Can A Public Street Ever Be School Property?

[Mr. Habib]

My 3rd grader has a field trip next week to a fall festival. This festival is held on public streets which have been closed for this event. The field trip takes place during the day before the festival official opening. I believe that law, as it is written, makes it legal to carry there as I am authorized by the school to participate by virtue of my signed volunteer chaperone form and background check. Being required to submit to a background check to attend a public festival with my own daughter is beyond ridiculous, but I digress. I will not be riding the bus or stepping on school property. My question for the INGO legal staff is this. Are these streets school property for the purpose of carrying a handgun. Why or why not? You opinions probably won't sway my decision to carry or not, as I believe, as previously stated, that the IC recognizes my right to carry when read literally. I'm just curious as to your opinions.

 

[FutureButterBar]

my understanding is that anything used for a school function is therefore the schools and has to abide by school laws. that is just the long arm of the school reaching out. not sure how legal that all is, but that is what the school will try. good luck to you with that

 

[GBuck]

IC 35-47-9-1
Exemptions from chapter
Sec. 1. This chapter does not apply to the following:
(1) A:
(A) federal;
(B) state; or
(C) local;
law enforcement officer.
(2) A person who has been employed or authorized by:
(A) a school; or
(B) another person who owns or operates property being used by a school for a school function;
to act as a security guard, perform or participate in a school function, or participate in any other activity authorized by a school.
(3) A person who:
(A) may legally possess a firearm; and
(B) possesses the firearm in a motor vehicle that is being operated by the person to transport another person to or from a school or a school function.
As added by P.L.140-1994, SEC.11.


IC 35-47-9-2
Possession of firearms on school property, at school function, or on school bus; felony
Sec. 2. A person who possesses a firearm:
(1) in or on school property;
(2) in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function; or
(3) on a school bus;
commits a Class D felony.



Based on this, I would say you are incorrect on being able to carry a firearm. IMO you are not a security guard, or performing in or participating in, the event enough to meet the standards of the law. ut as you previously stated, you aren't going to be swayed. So I guess I would say, "concealed means concealed.

It also appears that the streets can be considered part of the school function. Public parks are often considered part of a school function.

 

[jedi]

IC 35-47-9-1
Exemptions from chapter

^This! We just had this topic last week I think and Bill Of Righst posted a long thread where he had a discussion with his ATTY friend who advised him that why you can read the IC literally and it does "exempt you due to the commas" no court case has been done yet and his opinion they ATTY) and other ATTYs are you are going to jail for a felony as no judge is going to rule for you since the "spririt" of the law was to not allow the guns there in the first place.

Need to find the other thread.
Paging BoR!

 

[Bunnykid68]

So, anyone working the festival that may be packin heat instantly becomes a potential felon because the school shows up. Just crazy I say.

 

[jedi]

So, anyone working the festival that may be packin heat instantly becomes a potential felon because the school shows up. Just crazy I say.

Yes/No.

You are talking about 2 different things here.
In the OP he is part of the school function (ie. he is going with the other students and his daughter).

In you text you are NOT part of the school function (you are there & then they showup). This latter is what we refer to as the "rolling felony issue" here on INGO and again NO COURT CASE on this one.

Looking at the IC yes you would be doing a felony if you are at say McDonalds and a bus of school children arrive. However that was not the indent of the law as it was written. It was dedigned to keep "those in school/associated with the school" from having guns outside the school (ie. prom at hotel) property while in a school function.

But again THERE IS NO COURT CASE ON THIS YET!

 

[Taylorz71]

So, anyone working the festival that may be packin heat instantly becomes a potential felon because the school shows up. Just crazy I say.

Agreed it is crazy. First off I don't think we should have to have a permit in the first place, but since we do we should be able to carry anywhere except on private property as I believe a property owner has the right to choose how people should act on said property. I work for a school so I can't even have a firearm in my vehicle when going to work. I am sure they would love to make an example of me right now too. I either have to help change the law or find a different way to put food on the table.

 

[Mr. Habib]

(B) another person who owns or operates property being used by a school for a school function;
to act as a security guard, perform or participate in a school function, or participate in any other activity authorized by a school.
The commas are important. It doesn't say act as a security guard and perform or participate... The comma separates the clauses. To be legal by the strict wording of the law, one would only need to to meet one of the conditions. I am authorized by the school to participate in this activity, therefore according to the law as written I would be legal. Whether or not a jury would have the logic and reading comprehension skills to see that remains to be seen. That is why I would like the code changed as others have suggested to specifically exempt LTCH holders from this prohibition.

 

[GBuck]

(B) another person who owns or operates property being used by a school for a school function;
to act as a security guard, perform or participate in a school function, or participate in any other activity authorized by a school.
The commas are important. It doesn't say act as a security guard and perform or participate... The comma separates the clauses. To be legal by the strict wording of the law, one would only need to to meet one of the conditions. I am authorized by the school to participate in this activity, therefore according to the law as written I would be legal. Whether or not a jury would have the logic and reading comprehension skills to see that remains to be seen. That is why I would like the code changed as others have suggested to specifically exempt LTCH holders from this prohibition.

So how are you "particitpating"? Are you running a booth? Are you hosting an event?

That's my point, you aren't, from what you have stated, actually PARTICIPATING so much as chaperoning. Maybe there isn't a difference, but if you look at it from a cop/jury/judges POV I think you will be hard pressed to say you are in the right according to the law. Is it stupid, sure. Will you probably end up in cuffs if approached, sure.

 

[Mr. Habib]

So how are you "particitpating"? Are you running a booth? Are you hosting an event?

That's my point, you aren't, from what you have stated, actually PARTICIPATING so much as chaperoning. Maybe there isn't a difference, but if you look at it from a cop/jury/judges POV I think you will be hard pressed to say you are in the right according to the law. Is it stupid, sure. Will you probably end up in cuffs if approached, sure.

I agree. The law is very ambiguous, and that's why it needs to be changed. You're also correct about being arrested, although I'm not as certain of the outcome. I don't plan on being the test case, but until there is one this kind of stupidity will continue.

 

[Concerned Citizen]

Sorry my man, but I'm going to have to agree with jediagh's reasoning on this one. It may not be right, but not worth the felony or the battle to the supreme court to avoid it.

 

[GBuck]

I agree. The law is very ambiguous, and that's why it needs to be changed. You're also correct about being arrested, although I'm not as certain of the outcome. I don't plan on being the test case, but until there is one this kind of stupidity will continue.

AGREED, I'd just hate to see it be a fellow INGOer. We are a peaceful bunch, for the most part, and some idiot will eventually provide us with the test case. Let's just not be the idiots ourselves.

 

[Mr. Habib]

Do you know anyone that has an idiot that could borrow?

 

[GBuck]

Do you know anyone that has an idiot that could borrow?

Just look downtown Indy. They will be the ones J-walking.

 

[Mr. Habib]

Thanks.