Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'Carry Issues' started by HerrGlock, May 4, 2013.
Some liberal is reading this right now and wetting his pants!!
So you shouldn't do something that is legal because it may cause the state to outlaw it? Under this thinking there would be nothing lost, since you couldn't carry either way. I guess we should all stop doing private sales since they are chomping at the bit to take that away from us.
I do not OC but that is because I feel like I have an advantage being the "unknown". I DO NOT fault anyone that legally open carries. It is their RIGHT and who am I to say that the should not have that right? I think it is funny (and sad) that our community that is up in arms for our 2A rights want to trample on others' and tell them how to carry. People that scream about the person with a gun and how scared they are need to learn that the guy/girl has every right to have and carry it. Just my .02
He's lucky that some crazy cop didn't shoot him, notifications or not...
Revised Code of Washington 9.41.280
With that in mind, one could carry on school grounds, when the building is being used fro something other than a shool only function.
Inculcate - verb (used with object), in·cul·cat·ed, in·cul·cat·ing.
1. to implant by repeated statement or admonition; teach persistently and earnestly (usually followed by upon or in ): to inculcate virtue in the young.
2. to cause or influence (someone) to accept an idea or feeling (usually followed by with ): Socrates inculcated his pupils with the love of truth.
Uh....can you splain this logic you opine? How often should one practice this logic you espouse?
Cudos for the firearm owner to exercise their right. I appreciate him not acting as a sidewalk attorney. He handled everything just fine......I noticed the complete collapse of society when he did this!
I hope he handles his .45 better than his camera!
Otherwise, point well made sir!
You're dangerously misreading that. For starters, a school is always a school, no matter what it's being used for at any specific or given time. The part about being used exclusively by public or private schools applies to ANY OTHER facility or place. In other words, if a school (public or private) rents a hall or other facility for their exclusive use at that time, then it's considered a school function (at that specific time) and carry is banned there. We have a similar law here in TX.
Your declaration that one could carry on school grounds when it's being used for something else is wrong, a dangerous thing to test out, and poorly misread.
You can carry in Alaska with permission from a school administrator.
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.
So what good is it if you can't use it?
If no one "tests it" then no one is using it and it might as well not exist.
posted from my stupid smart phone, please excuse any spelling mistakes.
Sounds like the kind of issue that might best be clarified by an assistant district or state attorney.
Good story, I like it
I don't open carry but occasionally I'll see someone who is.
I respect that, and I usually think to myself "that's pretty cool"
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.
I'm glad it worked out for dad. I just never want to draw that much attention to myself.
So, the word "facilities" does not refer to the school building? Huh. I reckon I'll have to contact the state atty general or someone for clarification.
If how you guys have interpreted it is correct I'll be severly bummed.
Thanks to Lord and Citadel, for pointing this out.
I thought I was good to go. So much for reading and knowing your states laws. Between state and fed there is a large myriad to decipher. It should just be Constitutional carry throughout the land. I seriously don't understand how folks think criminals will obey laws.
What would be one good reason for doing such a thing in the first place? I see no advantage what so ever. Unless, of course, your trying to prove a point. And being how the liberals think, it will not just be open carrying in a school that they want to make illegal. They'll try other circumstances as well.
Yeah. From a safety perspective, and having the option to conceal, it's utterly foolish to open carry. ESPECIALLY in a school.
It's all good here. Better to debate a subject and come out smarter in the end than to find out the hard way that one was wrong. I went ahead and spoke to a couple of attorney friends of mine (one is a retired police officer) and they agree with our interpretation of it. Citadel's breakdown is done very well on it.
I carry a gun to protect myself and my family. If my only option was to open carry on school property I would. Unfortunately not even open carry is allowed in schools here so it stays legally in my car when I am in the school.
posted from my stupid smart phone, please excuse any spelling mistakes.
Here in Michigan it is legal to open carry in a school if you have cpl, but it's kind of a loophole in the law and just a matter of time before it will be illegal. The more people that test this in schools and obviously have police come with guns drawn, the sooner it will be illegal. The public is not going to go for people open carrying guns in schools with everything going on these days.
I also see what you mean if conceal is not an option, then I would open carry too verses not carrying at all.