to change now. If we can get a big enough voice behind this, it shouldn't be too difficult to fix.

If I were on the jury, it would be brought up. And it's about time to get called again.:angry: I average about every 6 years with a criminal case followed by a civil case 2 years later.

And I do agree it needs changed. If not removed. It is a feel good law that does not prevent criminals from doing anything.