Gun Free School Zone: "You can't get there from here."

RickD

Moderator
Senator Di-Fi opened her hypocritical mouth at the Judge Roberts confirmation hearings by first lauding the worth of the 1,000 foot "gun free zone" and then saying that the Supreme Court showed poor judgment in overturning the law in 1995' US v Lopez decision (Congress passed it again the next year).

So, in the map you'll see by going to Alan Korwin's gunlaws.com web site:

http://www.gunlaws.com/Gun_Free_School_Zones.htm

You'll see a map of central Phoenix with as many school zones as the database and GIS software could find and map. About a 1,100 in Maricopa county which has a population of 3.5 million, give or take.

You'll see dots covering major and minor roads throughout metro-Phoenix. (The dots represent the 1,000 foot zone, plus another 300 feet since the zone starts not at the center of the school, but on the sidewalks). So, each dot has a radius of 1,300 feet, and a diameter of 2,600 feet, or about a half mile.

You'll see major highways in red such as Interstate 10 heading west to east through central Phoenix; State Route 51 (Squaw, nay, Pietewa Peak Freeway) and I-17 both heading north/south; and the US 60 heading east into Mesa. The gray lines represent the major surface streets such as Bell Road, Thunderbird, Cactus, Peoria (all east/west in the northern part of Phoenix) as well as north/south streets such as 19th Ave, 35th Ave, etc, in the central-west valley. These are major surface streets WIDE... usually six or even eight lane city streets (fun to cross on foot with the "Don't Walk" sign flashing at you).

To give you some perspective, the blocks made up by the gray roads should be roughly one-square mile (sometimes more, sometimes less) so that two zones, end to end will match the width of most Phoenix city blocks (yes, they are big blocks).

So, as you look over the map which I will post below, you will see that dozens and dozens of school zones block major highways and major surface streets. So, if you're one of the many Arizona citizens who don't have a CCW (only about 70,000 do), if you pass through one of these zones... you're a felon.

Just try to get from Metro Center Mall in NW Phoenix down to the State Capitol in the center of the city. Good luck. Now, look how many surface steets are blocked off at many different places. Some metro-Phoenix citizens are "land-locked" by the GFSZ.

Can't get there from here.

Rick

The following is text from Korwin's press release:

GUN FREE SCHOOL ZONES ACT OF 1990

This act criminalizes every lawful gun owner who travels with a firearm outside the home, with a few narrow exceptions. It was never intended to do this, and needs to be amended. Schools themselves would remain gun-free zones, and the near-total gun ban this law creates would be corrected.

GFSZ%20Phoenix.jpg


Next up is Cleveland. All those Catholic schools? What a mess !!

GFSZ%20Cleveland.jpg
 
You mean, other than US v Lopez, 1995 for GFSZ #1? You're asking has there been prosecutions and appeals for GFSZ #2 which was passed by Congress in 1996?

I am unaware of prosecutions (there might be some), and I am completely, absolutely unaware of any appeals activity.

If you were a fed.gov US Attorney, would you want to get bitch-slapped by the 5th Circuit and then crunched by the USSC which had just ruled on this issue a few years back?

I'd keep a low profile.

http://www.gunlaws.com/images/GFSZ Phoenix.pdf

The link above is a high-rez version of phoenix.

The little-teeny grey lines are neighborhood streets.

Scroll around and see how many areas are totally boxed in by GFSZones.

Rick
 
This act criminalizes every lawful gun owner who travels with a firearm outside the home, with a few narrow exceptions. It was never intended to do this, and needs to be repealed in its entirety [amended]. Schools themselves would remain gun-free zones, and the near-total gun ban this law creates would be corrected.


There -- I corrected it for you. ;)


And, um, are you sure it was "never intended to do this"?

The idea that putting up signs ever made any place a gun free [whatever] zone was laughable on its face the first moment anyone ever conceived it. This is mamsy-pamsy, pollyanna, hopeless idealist leftism at its most pathetic and disgusting.

-blackmind
 
I am curious how far bars and liquor stores have to be from schools and churches. Ever hear of someone with a six pack in the trunk get arrested in the "zone."

It sounds rediculious. When I was in high school the ROTC put on a turkey shoot each Thanksgiving. The marksmen; from the school at large, who shoot the best got a free turkey. It took place in the school basement range. Gotta love Texas - ranges in the school!!!

I just shot the paperclips holding the target up. We'd have 4 shooters at a time. No one would know who did it (shot the paperclip) unless they counted holes in the target. Really pissed some of the guys off. No safty discourse or "qualifing test". Early 90's!!!

Hmmm, something is incongruitive about this law, when some schools even have ranges. I don't know about AZ, but it would be tested quickly here.
 
I've often wondered about the law. My house is within a school zone, and I often pass directly by the elementary school with my CCW on me. Let alone if I'm going to the range and have the jeep loaded up with half my collection.

If that pdf is federal law, then it's good to know that it specifically states right there that private property and licenced 'people' can carry okay in these zones.
 
The problem is that it exempts private property, but not public property such as ... oh... say... ROADS! inside the 1,000 foot radius.
 
Lopez makes the law unConstitutional.
Morrison affirmed Lopez bigtime.
While Raich didn't come through, it didn't overturn Lopez or Morrison.

As a practical matter, worry more about your state and local laws.

But it is irritating that DiFi's GunFreeZone is still on the books.
 
After the Lopez smack-down Congress re-enacted the law with a new section laying out an "interstate commerce" rationale for the restriction, which has yet to be challenged. Alan Korwin covers this in detail in his article.
 
From that map:

In addition, it's illegal to knowingly or with reckless disregard for another person's safety, fire or attempt to fire a gun in a school zone.

So, accidental discharges are ok?

~Dan
 
Im going with Long Path on this one

I just had my CHL class recently.

As put by my Instructor who is a officer for the Sheriffs Dept

Texas law uses the word premises....

which does not include the parking lot nor public roads.

There are other places in Texas where you cant take a handgun even though you have a CCW.....

when in doubt leave it in the car...........was drilled into our little pointy heads
 
GFSZ is a federal law with federal supremacy (assuming the USSC upholds it when it is next challenged). So, state law allowing something (such as marijuana possession in California) won't protect someone from federal law.

Rick
 
Uh huh. Know any federal prosecutors willing to pop a gunowner for peaceably driving down the street? After Lopez?

I don't think so.

Again, the law is bad, but unenforceable.
 
The state of Arizona does not recognize the 1000’ gun free school zone. You can even keep the gun in your car in a school parking lot as long as it is unloaded, out of site and the car is locked. So the only way you can get in trouble in AZ is to be picked up by a federal officer.

Nice little tidbit of information I learned a Gunsite when I was getting my AZ CCW.
 
If they actually expect anyone to listen to that map, they'd practically have to make a "gun route" to follow to get from one side to the other (not that I think it's even possible, without going through a "gun free" zone).

Then again, if you're driving along with your arsenal in the trunk and you pass by a school area that you didn't know was along that road, what do you do then? If you didn't "know" that road lead past a school, would you be ok?
 
If it's locked in the trunk, it falls under one of the exceptions in the law.

Likewise if your CCW license issuance process requires law enforcement to conduct a background check, and you have one.
 
On topic for the last couple of posts ...

Dana Wilke, a D.C.-based reporter snagged Korwin's press release and decided to give Senator DiFi's office...
Alan:

I'm a news reporter here in D.C., and I bounced your release off Feinstein's office.

Her contention is that as long as a gun is unloaded, or in a locked container, it can be carried within 1,000 feet of school grounds.

Can you speak to her remark? Presumably, if she is correct, it seems unlikely that most gunowners have run afoul of the Gun-Free School Zones law. Or, if they have, it seems it would have been simple for them to have avoided breaking the law, simply by unloading their gun or putting it in a locked container.

An emailed reply, either from you or your principals, is preferable.

Thanks ahead for your help.

Best --

Dana Wilkie

Here is Alan Korwin's reply to the reporter:

Dana,

Thanks for your note. There are narrow exceptions, as I pointed out, and the law itself is posted on my site and linked from the news release.

A proper CCW license is an exemption, leaving only 99% of the public (on national average) at risk. The idea that a government permit exempts you from arrest for exercise of a right is, well, you pick an adjective. Can you imagine a similar license requirement for, say, writing editorials? Why would an honest reporter object?

An unloaded gun in a locked container cannot be considered "bearing arms" in any normal sense, and it too is one of the very narrow exceptions. If you locked up your unloaded gun on the way home from a purchase you would be exempt. Hunters "enjoy" the same exemption.

The anti-rights advocates like Sen. Feinstein see this as the "decommissioning" exemption. If a gun is locked, or unloaded, disassembled (as in D.C. or National Parks), or otherwise inaccessible or unusable, it is legal. Any effort that makes the gun usable subjects you to immediate arrest. That is the "fair" allowance Feinstein's office is comfortable with. It represents a nearly total abrogation of rights. Transporting a firearm and bearing arms are substantly different things.

Carry or even possession for personal safety without a license is forbidden under current law. Any sort of unlocked carry is a violation. Loaded carry is a violation. I don't see an exception even for possession at a shooting range within the ban zone. Mens rea is not an issue. Col. Jeff Cooper makes a telling point that sheds light, saying, "A gun that's 'safe' isn't worth anything." This is what, under the onion's layers, Feinstein supports.

Any act of legal self defense against a mortal or other felony assault is a five-year federal crime under the law, if you're within the ubiquitous gun-free zones. It's actually a pretty clever way to achieve a ban, without having to clearly label it as such.

Apologies if I wasn't more clear. This law's contempt for 2A rights violates the oath of office and ought to be grounds for removal IMHO, but then, I'm a moderate. Please forward these remarks to your contact, and I would appreciate seeing any reply you get.

I will be out of town for the next five days, and will reply to any further inquiries then.

Alan.

--
Contact:
Alan Korwin
BLOOMFIELD PRESS
"We publish the gun laws."
4718 E. Cactus #440
Phoenix, AZ 85032
602-996-4020 Phone
602-494-0679 FAX
1-800-707-4020 Orders
http://www.gunlaws.com
alan@gunlaws.com
 
They will be in deep kimchee if they ever start prosecuting this law. Imagine fifty thousand gunnies giving informal talks on the finer points of marksmanship to 500,000 bored prisoners with nothing better to do than listen. :p
 
Back
Top