One offense or two? (Non-lawyers welcome)

[bogey1]

Damn. And I thought was going to open a casino.

[Delkal]

Speculating how many offenses someone can get charged with is pointless so lets cut to the chase. What we really want to know is what this person would be convicted of and how long they would be in jail.....

So I'll start. I do not believe an otherwise lawful citizen with a LTCF would be charged with anything if he happened to be on a school bus or entered a school. So no conviction or even a misdemeanor after things were cleared up. But I am sure others here think they would be imprisoned for years, decades, or even life so let us know what you think. It will be fun to see how paranoid and scared of life people can be.

[free]

Speculating how many offenses someone can get charged with is pointless so lets cut to the chase. What we really want to know is what this person would be convicted of and how long they would be in jail.....

So I'll start. I do not believe an otherwise lawful citizen with a LTCF would be charged with anything if he happened to be on a school bus or entered a school. So no conviction or even a misdemeanor after things were cleared up. But I am sure others here think they would be imprisoned for years, decades, or even life so let us know what you think. It will be fun to see how paranoid and scared of life people can be.

That's totally different question from what COULD he be charged with.

Jezzz.

[Delkal]

That's totally different question from what COULD he be charged with.

Jezzz.

Being charged with anything is meaningless. Only convictions matter.

But that said I don't think a prosecutor would even charge you. What were you thinking?

[GunLawyer001]

Speculating how many offenses someone can get charged with is pointless so lets cut to the chase. What we really want to know is what this person would be convicted of and how long they would be in jail.....

So I'll start. I do not believe an otherwise lawful citizen with a LTCF would be charged with anything if he happened to be on a school bus or entered a school. So no conviction or even a misdemeanor after things were cleared up. But I am sure others here think they would be imprisoned for years, decades, or even life so let us know what you think. It will be fun to see how paranoid and scared of life people can be.

Being charged with anything is meaningless. Only convictions matter.

But that said I don't think a prosecutor would even charge you. What were you thinking?

Any conviction in this fact pattern is likely going to be an M1 or felony, so your gun rights are gone for life.

Prosecutors have charged many people for technical violations of the gun laws, in PA and NJ and other states. PA resident with an LTCF strays into NJ? Arrested & charged. PA resident with an LTCF has a legal gun in his own car in the school parking lot? Been there, done that.

You have to understand that half the country (more than half the criminal justice system near urban areas) believes that guns are a loophole, not a right. You didn't have good intentions, you had a gun, you're the bad guy.

There was a guy with a gun legally checked & declared in his baggage, his flight was diverted to NJ with a layover, the airline gave him his bags so he'd have clothing overnight, the NJ cops were waiting & arrested him for possessing a gun in NJ without a NJ FOID.

Assuming that "it'll be OK" is childishly naive when it comes to gun laws. They hate you. You are literally Hitler, and they won't pass up a chance to smack your racist, homophobic ass down if you give them that chance.

[free]

Being charged with anything is meaningless. Only convictions matter.

But that said I don't think a prosecutor would even charge you. What were you thinking?

The OP asked what offenses had been committed, not what convictions would be achieved.

[tlnzz1]

None, it is an unconstitutional law that did not exist when the 2A was put in place. Just ask the SCOTUS about the Bruen decision.

Correct. The problem is that it will take the next 100 years for the Supreme Court to overturn these laws. Until they do, people will be prosecuted for these unconstitutional laws.

[NEAHS]

Correct. The problem is that it will take the next 100 years for the Supreme Court to overturn these laws. Until they do, people will be prosecuted for these unconstitutional laws.

While this didn't happen in PA, and not a school building itself but still a school district owned building. It didn't take 100 yrs for the judge to declare it unconstitutional...

So there is hope that it won't take 100 yrs to strike down all these unconstitutional laws.

Judge Cites Second Amendment While Dismissing Gun Charge Against Former School Superintendent

A former Kentucky school superintendent who was charged with possessing a firearm on public school property had his case thrown out by a judge this week, who said prosecutors hadn't been able to show a national tradition of prohibiting firearms on all property owned by a school district.

John Gunn, the former school superintendent in McCreary County, had just resigned his position in February, 2023 when he went to the board of education office around 6 a.m. to gather his personal belongings from his office. Gunn was allegedly wearing a .45 caliber pistol when he showed up at the building, but he left because his access card had been deactivated and he couldn't get inside. When he returned during normal business hours he no longer had his gun with him, but he was still arrested by a school resource officer when he tried once more to collect his things.

Gunn’s attorney, David S. Hoskins, argued that the law was an unconstitutional infringement on Gunn’s right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.

Hoskins cited a 2022 case in which the U.S. Supreme Court set out a new standard for deciding the legality of gun restrictions, commonly called the Bruen case.

The high court said that gun laws must be assessed on whether they are consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Hoskins argued there was no historical analogue regarding regulating carrying guns on school property — as opposed to schools themselves — and as a result Kentucky’s prohibition on carrying guns as it was applied to Gunn was unconstitutional.

The prosecutor, Commonwealth’s Attorney Ronnie Bowling, argued in response that the Supreme Court decision would still allow barring possession of guns in sensitive places such as schools.

Gunn’s act of carrying a gun at the school-board office “is not a traditional, historical recognized right” at the time the Second Amendment was ratified, Bowling said.

Bowling got it backward. Unless he could show a longstanding, national tradition of treating school administrative offices as "sensitive places", Gunn presumably had the right to have his firearm with him that morning, and Judge Dan Ballou cited the Supreme Court's "history, text, and tradition" test in dismissing the felony charge against the former superintendent.

Ballou ruled the prosecution had not shown “that the Nation’s historical tradition of regulating the possession of firearms extends to an individual carrying a firearm on property not utilized as a school, during a time when neither students nor school employees were present, and with no other alleged criminal acts being committed, regardless of the ownership of the property at issue.”

Honestly, this case never should have been filed to begin with. There were never any allegations that Gunn intended to do harm to anyone in the building. In fact, he went to the board of education building early in the morning so he could collect his things and be gone before anyone else had shown up for work. This was simply about possessing a firearm, and I can't help but wonder if there was any underlying animosity from the school board that led to his arrest, when the easiest thing would have been to drop the matter once he'd cleared out his office.

Hopefully the Commonwealth Attorney will take the loss and let this be the end of Gunn's ordeal instead of appealing Ballou's ruling and continuing on with the prosecution. The judge made the right call in dismissing the case on Second Amendment grounds, and the interests of the public aren't going to be served by trying to turn Gunn into a felon for merely possessing a gun outside of the school board's building early one morning.

https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2...harge-n1224638

[tlnzz1]

[QUOTE=NEAHS;4898391]While this didn't happen in PA, and not a school building itself but still a school district owned building. It didn't take 100 yrs for the judge to declare it unconstitutional...

So there is hope that it won't take 100 yrs to strike down all these unconstitutional laws.

One down and only hundreds to go.

[gnbrotz]

Who is this?

Jules tracked down the full story. It is the person and incident which sparked this thread.

While I largely agree with the unconstitutionality of all gun control measures, my question was more about expectations in the current world we live in. At best, this person made a series of very poor choices, and while the district is downplaying it big time, there was at least the potential for some very bad things to happen. IMO, planned "mass shooting" seems unlikely, due to the lack of rounds brought along, but checking the guy's (assumed) LTCF, slapping him on the head with a Red Foreman "Don't be a dumbass" and sending him on his way somehow seems like not quite enough either.

Perhaps Disorderly Conduct applies here (Sarcasm)