LTCF: Carrying in/on School Zone; PSP Answer

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by SigForLife

Hold on, where do they state that? They specifically give the example that in PA, an individual with a PA LTCF, would be exempt under the fed law. Now where do they say that such is not the case for state law?

they don't have to state that it is not the case for the state law. here is what they are saying:

having an LTCF exempts you from law A. period. end of story. nothing about law B.

that does not imply that having an LTCF also exempts you from any other laws.

therefore, there is no need to explicitly state that having an LTCF does not exempt you from law B.

having an LTCF negates the effect of the federal GFSZ act on you. it does not positively make it legal for you to carry in a school. those are two different things.

basically, by not stating that having an LTCF exempts you from the state law, the PSP has, well, not stated that having an LTCF exempts you from the state law.

It is entrapment if the PSP stated that it was lawful federally and then ignored to address it as pertaining to the state

no, it just plain isn't.

anyway, we need someone to test the exception in the state law, so, if you want to be the one go for it.

[SigForLife]

Right, and the most important text is: The firearm is possessed by an individual that is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located...(e.g. a Pennsylvania carry permit with respect to a school zone in Pennsylvania). If that isn't a clear opinion that a PA LTCF allows the lawful carry of a firearm in a school zone in PA, I don't know what is.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by jofreder

I do not see any clarification on carry into a school. I read the school Zone section but the topic of carrying in a school just says it is a crime. I find it curious that the school zone section gave the exemptions but on school property just said against the law. Did I miss something?

you have to differentiate between the federal GFSZ act (what the first section is talking about) and the state law against carrying weapons on school property (what the second section is talking about).

although they address roughly the same issue, they are two completely separate laws under to completely separate jurisdictions. one has absolutely no effect on the other.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by SigForLife

Right, and the most important text is: The firearm is possessed by an individual that is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located...(e.g. a Pennsylvania carry permit with respect to a school zone in Pennsylvania). If that isn't a clear opinion that a PA LTCF allows the lawful carry of a firearm in a school zone in PA, I don't know what is.

1. it isn't an opinion at all. it is a statement of the text of the federal gun free school zone act.

2. it pertains only to the federal GFSZ act.

that text that you refer to as the "most important text" isn't saying what you think it says. and, you can't just ignore the rest of the text.

regarding the state law, the most important text is the part where it says it is illegal...and then the lack of any part where it says having an LTCF exempts you from the state law.

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by SigForLife

Right, and the most important text is: The firearm is possessed by an individual that is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located...(e.g. a Pennsylvania carry permit with respect to a school zone in Pennsylvania). If that isn't a clear opinion that a PA LTCF allows the lawful carry of a firearm in a school zone in PA, I don't know what is.

LittleRedToyota is right, you have to read every word. Maybe do a flow chart or a Venn diagram or something, too.

There are TWO (that's -2-) separate statutes that outlaw guns on school property. One is a Federal law, that was shot down in the Lopez decision, but was re-enacted to deal with the Constitutional defects (I think it was a lack of nexus to Interstate Commerce), and has been mostly unenforced since then; there's also a Pennsylvania statute that uses different wording.

The FEDERAL law allows you to carry in a school in Pennsylvania if the Pennsylvania STATE government has licensed you to carry.

There's no sentence in the PSP newsletter that covers the STATE law regarding guns on school property.

[Damage control]

Maybe someone with good wording skills can write the PSP asking to clarify their news letter?

DC

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by Damage control

Maybe someone with good wording skills can write the PSP asking to clarify their news letter?

DC

someone could, but it is actually already quite clear.

it just doesn't say what we want it to say.

and the PSP is not going to say what we want them to say.

and, even if they did, it wouldn't be legally binding.

[SigForLife]

I'll write them and AG Corbett and let everyone know the result. Since everyone believes it is negative, then there is nothing to lose.

[5711-Marine]

Found this posted by Statowski on the Open Carry website:

Back in February I asked Representative Sam Smith, House Majority Leader, how an LTCF or carry for a lawful purpose applied against Section 912. This was his response then:



Thank you for contacting me in regard to your interest in Commonwealth laws regarding firearms. I always appreciate the opportunity to respond to these questions and appreciate your continued interest in this matter.



In your letter, you had inquired about the meaning of the phrase "possessed for other lawful purpose" found in 18 Pa.C.S. § 912(c) relating to possession of weapon on school property. Specifically, you wondered if this language recognized a Pennsylvania license to carry a firearm as a "lawful purpose."



Section 912, enacted in 1980, reads as follows:



"Possession of weapon on school property.

(a) Definition.—Notwithstanding the definition of "weapon" in section 907 (relating to possessing instruments of crime), "weapon" for purposes of this section shall include but not be limited to any knife, cutting instrument, cutting tool, nun-chuck stick, firearm, shotgun, rifle and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.

(b) Offense defined.—A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.

(c) Defense.—It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose."



According to House legal staff, at least two statewide courts have had the opportunity to address the issue of possession of firearms on school property by an individual who was licensed pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 6109. Neither has issued an absolute rule.



Legal staff further indicated that in Commonwealth v. Heidler, the Pennsylvania Superior Court specifically refused to answer the question of whether an individual with a license to carry a firearm possessed such firearm for a lawful purpose on school grounds. 741 A.2d 213, 217, fn 8 (1999), app. denied 758 A.2d 660 (Pa. 2000). In Bolden v. Chartiers Valley School District, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania noted that, "(w)e need not address Bolden's argument that because his gun was registered his conduct falls within the exception to Section 912 which states that no crime is committed if Bolden possessed the gun with a lawful purpose. We note, however, that Bolden's argument ignores that the exception to Section 912 only allows possession of a firearm...for '[an] other lawful purpose' (meaning, for example, than an investigator, or a security guard, or other person who as part of his or her duties carries a firearm will not be charged with a crime...)." 869 A.2d 1 134. 1139. fn 7 (2005).



The decision in Bolden, in particular the examples provided by the court in footnote 7, should give pause to an individual licensed under 18 Pa.C.S. § 6109. Although there is no iron-clad rule, in neither case did the court consider a license as a defense to a violation of the Crimes Code language concerning possession of weapons on school property. Until a definitive court ruling on this question, an individual would be in jeopardy of prosecution. It is worth noting that the penalty for a conviction under 18 Pa.C.S § 912 would be a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000.



It is hoped that this information is useful. If I can be of further assistance on this or other legislative matters, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Commonwealth v. Heidler
Bolden v. Chartiers Valley School District

[Delco Sig]

Here's my interpretation based on my limited knowledge of federal/state law interactions:

Generally, federal law trumps state law. Example: the federal government says A is illegal, the state enacts a law saying A is legal, state law gets slapped down in court (legalization of marijuana). Also of note, states can make more restrictive laws than the federal laws. Example: federal government says you must be 18 to buy tobacco, a state could make a law stating you must be 21.

Now, the USC section quoted in the pamphlet states that:

The following
examples list when
the individual
would not be in
violation of the
Federal law with
respect to firearm
possession in a school zone:
• The firearm is possessed on private property not part of
school grounds, such as possession on an FFL’s business
premises;
• The firearm is unloaded and stored within a locked
container (to include bringing a firearm to an FFL or
departing the premises with a purchased firearm), or a
locked firearms rack on a vehicle;
• The firearm is possessed by an individual that 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 (e.g. a Pennsylvania
carry permit with respect to a school zone in Pennsylvania);
...

Since the USC specifically states a person with a state-issued permit that meets the guidelines set forth, a Pennsylvania law that states you are not allowed to carry on school grounds with a state-issued license is a state law counteracting a federal law, i.e. it should be knocked down in court (if it ever even becomes an issue).

Anyone want to poke holes in my understanding?