Firearms On School Grounds

The Village Idiot

Shooting at the big range in heaven. 1952-2009
NES Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
2,284
Likes
353
Location
The Live Free Or Keep Voting In dimocrats State
Feedback: 2 / 0 / 0
I know that it is Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(q). Except as authorized, may not possess or discharge a firearm in a school zone) that one cannot possess a firearm on school grounds. I am licensed to carry in the State of NH and do so on a regular basis. I travel good distances to see my daughter's high school team play and prefer to keep my pistol with me while on the road. Are there any Federal provisions that allow me to carry it while on the road but store it in the trunk while on high school grounds? Currently, on game days, I do not have it in my car/possession since I don't wish to violate any laws.
Thanks,

EdH
TVI
 
No. No firearms on school grounds. INAL, but I believe the only exception would be on-duty LEO.
IANL, but,...

The federal prohibition does not kick in if you are licensed by the state to possess on school grounds. The exact nature of the typical "school ban" varies by state. In MA the ban is against "carry on ones person", not "possession on grounds". Court decisions are clear on the distinction (because subsection 10j contains a less comprehensive prohibition that other subsections of MGL 269), however, police training does not seem to cover this subtle, but important, distinction. Consult a real attorney for answers before you rely on any of this.
 
Not sure, but I thought NH allowed licensed carry on school grounds?

No, part of the federal law, requires certain oversight in the licensing process. NH does not have any oversight as if you are not a felon you pretty much get a license, as well as some town clerks/selectmen are responsible for issuing of permits in NH.
 
This is the part of the law that prevents you from having it in NH:

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;

However, I believe you can get by with this:

iii) that is -
(I) not loaded; and
(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is
on a motor vehicle;

As my SIG says, IANAL...
 
So, based on:
Title 18, United State Code, Section 922, paragraph (q) is the Gun Free School Zones Act. You can’t have a gun in, on the grounds of, or within 1,000 feet of the property line of, an elementary or secondary school, whether public or private. (Note that this doesn’t include colleges or universities.)

What if you drive by a school while carrying or are walking by to get from point A to point B?
 
Thanks guys. I was hoping that a lawyer-type would chime in but I think I'll just leave my pistol home when I travel to my daughter's away games. I obviously don't carry to her home games.

Unfortunately we don't have any NH gun lawyers on the board. If you are a PGNH or GONH member, you can try to give them a call and talk to someone there.
 
I don't believe that to be correct. They run a check on you. If you're not a felon, you're qualified under NH law. Thus, you're qualified by law. I just don't get why that NH group would see otherwise, as the wording in the federal law seems to be pretty clear.
 
Last edited:
Unless NH has a law against it I don't see what the problem is.

GFSZ = toothless.

-Mike
 
Well, since this is about NH gun laws . . .

Fed Law ONLY exempts LTC/CCW permit holders if a LEO issues them. [See quoted Fed Law posted earlier in this thread.]

In NH, statutorily, the Selectmen or other NON-LEO town management personnel are/can be the issuing authority. That is why NH permits don't conform to the Fed Law on schools and guns.
 
In NH, statutorily, the Selectmen or other NON-LEO town management personnel are/can be the issuing authority. That is why NH permits don't conform to the Fed Law on schools and guns.

The way I read the law it states

(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm 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;

Of course, the question of the day is, in NH, who conducts the
background check? Presumably, these checks would probably be
actually conducted by the local PD or the state PD. Technically, this would
mean that the "law enforcement authority" verified that the individual was
qualified.

I guess it depends on how one qualifies "law enforcment authority".

Here;s a nice piece of trivia I found on Wikipedia:

Congress re-enacted the law in the GFSZ Act of 1995, following the Supreme Court's ruling, correcting the technical defects identified by the Court by adding section 3(A) placing the burden on the prosecutor to prove an additional element that the gun, " has moved in or otherwise affects interstate commerce."[1].

So I guess this means that if you want to carry in a school in NH, and are REALLY concerned about the never-enforced GFSZ, that you should just buy an NH manufactured SigSauer handgun. (tongue firmly implanted in cheek)

I'm further surprised that GFSZ hasn't been repealed entirely... thats how
much of a piece of crap it is. [laugh]

-Mike
 
Mike,

Selectmen, mayors and town managers aren't LEOs, thus the NH permit law fails the Fed requirements in the para that you quoted above.

Not my opinion, but something that I read . . . I think it was a legal opinion posted on one of the 3 NH pro-gun org sites, but I am not 100% positive.
 
Well with everything being said... it is federal law, and don't ask don't tell.... conceal carry so people can't see, lock properly in your car without anyone knowing....and please don't be a test case.
 
I agree Doobie. We had a stupid ass selectman here go into the town hall and he started making a stink about whether people were allowed to CCW in the town hall and that nobody would ever know if someone was armed at a town hall meeting (they get heated as most town meetings do) and this selectman was all flippy about it and he had a CCW and told them he was carrying and that he wanted to know if it was legal cause it didn't seem right to have people CCW during town meetings and such and someone could get really mad and go postal cause they couldn't get their frigging building permit or start a home based business cause the selectmen had a phone pole up their collective asses or some such thing. Well, phew, if the guy has a CCW, he should get it revoked. A CONCEALED firearm is just that, and law abiding citizens are the only ones who should CCW. By enacting some stupid ordinance you will NOT prevent criminals and irrisponsible residents from carrying into a meeting. He should never have approached it the way he did and essentially he can no longer truly CCW around here cause everyone knows!! Concealed is from sight and really knowledge too. The element of surprise is gone once people know you CCW. If I knew someone CCW'ed and I wanted to steal their gun or attack them for some reason, I would handle the attack WAY differently knowing they were packing. Inside of 20ft, ya'll aren't getting your pistol out of a holster from under your jacket before someone wacks you with a bat or punches you square in the face, as research has shown. I think they say an attacker can cover 21ft in mere seconds.

Conceal it, lock it up, do what you have to to keep yourself safe. Always explain to people that a sign saying "No firearms and weapons allowed" will only make the law abiding honest people unarmed. Criminals by definition do NOT follow the law, so if they want to possess a weapon where it is a no no, they will.
 
GOAL's response to a similar question.

I recently sought advise on this question after having been asked during one of my classes about it. Here is the content of my question and the response that GOAL sent me:


While teaching an NRA Basic Pistol Course a few weeks ago I was confronted by one of the students who recounted a situation I was unclear about answering.

He was with his brother driving across the campus of one of our community colleges. They were on their way to another family members home having come from a gun club meeting. The handguns that had been used at the club were properly secured within a locked case, unloaded and that case was in the trunk of their sedan. The Ammunition was in a seperate locked ammo box also in the trunk. They were stopped by the local police department at the exit of the campus due to having a broken headlamp. Apparently they were warned about the lamp and at some time in the conversation one of them stated they were on their way back from a gun club. The officer apparently lectured them about possessing firearms on a school's property and how fortunate they were that he was not going to arrest them.

Am I incorrect in saying that in this scenario they were "transporting" their firearms and not "possessing" them? I have believed that "possession" was specific to carrying the firearm on ones person.

Therefore, the question is, can you drive across school property if your firearms are properly locked and stored for transport according to acceptable practices and laws? Why would the officer seem to indicate that firearms being transported suddenly become in possession just because it is school property.

Inquiring minds want to know. Am I correct that this seems incorrect or was the officer correct and the driver was flirting with jail when he crossed the school boundry?


This was the response:

"GOAL would never, ever, advocate taking a gun onto any school grounds without getting prior written permission.

The actual language of the law is found in Chapter 269, section 10 of the general laws, in paragraph (j).
(j) Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer, and notwithstanding any license obtained by him under the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty, carries on his person a firearm as hereinafter defined, loaded or unloaded or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university without the written authorization of the board or officer in charge of such elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means.

Any officer in charge of an elementary or secondary school, college or university or any faculty member or administrative officer of an elementary or secondary school, college or university failing to report violations of this paragraph shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars.

What a person transporting guns across the campus is risking that the arresting officer would not believe that you can transport without carrying on your person. Semantics, I know... and one ought to be able to carry, but we would not advise anyone to be the test case!! and that is what we are talking about here.


GOAL STAFF"
 
Not my opinion, but something that I read . . . I think it was a legal opinion posted on one of the 3 NH pro-gun org sites, but I am not 100% positive.

Probably something like this:

Unfortunately, New Hampshire state law (RSA 159:6) arguably does NOT make the cut, in part because town selectmen and city mayors can issue carry licenses, and they’re not “law enforcement authorities.” But even if your carry license was issued by a police chief, it doesn’t protect you, because our state law doesn’t meet the requirements of the federal law.

I see their point- eg, 159:6 is "vague" so they are unsure whether or
not it meets the "requirement" posited in GFSZ.

Of course, some of this lies within 159:6, eg "and that the applicant is a suitable person to be licensed." The problem is without knowing what that means, if it's not codified in law, it doesn't mean much WRT GFSZ,
even if the default posture of those issuing licenses is to request a BG check from the city/state PD, etc.

What a mess, that's all I can say. Would be interesting if there are any successful GFSZ prosecutions after US v Lopez given that SCOTUS basically says "feds can't do this unless it meets multi pronged test. " It would appear the feds recognized part of this because they added one prong to the actual law (the "gun moving in interstate commerce" test) but they seemed to blatantly ignore the other issues that SCOTUS clearly raised.


-Mike
 
Last edited:
Mike,

Yes that was exactly what I was referring to. Where did you find it?

------------

Scouter-Rick,

Sounds like the Bridgewater State issue. IIRC State highway (or other major road) runs thru the campus.

They were DUMB for mentioning that they were coming from a gun club. Open mouth, insert foot here! Nothing like creating your own troubles.
 
They were DUMB for mentioning that they were coming from a gun club. Open mouth, insert foot here! Nothing like creating your own troubles.

No kidding LenS, don't volunteer info, there are a few LEO's who just don't know the gun laws, and they might make your life hell even over a law you didn't break.

To the OP, I'd say park off of the school grounds with the gun locked in the trunk. Most high school sports events have people parking all over the streets surrounding the school anyway, so why not? It shouldn't seem that unusual.
 
Back
Top Bottom