CT Weapons on School Grounds?

[BIGJOHN621]

Ok, I'm confused. Now that I have said something everyone agrees with, perhaps someone can interpret this CT school weapon law.

Sec. 53a-217b Possession of A Weapon on School Grounds: Class D Felony.
(a) A person is guilty of possession of a weapon on school grounds when, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he possesses a firearm or deadly weapon, as defined in section 53a-3, (1) in or on the real property comprising a public or private elementary or secondary school or (2) at a school-sponsored activity as defined in subsection (h) of section 10-233a.

It goes on to exempt organized school shooting activities such as a rifle team, traversing for hunting with unloaded weapons, LEOs, etc. Here is the confusing part. There was an exception in this law that exempted CT CCW holders, but that was removed in 1998. The AG has given an opinion that employees must have district permission to carry while working but the opinion does not address others.

Does the clause "knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so" refer to a CT CCW holder being licensed?

I have tried to find this answer elsewhere and have not been able to get one. I haven't (yet) sought an attorney's opinion and have no interest in being a test case, as my son now attends school in CT. Can you carry or can you not?

My interpretation is that "licensed to do so" means a CCW license. However, if that is true, why was the exemption removed in 1998, or there at all for that matter?

 

[Joe Legere]

I'm not sure and I'm can't say either way, but I've wondered the same about Maine schools.

 

[GoBangz]

Have you looked at this site: Link Removed
They may be able to answer your question.

 

[rev. dave]

CT has an "Office of Legislative Research". I suggest you ask them, and post their reply on this site for all of us to see. There is a 2007 review of gun laws done by that office, but it says basically the same thing as what you found. I suppose it hinges on whether "licensed or privileged to do so" applies to "possession of a weapon" or to "on school grounds". Find out what OLR says.

 

[jimmyjohn]

Last time I renewed my license/permit. I asked the examining deputy the question of school grounds concealed carry and the deputy said they were subject to the same rules we were off duty and everyone in the office carried on the school grounds because they actually considered it to be an area of concern because of the local history of school shootings that they would never forget. The deputy said that for them if they broke the law it would be their job at least and that the subject was discussed as a group with department management present. The decision was that it was a legal carry zone for permit holders but not a court tested policy. Therefore make sure it stays concealed when off duty. The deputy thought I was wise and being responsible to carry on school grounds. I didn't mention that I was only asking because it was a bother to upholster and store it in the car gun safe when I had to go into the grounds to pick up my kid from study hall when I was late.

 

[ccwaz]

Find out what your OLR says, and also consult with an attorney. The opinion of anyone who is not an attorney will not hold water, and giving legal advice without being licensed to practice law can get you into trouble for "practicing law" without a license. That said, in most states the CCW permit does NOT allow you to carry on school grounds, no matter how the law is worded, and there is not only a State law to deal with but a Federal law that prohibits carrying within 1,000 feet of the outer limit of a school zone. In most states that have a CCW permit, permit holders are exempt from this school zone 1,000 foot law - but NOT the law that prohibits carry actually on the campus. This exemption is just intended to allow you to pick up your kid at the edge of the school zone without having to disarm. In some states even an off duty police officer is not allowed to carry on campus.

 

[ccwaz]

If it is still considered an untested rule, you have the choice of potentially being the test case (carried by 6 or judged by 12...) or disarming when you go on to the campus. Being the test case can be very expensive, but at some point, somebody's gotta do it...

 

[OlympicFox]

Being an attorney doesn't hold much water IMHO.

My wife wrote decisions for federal judges for 38 years, and as a result has more than a little experience with the "opinions" of attorney's and judges.

While it is true that giving legal advise is illegal - the attorneys had to write a law to protect their monopoly - it's not illegal to give one's opinion on the law, or anything else for that matter. My personal experience is that a good lay person can frequently give a better opinion on the law because their brain isn't so full of contradictory bull, or so caught up in the business that values minutia over justice and common sense. Attorney's love it when laws make almost everything illegal, and other laws that seem to contradict everything. It's good for business.

That said, it is my personal opinion that carrying concealed means carrying CONCEALED.

Common sense tells us that "Gun Free Zones" are by definition "areas of concern" where there is a higher probability that someone intent on killing a lot of people will chose to go because he can assume that 100% of his victims are unarmed.

If you are carrying CONCEALED, then the only way you are going to be outed is if the SHTF and you pulled out your gun to defend yourself and/or others. If I have any doubt over my ability to keep my CCW concealed in XYZ circumstances that I feel REQUIRE concealment, then I carry a smaller CCW on that occasion.

Are there DA's that will prosecute hero's of the day? Absolutely. Remember what I said earlier: values minutia over justice and common sense.

Find out what your OLR says, and also consult with an attorney. The opinion of anyone who is not an attorney will not hold water . . .

 

[tionico]

Washington State allow permittees to actually carry on school grounds, and even in buidings under certain conditions. Sounds like this law was originally written with such an exception in mind, but when a different law was passed no one thought to ammend the wording of this one. One good "clue" would be to look up the legislative history of the law that denied permittees the ability to carry on school grounds.

As to the federal gun free school zones law... it would take a FEDERAL level authority to find and charge one under this law, and local law should govern. In Wasghington, where permittees can carry on school property, local habit does not lay charges on the basis of the "carp in the barrel " laws at the federal level. Stupid laws, anyway... I can not find any route between my home and any freeway without coming within a thousand feet of a school zone. So, what, am I now forced to forfeit my 2A rights, as I cannot lawfully even GET any firearm from the gunstore to home? That law is so phoney, it needs to be repealed.

 

[OlympicFox]

Bingo!

123456789101112131415 aka extra characters needed to satisfy another stupid "law"

Washington State allow permittees to actually carry on school grounds, and even in buidings under certain conditions. Sounds like this law was originally written with such an exception in mind, but when a different law was passed no one thought to ammend the wording of this one. One good "clue" would be to look up the legislative history of the law that denied permittees the ability to carry on school grounds.

As to the federal gun free school zones law... it would take a FEDERAL level authority to find and charge one under this law, and local law should govern. In Wasghington, where permittees can carry on school property, local habit does not lay charges on the basis of the "carp in the barrel " laws at the federal level. Stupid laws, anyway... I can not find any route between my home and any freeway without coming within a thousand feet of a school zone. So, what, am I now forced to forfeit my 2A rights, as I cannot lawfully even GET any firearm from the gunstore to home? That law is so phoney, it needs to be repealed.

 

[rev. dave]

1000 ft of WHAT school?

I just realized that a law like this is really onerous. Ours says within '1000 feet of a school' like so many others - but what kind of schools? Does a Barber College count, or Dental College, or a Secretarial school? Public, or private? How about Sunday School - and what about during 'non-school' hours? What if it's an income tax training school, or a 'language school' - like Hebrew or Ukrainian schools? What about a madrassa? Is the music store giving lessons a 'school'? How about adult education - like literacy classes or car repair for women? Martial Arts schools?

This literally means there may be some kind of school you don't know about within the prohibited distance anywhere you might go. I think it's too vague and is probably unconstitutional. Of course, I'm not cashing out my 401k to pay a lawyer and giving up 10 years of my life to fight this by becoming the first test case either.