Guns in car trigger school lockdown, criminal charges...

**RenoV8** · September 18th, 2021, 12:54 PM

"Pennsylvania law prohibits the possession of any weapon in school buildings or on the surrounding property."

Total Bullshit. If you have a CC permit, you are allowed by law, as per the PA Supreme Court, to carry for "any other lawful purpose". This has been argued in court and the the Supremes ruled in favor of the permit holder. The article clearly is wrong in stating the above.

However...don't be surprised if your local, corrupt DA decides to charge you and force you to prove you are entitled to the other lawful purpose defense...

https://blog.princelaw.com/2017/02/1...hool-property/

**gnbrotz** · September 18th, 2021, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by RenoV8

"Pennsylvania law prohibits the possession of any weapon in school buildings or on the surrounding property."

Total Bullshit. If you have a CC permit, you are allowed by law, as per the PA Supreme Court, to carry for "any other lawful purpose". This has been argued in court and the the Supremes ruled in favor of the permit holder. The article clearly is wrong in stating the above.

However...don't be surprised if your local, corrupt DA decides to charge you and force you to prove you are entitled to the other lawful purpose defense...

https://blog.princelaw.com/2017/02/1...hool-property/

You'd better re-read the article you linked to. First of all, the SCOPA has NOT ruled on this matter (It was Superior Court, which is one level down), and despite the positives that came from the ruling, even attorney Prince notes:

Accordingly, the key points are that anyone lawfully possessing a weapon on school grounds ensure that they are possessing it for a lawful purpose (e.g. self-defense) and they understand that they can be charged with violating Section 912 and forced to argue the defense under Section 912(c).

**Gman106** · September 18th, 2021, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

You'd better re-read the article you linked to. First of all, the SCOPA has NOT ruled on this matter (It was Superior Court, which is one level down), and despite the positives that came from the ruling, even attorney Prince notes:

Curious thing is, this is actually a pocket knife case. I would think twice about carrying a firearm into a school, but probably wouldn't think twice about the EDC knife in my pocket.

**gnbrotz** · September 18th, 2021, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by Gman106

Curious thing is, this is actually a pocket knife case. I would think twice about carrying a firearm into a school, but probably wouldn't think twice about the EDC knife in my pocket.

Yep. The statute regulates "weapons" on school property, not "guns". If you walked in and stabbed someone with a screwdriver, this charge would certainly be among those you would face, even though guns (and sometimes knives) are the only "implements capable of inflicting serious bodily injury" that you're likely to be arrested for without performing any explicit action with them.

**Manxdriver** · September 18th, 2021, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by ROCK-IT3

I didn't see anything in the linked article stating the firearms were visible in the car.

Me either. I’m thinking he blabbed on himself.

**RenoV8** · September 18th, 2021, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

You'd better re-read the article you linked to. First of all, the SCOPA has NOT ruled on this matter (It was Superior Court, which is one level down), and despite the positives that came from the ruling, even attorney Prince notes:

I stand corrected on the Superior Court ruling on this matter and not SCOPA...I pointed out the other point you make again in your post.

I will take my chances carrying on school grounds...as I often do for lawful purposes. I even spoke to our police chief about it...educating him in the process.

**cham09** · September 18th, 2021, 06:04 PM

It says he was charged with “firearms not to be carried without a license” which says to me he doesn’t have a LTCF, which puts his other lawful purpose defense out the window cause he wasn’t legally possessing them in the vehicle in the first place

**Sgt.K** · September 18th, 2021, 06:14 PM

I have a friend whose employer indicates that it is a violation to have a firearm in your car "in the company parking lot". Their office space is leased, the lot they use belongs to the building and is used by all the tenants and visitors - so, not "the company lot".

He maintains a lockbox on the back seat floor/under the driver's seat which can sometimes slide into view, but is only there for unavoidable trips to places like the post office. I can pretty much guarantee the lockbox is empty when he is at work, but I sincerely doubt he would prove that to *anyone* while in that lot except under extreme duress.

P.S. - If it matters to anyone, he does have his LTCF.

**tl_3237** · September 18th, 2021, 06:35 PM

Reliance on Goslin for possession on school property may be premature as that same court seems to be ambivalent regarding the self-defense issue:

Originally Posted by cham09

Has there been any cases yet of someone using that defense in PA successfully?

Commonwealth v. Goslin, 156 A. 3d 314 - Pa: Superior Court 2017

A 2019 case ruling by the same court in Commonwealth v. Edwards, Pa: Superior Court 2019:

[7] Without citing to any authority, Appellant argues that his possession of the knife for protection is a lawful purpose. Appellant's Brief at 14. The Commonwealth argues the opposite, "self-defense is not a lawful purpose for bringing a weapon to school. If it were, any student could bring a weapon to school." Commonwealth's Brief at 12.

In Commonwealth v. Goslin, 156 A.3d 314 (Pa. Super. 2017), this Court interpreted the language of Section 912(c). We held that the language, "other lawful purpose," "expands the defense to include any additional or different lawful reason not otherwise mentioned in the first clause of Section 912(c), regardless of whether it is school-related." Id. at 317-318. However, we noted, "[a]lthough we are concerned about individuals possessing weapons on school property, we are bound by the broad defense that the legislature has provided defendants in such cases. We would urge the legislature to review this language to ensure that the legislature's view has not changed since it enacted this defense in 1980." Goslin, 156 A.3d at 318, n. 4.

We are inclined to agree with the Commonwealth, however, we need not reach the question of whether self-defense constitutes an "other lawful purpose" within the meaning of the statute today.

https://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.p...89#post4477989

**abner13** · September 18th, 2021, 06:46 PM

Someone at a former place of employment , defense contractor with the 'firearms forbidden on company property'' policy , got into a shouting match with another employee & supervisor and said, ''I'll go out to my car , get my 9mm and shoot everyone in here!'' Security asked to search his vehicle , but he refused , got in and left. Yes , he was immediately terminated. Made several threats to come back. Local PD had a car at each entrance for a few days.