Man Open Carry's @ High School Soccer Game, Coache's/Parent's Freak Out. - Page 3
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48

Thread: Man Open Carry's @ High School Soccer Game, Coache's/Parent's Freak Out.

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    1,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Jhorton71 View Post
    CCW in some states are not allowed to be carried into bars because of the potential. I am an ex football official and some people that I thought were level headed in person had become very violent at football games and baseball games that I have officiated at. As a matter of fact one instance actually involved a police officer in another game in our area. Put yourself in the officials spot. An official has no way to carry to protect himself so as a matter of instance you took away his rights by him having the same right of protection as the man that carried at the game. If you open carry in a shopping mall, I have the same protection since I'm allowed to carry.
    I spent several years officiating and more coaching baseball, basketball and other sports. (Adult & kid players) I had to throw some parents & spectators out because of their behavior on several occasions. But, I never once worried about a person who was "LEGALLY" carry a weapon.

    Personally, I would have told the coach to focus on the game instead of the stands.


    -
    “Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.” —JAMES TOUR, NANOSCIENTIST

  2.   
  3. #22
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Jhorton71 View Post
    By the way it was not stated if the man had a CCW or not. In Michigan it is illegal to carry in a vehicle unless you have a Permit which could only be secured in the trunk. Now that we covered state law lets cover federal law. Title 18 of the United States Code section 922(q) contains the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1995, which prohibits the possession of a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reason to believe, is a school zone. The statute defines a school zone as the grounds of a public, parochial or private elementary or secondary school, or within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a public, parochial or private elementary or secondary school. The ban on firearm possession does not apply: (a) if the possession is on on private property outside the school grounds.
    All right, let's go to school. The same GFSZA that you cite also contains an exemption for carriers in possession of a CPL whose states mandate background checks as part of the CPL application process:

    (B)Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;


    If you're going to quote from the act, then study the ENTIRE ACT, not just those parts that seem to bolster your interpretation.

    Simply put, Michigan requires background checks to insure that the applicant is legally able to possess and carry a firearm. Therefore, in accordance with Michigan law, one who possesses a CPL is legally entitled to carry on public school property - including the stadium. As confirmation of this fact, I refer you to MSP legal update 86:

    MCL 28.425o provides that a person with a valid CPL shall not carry a concealed pistol in a pistol-free zone. First offense is a state civil infraction.The following is a list of the premises (excluding parking lots) included in the statute:
    School or school property, except a parent orlegal guardian who is dropping off or picking up a child and the pistol is kept in the vehicle
    Public or private day care center
    Sports arena or stadium
    A bar or tavern where sale and consumption of

    liquor by the glass is the primary source of income (does not apply to owner or employee of the business).
    Any property or facility owned or operated by a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or otherplace of worship, unless authorized by the presiding official
    An entertainment facility that has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more
    A hospital
    A dormitory or classroom of a community college,

    college, or university
    A casino


    Note, the above statute applies to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. If the CPL holder is carrying a non-concealed pistol, the statute does not apply. As noted above, the unlawful premises listed in MCL 750.234d do not apply to persons with a valid CPL. Therefore, a person with a valid CPL may carry a non-concealed pistol in the areas described in MCL 28.425oand MCL 750.234d.

    However, this was not a public school, it was a private Christian school. In this instance, private property rights override the possession of a CPL. Unless one is under contract with the school to carry out a security function or has received specific written permission from the school to carry on its grounds, the only person authorized to do so is a LEO under color of law.

    Further, you know for a fact that if the carrier had NOT been a CPL holder, the article would have made that fact part of the headline.

  4. #23
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Itstjs View Post
    I firmly believe with all of these recent events popping up in the Michigan Media where people are openly carrying to school events, I believe 1 of 2 things will happen. Either, 1, Theyll BAN open carry on school property or in school buildings/at events or 2, allow concealed carry at such places to prevent issues on both sides. Out of sight out of mind.
    Saying that, Would I have openly carried to a school event? Probably not. If anything, not went or just left it in the vehicle/home. I only carry about 95% of the time, and a school sporting event wouldnt have been one of them.
    This is exactly what Gov. Snyder has wanted all along. He also wants to ban open carry entirely; he made that clear in his veto of SB 59.

  5. federal law takes priority over state law. Private and Parochial schools are mentioned in the Federal Gun Free zone act. I am not a troll as some of you might expect. You are assuming the man had a CPL. There was no mention of that so it would be safe to say that until he presented it he doesn't have one. I do agree that the police should have handled the situation. As far as the person who said he has been upset and never pulled the trigger on anyone, Same for me. But I'm not worried about me discharging my gun in anger. I happen to worry about some of the other people that I have witnessed that didn't have a gun in their possession at the time. I prefer to carry concealed so not to provoke an instance. Negative publicity about guns of any kind does not help our cause at all. Also if you read the Michigan law, it says you can possess to pick up or drop off not to continue to occupy school property. The parking lot your talking about is covered in the Federal law as within a 1000 feet range of School property. The weapon to be secured must be unloaded and locked in a secure area of the vehicle. The article only mentions he returned it to the car. As for the official that witnessed violence at a game, aren't you glad someone didn't carry a gun when they acted a fool. Just remember the negative publicity is way more damaging than 10 positive articles about guns.


  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan
    Posts
    3,355
    Quote Originally Posted by Jhorton71 View Post
    federal law takes priority over state law. Private and Parochial schools are mentioned in the Federal Gun Free zone act. I am not a troll as some of you might expect. You are assuming the man had a CPL. There was no mention of that so it would be safe to say that until he presented it he doesn't have one. I do agree that the police should have handled the situation. As far as the person who said he has been upset and never pulled the trigger on anyone, Same for me. But I'm not worried about me discharging my gun in anger. I happen to worry about some of the other people that I have witnessed that didn't have a gun in their possession at the time. I prefer to carry concealed so not to provoke an instance. Negative publicity about guns of any kind does not help our cause at all. Also if you read the Michigan law, it says you can possess to pick up or drop off not to continue to occupy school property. The parking lot your talking about is covered in the Federal law as within a 1000 feet range of School property. The weapon to be secured must be unloaded and locked in a secure area of the vehicle. The article only mentions he returned it to the car. As for the official that witnessed violence at a game, aren't you glad someone didn't carry a gun when they acted a fool. Just remember the negative publicity is way more damaging than 10 positive articles about guns.
    Please see the part I put in bold...

    Michigan Legislature - Section 28.422

    FIREARMS (EXCERPT)
    Act 372 of 1927


    28.422 License to purchase, carry, possess, or transport pistol; issuance; qualifications; applications; sale of pistol; exemptions; nonresidents; forging application; implementation during business hours.

    Sec. 2.

    (1) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a person shall not purchase, carry, possess, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol as prescribed in this section.
    -snip-

    Please note this law is NOT for a CPL (carry permit) but is still a "license to posses" and as such satisfies the Federal law:

    Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    I fail to see your point.

    The ban of firearm possession also does not apply:

    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm— (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
    One more time... let us NOT attempt to add the weight of a Federal law that does NOT apply in hopes of bolstering your argument. Quite simply, because the school is a private school private property rights and the trespass laws DO apply but the Federal law you keep hoping will add to your argument DOES NOT apply... at least not in Michigan.

    As for assuming the man didn't have a CPL (carry permit) because he didn't present it.... Please see the law above that says he didn't even need a carry permit... all he needed was to be "licensed".

    Now.... I'll offer a personal opinion (which means it isn't based in citable or linkable fact but is based on personal experience and subjective observation only) concerning open carry....

    On more than one occasion I have seen manly men strutting around with their chests all puffed up as they attempted to present an intimidating front to all and sundry.......... suddenly appear confused and have a "hitch in their get-a-long" along with a deflation of their chests and manly strut accompanied by a dirty look when they see meek and mild mannered me just going about my business and not impressed by them while unashamedly wearing a gun right out there in their faces.

    I have concluded... (again only my personal opinion)... that simply by wearing a gun I had "out Richarded" those manly men and they didn't like it either.

    And, in the case where the game was ended early by the officials... it is my opinion the officials knew they had been "out Richarded" and, in their resentment of having their authority (and their importance) shown to be ineffective... they did the only thing they could. Instead of confronting the guy with the empty holster ... because they knew they had little to no authority over him... they exerted the authority over those they could control... and stopped the game. All just to soothe their own smarting egos.

    Or I'm all wrong... but that is still my opinion. In fact... I believe the same concept applies to those who complain about open carry... they really are not upset about the open carry itself... they are upset because they have been "out Richarded" by the open carrier who wasn't even trying and doesn't care two farts in the wind about anti open carry "Richards".

  7. It is a historically proven fact that gun free zones and gun control laws do not reduce violence. They only make people like you feel a little bit more warm and fuzzy inside because you have one more no guns sign to hide behind that isn't going to offer you any protection at all. One more gun free zone is one more place where the law abiding citizen will not be able to defend themself when the criminal who has no issues with breaking the law already walks right past your no guns sign. It's been proven time and time again that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

    Here's a novel idea, let's make it illegal to attack a referee or a coach. And then let's make it a higher prison term if that attack is done with a gun. And then, let's actually punish the criminal for violating the law - instead of just telling the law abiding citizen who wouldn't attack a coach or referee anyway that they have to leave their gun at home. Instead of trying to change the behavior of the law abiding citizen, maybe you should concentrate on punishing the criminal.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  8. Ok since you still didn't read what I put. Here is my bold print. state laws only supercede federal law if they are more stringent not the other way. Therefore the FEDERAL GUN FREE ZONE TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER MICHIGAN LAW.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Jhorton71 View Post
    Ok since you still didn't read what I put. Here is my bold print. state laws only supercede federal law if they are more stringent not the other way. Therefore the FEDERAL GUN FREE ZONE TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER MICHIGAN LAW.
    And since you didn't read what we wrote, here is my bold print (and I will raise your bold with a font size): You have no indication if the subject had a CPL or not and if the subject did have a CPL (and since he was not arrested, it would indicate that he did have a CPL), the Federal Gun Free School Zone Act WOULD NOT APPLY! You are assuming he did not have a CPL for the simple reason that he was carrying a gun on school property, an act which requires a CPL. How about assuming that since he is carrying a gun on school property, in a holster, minding his own business, obeying all other applicable laws, acting like everyone else present if not better, that he is also obeying the law that requires the CPL.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  10. Ok 2 things are wrong with your statement. First the article says they are unsure of whether the officer questioned him or not so the assumption must be that he wasn't until further proven. Second once they told him it was private property and the weapon wasn't allowed that included the parking lot. The person returned to the game with his holster on and the coach then assumed the gun was still on the property of the school. Again Federal Law precedes state law because it is private property and he was asked to leave. I can carry on my property but I don't let anybody else carry on my property.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast