School zone - school ground

[selk]

Do I understand it right that it is against the law in MA to drive past school zone signs when carrying? Or are public roads not considered school ground?

 

[Chevy 2 65]

PUBLIC road. Get it?

 

[spcantwell]

I belive the consensus is that the law refers to 'school property' hence driving through boston where colleges take up both sides of major roadways. That said it's more then possible in this state for a few levels (arresting officer, prosecution, or judge) to consider anyplace that anyplace that has any sort of education involved at the site to have a magic gun free bobble around it and you are guilty until proven innocent.

That all said, conceled is conceled and simply driving by a school should not give anyone a reason to question if you are carrying

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[jimnasium]

I was curious about this because I pick my son up after school. The law says you cannot carry a firearm within 1000 ft of a school zone . including public walkways , roads and highways. Several years ago a woman was prosecuted for having a gun in her apartment .One of her neighbors ratted her out. she lived in a housing project that was less than 1000 ft from a school zone.

 

[dragonballzz]

A coworker told me that his firearms lawyer said it is NOT illegal to carry at a school. The lawyer said he will take the case if my coworker wanted to test it but also asked my coworker if it was worth it to be the guinea pig.

Any thoughts?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I was curious about this because I pick my son up after school. The law says you cannot carry a firearm within 1000 ft of a school zone . including public walkways , roads and highways. Several years ago a woman was prosecuted for having a gun in her apartment .One of her neighbors ratted her out. she lived in a housing project that was less than 1000 ft from a school zone.

The federal law says 1000ft unless you have a state issued permit authorizing carry. The MA LTC authorizes such carry withing the school zone, but not on the buildings or grounds of school. See my next post for more details.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

A coworker told me that his firearms lawyer said it is NOT illegal to carry at a school. The lawyer said he will take the case if my coworker wanted to test it but also asked my coworker if it was worth it to be the guinea pig.

Any thoughts?

MGL 269-10j is clear - it is unlawful to carry a firearm or dangerous weapon on one's person on school property without formal permission from the administration of the school or police officer status. The "catch" is that "on one's person" is generally ignored by police and prosecutors until a well paid attorney gets involved.

Unless the attorney was thinking about something like a gun in the trunk of a car, I can't imagine what legal theory (s)he would use to argue that 269-10j does not apply. Remember "will take the case" is lawyer speak for "will take your money with no guarantee as to outcome".

 

[Greschner 4]

MGL 269-10j is clear - it is unlawful to carry a firearm or dangerous weapon on one's person on school property without formal permission from the administration of the school or police officer status. The "catch" is that "on one's person" is generally ignored by police and prosecutors until a well paid attorney gets involved.

Unless the attorney was thinking about something like a gun in the trunk of a car, I can't imagine what legal theory (s)he would use to argue that 269-10j does not apply. Remember "will take the case" is lawyer speak for "will take your money with no guarantee as to outcome".

Rob - this has been discussed at length in another thread (can't locate). I was always under the impression (prior to being illuminated in that thread) that it was acceptable to have a firearm on school grounds PROVIDED it is locked in your trunk, unloaded, with the ammo secured in the locked trunk. But, there was particular MGL language that made that interpretation not acceptable.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Rob - this has been discussed at length in another thread (can't locate). I was always under the impression (prior to being illuminated in that thread) that it was acceptable to have a firearm on school grounds PROVIDED it is locked in your trunk, unloaded, with the ammo secured in the locked trunk. But, there was particular MGL language that made that interpretation not acceptable.

I'd be interested in hearing what interpretation you are alluding to.

There is one bit of dicta where the SJC mentions ammo on school property is illegal, however, they do not go into detail, and the issue of "on one's person" was not raised or addressed in that dicta.

The reason it is unacceptable lon a practice level is that police, particularly campus police, specifically refuse to accept the qualifier "on one's person" as having any meaning. I do know of cases where the 269-10j charge once defense counsel pointed this out (and, in one such case, it was refiled as a storage violation since the unattended gun was in the passenger compartment of the car, not the trunk, when stored). I also know of a case where the judge in a campus in-the-car possession case started out with "not interested in hearing any argument challenging the validity of the warrant".

I have seen a search warrant application, that was accepted by the court, in which the police stated that "possession of a gun in the car by a person known to possess a valid LTC was a crime" - in effect, issuing a warrant based on suspicion of lawful behavior.

 

[MisterHappy]

There have been cases (one known to me personally) where a firearm (general term, not the MGL definition) that was in a locked car became a problem, as the car was on the property of a Mass. State college/university.

It was not on the person of the individual, but they still got a world of pain.

By written law (cited above), it's not unlawful, but as the video clip that gets posted frequently, "Everything is illegal in Massachusetts."

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It was not on the person of the individual, but they still got a world of pain.

I'll bet that pain did not result in a 269-10j conviction. But, expect an aggressive prosecutorial response. This is where you can expect the dismissal of charges to be followed up with a possible storage violation, and maybe even a MSP lab analysis of the mags to see if they can bring a post-ban mag charge. If you beat the system on the bogus "possession not one one's person" charge, it will be mad and will bite back.

 

[Greschner 4]

I'd be interested in hearing what interpretation you are alluding to.

There is one bit of dicta where the SJC mentions ammo on school property is illegal, however, they do not go into detail, and the issue of "on one's person" was not raised or addressed in that dicta.

The reason it is unacceptable lon a practice level is that police, particularly campus police, specifically refuse to accept the qualifier "on one's person" as having any meaning. I do know of cases where the 269-10j charge once defense counsel pointed this out (and, in one such case, it was refiled as a storage violation since the unattended gun was in the passenger compartment of the car, not the trunk, when stored). I also know of a case where the judge in a campus in-the-car possession case started out with "not interested in hearing any argument challenging the validity of the warrant".

I have seen a search warrant application, that was accepted by the court, in which the police stated that "possession of a gun in the car by a person known to possess a valid LTC was a crime" - in effect, issuing a warrant based on suspicion of lawful behavior.

Here's the thread - great info: http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...-a-pistol-in-the-car?highlight=school+grounds

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Here's the thread - great info: http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...-a-pistol-in-the-car?highlight=school+grounds

I believe the Whitehead case contained dicta stating possession was illegal on school grounds, however, that was not the basis for his conviction and the "on one's person" exemption was neither applicable or addressed.

 

[MisterHappy]

I'll bet that pain did not result in a 269-10j conviction. But, expect an aggressive prosecutorial response. This is where you can expect the dismissal of charges to be followed up with a possible storage violation, and maybe even a MSP lab analysis of the mags to see if they can bring a post-ban mag charge. If you beat the system on the bogus "possession not one one's person" charge, it will be mad and will bite back.

IIRC, the gun in question was something like a Mosin-Nagant, not even an EBR, or handgun.

 

[joe1231913]

I am a police officer at a large state university in MA. I have had this discussion with my co-workers. Some are gun guys, some aren't. The general consensus is to make the arrest and let the court sort it out. Until it becomes case law, the officer is covered under good faith. In my opinion, carrying on ones person is different than transporting in a trunk locked...I would not make an arrest personally but I think most college PO's would.