Concealed Carry Reciprocity is CURRENTLY banned under Federal Law. (Important) - Page 11
Page 11 of 31 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 302

Thread: Concealed Carry Reciprocity is CURRENTLY banned under Federal Law. (Important)

  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by antietam View Post
    The LEOs involved in "stopping" the legal CCW holder could conceivably be seen as creators of the crime!
    Yeah, it's just like the laws against underage drinking. It's a fiat crime, a crime because the government says it is a crime, not for any other reason.

  2.   
  3. #102
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Panhandle, Idaho
    Posts
    279
    The letter above is simply a reading of the USC in effect, namely this section:

    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
    (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;
    (iii) that is—
    (I) not loaded; and
    (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
    (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
    (v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
    (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
    (vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.
    Note in the letter is says a person may be in violation, it does not say they will be in violation. The letter also leaves out the part where the gunholder either knows or has reasonable cause to believe they are on school grounds to be in violation.

    Anyway, probably best to go to the source rather to rely on a letter.

  4. With nearly every municipality in the country, scrounging for revenue, and an over zealous anti-gun administration, i dont see your scenario all that impossible, a few well placed ATF agents could be a windfall for some local govts, what a perfect way for the federal govt to put more money in local communities, i dont see it as likely, but it Could happen

  5. Quote Originally Posted by antietam View Post
    that would show that local LEOs were road-block set up to entrap
    Entrapment in the legal sense is when law enforcement authorities cause a person to commit an illegal action they would not have committed without law enforcement's influence.


    A road block is not entrapment in the legal sense. If it were, DUI checkpoints would not exist.





    Here is an example of how a "law-abiding" CCW holder could be arrested under this Federal law.



    Situation: DUI Checkpoint set up in front of a Texas school; Missouri Permit Holder on vacation with family to Six Flags Amusement Park in Texas.


    Texas State Police: "Hello sir, have you had anything to drink this evening?"

    Missouri CCW: "No sir, I would never drink and drive, my family is too important to me. Also, Texas law requires me to inform you that I am currently in possession of a concealed handgun."

    Texas State Police: "Do you have a permit?"

    Missouri CCW: "Yes sir, I have a Missouri permit."

    Texas State Police: "Do you also have a Texas permit?"

    Missouri CCW: "No sir, Texas law gives my Missouri CCW the same privileges given to a Texas CCW."

    ATF Agent: "Sir, step out of the car, you're under arrest for GFSZA 1995."

    Missouri CCW: "What?"

    ATF Agent: "Sir, step out of the car right now, or I'll add resisting arrest. You're already facing five years, don't make it any worse for yourself."

  6. #105
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PANHANDLE, FL
    Posts
    144
    Eagle2009 you make great points with this scenario and I may be completely wrong in my understanding of the law on this issue. Are you aware of any occurrences similar to your scenario.

  7. #106
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PANHANDLE, FL
    Posts
    144
    Good points and thanks for the info.

  8. United States v Danks (1999) Danks was convicted for possessing a firearm within 1000 feet of a school. He was not on school grounds.

    Quote Originally Posted by United States v Danks
    "In April 1998, Danks shot at a car, which was parked within 1,000 feet of an elementary school. After a federal grand jury charged Danks with possessing a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2)(A), Danks moved to dismiss the indictment against him, arguing that section 922(q), as amended in 1996 (the amended Act), is an unconstitutional use of Congress's Commerce Clause power. The District Court1 denied his motion, finding that the amended Act was constitutional. and that the firearm had moved in interstate commerce."

    In United States v Nieves Castano (2007) A woman was convicted for having a gun in her apartment.

    Quote Originally Posted by United States v Nieves Castano
    "In the end, the defendant's argument devolves into a claim that the government's evidence was insufficient to show that the defendant possessed a firearm within 1000 feet of a school's grounds. That claim fails. As Soler held, "[p]recise measurements may be unnecessary in some cases where the spatial leeway is relatively great and the gap in the claim of proof is relatively small." 275 F.3d at 154. Here, three minor children lived with the defendant, and it would be easy for a jury to conclude that she knew there were two schools nearby, within or just outside her housing project and less than 1000 feet away, and that she regularly passed by those schools. One school was, in fact, located next to the south entrance of the housing project. The prosecution's evidence was that the distance from the main fence of that school to the corner of Building 9 was 636 feet, and that the distance from the entrance of the school to that same corner was 670 feet. The record shows that the other school was even closer. The distance from the corner of Building 9 to that school's fence was 473 feet, and the distance to its entrance was 550 feet. The measurements were made using a small wheel-like device commonly used to measure forensic crime scenes.4 The government also introduced an aerial photograph showing the location of the schools and the defendant's apartment, which was entirely consistent with the measurements.
    37

    Whatever the fine points about measurement, there was leeway — before reaching the 1000 foot mark — of at least 330 feet between one of the schools and Building 9. This was more than sufficient to cover any refinements in the horizontal and vertical measurement needed to account for the distance between the corner of Building 9 and Nieves-Castaño's apartment. The conviction on Count Two is affirmed."

  9. #108

    Question Fifth Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Eagle2009 View Post
    Here is an example of how a "law-abiding" CCW holder could be arrested under this Federal law.



    Situation: DUI Checkpoint set up in front of a Texas school; Missouri Permit Holder on vacation with family to Six Flags Amusement Park in Texas.


    Texas State Police: "Hello sir, have you had anything to drink this evening?"

    Missouri CCW: "No sir, I would never drink and drive, my family is too important to me. Also, Texas law requires me to inform you that I am currently in possession of a concealed handgun."

    Texas State Police: "Do you have a permit?"

    Missouri CCW: "Yes sir, I have a Missouri permit."

    Texas State Police: "Do you also have a Texas permit?"

    Missouri CCW: "No sir, Texas law gives my Missouri CCW the same privileges given to a Texas CCW."

    ATF Agent: "Sir, step out of the car, you're under arrest for GFSZA 1995."

    Missouri CCW: "What?"

    ATF Agent: "Sir, step out of the car right now, or I'll add resisting arrest. You're already facing five years, don't make it any worse for yourself."
    Does anyone see the Fifth Amendment violation taking place here?

  10. #109
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Giles Co.
    Posts
    2

    Within 1000 Ft.

    If I am not mistaken, and I cannot quote you the statute I am sorry, there is an ammendment to the Tn. statute also that allows for dropping off students at school. I have to take my nephew to school sometime,I carry with ccp and checked into ti and read up on all before going near the school grounds. The provisions have been ammended to protect LAW ABIDING ccw people here in Tn. on this matter. Read the facts that are up to date. I apologize, I am not trying to be crass but there are old laws still on the books about everything that need to be taken off but have only been revised.

  11. #110
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Z View Post
    ...there are old laws still on the books about everything that need to be taken off but have only been revised.
    But it does make great FUD material....

Page 11 of 31 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

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