Originally Posted by pizza_pablo
I believe that YOUR interpretation is incorrect, sir.
It states school premisis. I don't see how that could be comprehended to mean another facility.
I agree with LORD on this. The law is written to be broken up into three different parts. Lets break it down: the beginning of starts off by saying it is unlawful to carry onto or possess on (that's pretty easy to follow). What comes next are the three SEPARATE instances where it is unlawful to carry. It is important to note that anyone with a fifth grade reading level can see that these three points are meant to be exclusive from each other. They are mutually exclusive. Meaning they do not depend on one another and only one has to occur for the law to be broken. We know this because we can read the commas and the oh so important word 'OR
' in the statement.
The first instance is on public or private elementary or secondary school premises (in red below).
The second instance is on school-provided transportation. (In blue below). This is most commonly going to be a school bus.
The third instance are areas of facilities that are being used only by schools (in green below). "Facilities" in this third instance is not referring to "premises" from the first instance. In Florida there is a similar law that pertains to bus stops. It is illegal to carry a firearm near a bus stop while a school bus is present. However, when there is no school bus present it is not illegal. In this case the bus stop is considered a "facility" that is being used exclusively by schools when the bus is present. Facilities also pertain to what you would define as any sort of facility. It can be a park that is being used by the school for an award ceremony or anything of the sort.
(1) It is unlawful for a person to carry onto, or to possess on, public or private elementary or secondary school premises
, school-provided transportation
, or areas of facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools
I understand where you are coming form pablo but had they wanted it to mean what you think it means it would look more like: "it is unlawful for a person to carry onto public school premises while facilities are being used exclusively by public schools". There would be no separation of context.