Can an off duty LEO carry a firearm on school property?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Taylorz71

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 21, 2011
    677
    16
    Central IN
    I have a question that INGO members can hep me straighten out. I have been researching this for a while, and the recent school indecent and discussions prompted me to ask you guys. Can an off duy LEO carry a firearm on school property? Many departments consider the LEO's on duty 24/7 so does that constitute official capacity? I know that IC 35-47-9 states the LEO is except from the IC code that restricts firearms at schools, but does that trump the 1995 Gun Free School Zone Act?

    The Gun Free School Zones Act states:[6]
    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
    (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;
    (iii) that is— (I) not loaded; and (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
    (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
    (v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
    (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
    (vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.
    (3) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), it shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the person knows is a school zone. (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the discharge of a firearm—
    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
    (ii) as part of a program approved by a school in the school zone, by an individual who is participating in the program;
    (iii) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in a school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual; or
    (iv) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity.
    (4) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as preempting or preventing a State or local government from enacting a statute establishing gun free school zones as provided in this subsection.
    [edit]Definitions
    Title 18 U.S.C. §921(25) The term “school zone” means— (A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or (B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school. (26) The term “school” means a school which provides elementary or secondary education, as determined under State law.
    [edit]Penalty
    Title 18 U.S.C Section 924(a) establishes the penalty for violating GFSZA:
    Whoever violates the Act shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the term of imprisonment imposed under this paragraph shall not run concurrently with any other term of imprisonment imposed under any other provision of law.
    Note: A conviction under the GFSZA will cause an individual to become a "prohibited person" under the Gun Control Act of 1968. This will bar them from legally owning firearms for the rest of their life.
    [edit]Effect
    The GFSZA Deters Unlicensed Carry:
    Most states allow some form of unlicensed carry by law-abiding citizens.[10] This may be open-carry,[10] vehicle-carry,[11] or concealed carry without the need for a permit.[12] The Federal GFSZA deters unlicensed carry by making it a federal crime for an unlicensed individual to travel into a "Gun Free School Zone." [13][14][15][16] The large number of K-12 schools in developed areas makes it difficult for an individual to travel any distance without entering a Gun Free School Zone.[2][13][14][16]
    Reciprocity Agreements Between States Do Not Qualify as GFSZA Exception
    Although the Federal GFSZA does provide an exception for an individual licensed to carry a firearm,[7] this exception only applies in the State that physically issued the permit.[2][13][16][17] Forty-nine (49) States have provisions to issue concealed carry permits to citizens.[18] Most of these States also enter into reciprocity agreements with other States where each State agrees to recognize the other's concealed carry permits, just as they recognize an out-of-state driver's license.[18] Because the Federal GFSZA requires the permit be issued by the State in which the school zone is in, it is effectively impossible for a permit holder to travel outside their State of issuance to a reciprocating State without violating the Federal GFSZA.[2][13][16][17]
    Off-duty LEOSA Qualified Police Officers Not Exempt
    The Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act (LEOSA) which was intended to give qualified law enforcement officers the protection of carrying nation-wide does not provide any exceptions to Federal Law.[19] Although the GFSZA does provide an exception for a law-enforcement officer performing their official duties,[7] it does not provide any protection for an off-duty officer.[15] An off-duty LEOSA qualified officer is unable to legally travel within one-thousand (1000) feet of any K-12 school while armed unless he has a valid carry license issued by that state. [13][15][16]

    Than you

    (not sure if this topic goes here)
     

    45fan

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Apr 20, 2011
    2,388
    48
    East central IN
    Now you have done it!! the Federal code in the Library of Congress is going to implode, creating a black hole that will suck in all of Washington.

    Seriously though, the officer would have to be found out to be carrying first, reported, after I am sure whoever finds them out has been told that they are LE, then, convince a fellow officer to arrest the officer. Before anything could come of it, I would imagine that the offending officer's department would produce some official document that would make the issue go away.
     

    lrahm

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 17, 2011
    3,584
    113
    Newburgh
    I drive a take home car, am I not suppose to carry when I pick my sone up from school? Food for thought.
     

    HCRMPD1

    Marksman
    Rating - 98%
    49   1   0
    Jan 4, 2012
    224
    43
    Shelbyville
    Simply put, don't read too much into this issue.

    The federal law gives some direction, but does not make the matter clear. I would have to read the definitions section to determine what they consider a law enforcment officer's "acting in his or her" official capacity.

    Yes, it is so written; however, 41mph in a 40mph zone is still speeding but there is still a common sense enforcement. Kind of following some of the logic of 45fan's post.
     

    lrahm

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 17, 2011
    3,584
    113
    Newburgh
    I hope they're not allowed to.
    Please expound, why? I'm not trying to start an argument. I've been through almost every school in my city a couple dozen times. I have maps of the schools on my computer. I know almost all of the hiding spots. I've been through almost each one in the dark and light. I would think that if something happens you would want someone there. Not trying to start an argument.
     

    Jack Burton

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 9, 2008
    2,432
    48
    NWI
    Please expound, why? I'm not trying to start an argument. I've been through almost every school in my city a couple dozen times. I have maps of the schools on my computer. I know almost all of the hiding spots. I've been through almost each one in the dark and light. I would think that if something happens you would want someone there. Not trying to start an argument.

    because it helps create the impression that there are two classes of citizens.... regular people and LEOS who have much greater rights than the rest of us. Many ccw holders were against allowing retired cops to carry in other states for the same reason. When they are not on the job they should have to live with the very same rules that govern the rest of us. If they get special rules it takes away any incentive for their community to work hand in hand with us to change the rules to make it better for everyone.

    ETA: for instance... if "something happened" wouldn't you want a LTC holder to be "someone there" if it meant saving a life? It's not going to happen, though, with the current law. If it is important that a off duty LEO be able to be "there" then it is equally important that a LTC have the ability to be there.
     

    lrahm

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 17, 2011
    3,584
    113
    Newburgh
    because it helps create the impression that there are two classes of citizens.... regular people and LEOS who have much greater rights than the rest of us. Many ccw holders were against allowing retired cops to carry in other states for the same reason. When they are not on the job they should have to live with the very same rules that govern the rest of us. If they get special rules it takes away any incentive for their community to work hand in hand with us to change the rules to make it better for everyone.

    ETA: for instance... if "something happened" wouldn't you want a LTC holder to be "someone there" if it meant saving a life? It's not going to happen, though, with the current law. If it is important that a off duty LEO be able to be "there" then it is equally important that a LTC have the ability to be there.


    I didn't make the law and I have not commented on the changes. If it were my kids in the school I too would have different views if "something happened". I agree with your thoughts but once again I did not make the law. The children we have are our most important assets (period).
     

    cobber

    Parrot Daddy
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    44   0   0
    Sep 14, 2011
    10,289
    149
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    (So why didn't W work to repeal this?:dunno:)

    What a mess. Apparently licensed gun owners can carry within 1000 feet of a GFSZA, but an off-duty LEO can't?

    Congress should just declare, once and for all, that all American citizens are convicted felons by reason of birth, and are not entitled to carry arms, enjoy privacy, challenge the powers-that-be, or express dissent, etc. This would be the secular version of Original Sin. (And you thought there was separation of church and state?)

    Time to push the restart button. Just repeal ALL federal laws and start from scratch.

    We ought not to let congress pass bills they cannot explain to their constituents in English. Or let them have any sharp objects.
     

    Gabriel

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jun 3, 2010
    6,769
    113
    The shore of wonderful Lake Michigan
    ETA: for instance... if "something happened" wouldn't you want a LTC holder to be "someone there" if it meant saving a life? It's not going to happen, though, with the current law. If it is important that a off duty LEO be able to be "there" then it is equally important that a LTC have the ability to be there.

    Not really. I at least know that another officer has had training and at least knows how to use his/her firearm. I don'ty have the same confidence in someone who sent out for a pink piece of paper, then bought some handgun and stuck it in their holster.
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Not really. I at least know that another officer has had training and at least knows how to use his/her firearm. I don'ty have the same confidence in someone who sent out for a pink piece of paper, then bought some handgun and stuck it in their holster.

    How insulting and condescending! You'd rather have no backup at all than have one of us "underlings" there? Please let us know in what jurisdiction you work so no one ever comes to the aid of any LEO there.

    I respect the job that LEOs do as long as they live up to their oath and hold it inviolate. I do not respect this derisive holier-than-thou attitude you express here.

    Nonetheless, as always, I sign with

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Not really. I at least know that another officer has had training and at least knows how to use his/her firearm. I don'ty have the same confidence in someone who sent out for a pink piece of paper, then bought some handgun and stuck it in their holster.

    Now your going to get it!

    (waits for the fury)
     

    printcraft

    INGO Clown
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Feb 14, 2008
    39,063
    113
    Uranus
    Not really. I at least know that another officer has had training and at least knows how to use his/her firearm. I don'ty have the same confidence in someone who sent out for a pink piece of paper, then bought some handgun and stuck it in their holster.


    Again..........


    Not-sure-if-serious.jpg


    Shirley Knot.
     
    Last edited:

    Dwight

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Apr 24, 2011
    299
    28
    Sheridan
    Not really. I at least know that another officer has had training and at least knows how to use his/her firearm. I don'ty have the same confidence in someone who sent out for a pink piece of paper, then bought some handgun and stuck it in their holster.

    Are you freakin' serious? Someone please explain the use of purple for sarcasm...

    I've walked both sides of the line and I hold my LEO friends in high regard.

    HOWEVER, I am more than happy to have any of my LTCH buddies on the scene if things go bad. Many more well trained, responsible civilian gun owners on the streets than you know. Much better chance of minimizing a tragedy if we can respond than if we have to wait for LE. Frankly, my civilian friends shoot more, shoot better and handle safer than many badge holders....
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Are you freakin' serious? Someone please explain the use of purple for sarcasm...

    I've walked both sides of the line and I hold my LEO friends in high regard.

    HOWEVER, I am more than happy to have any of my LTCH buddies on the scene if things go bad. Many more well trained, responsible civilian gun owners on the streets than you know. Much better chance of minimizing a tragedy if we can respond than if we have to wait for LE. Frankly, my civilian friends shoot more, shoot better and handle safer than many badge holders....

    You're speaking from a personal perspective. However, I will side by you in that my non-LEO friends can shoot equally well, probably better, than many of the officers I know.... BUT, they're shooters.

    IMO, and I have no facts to back this up, other than seeing people muzzle sweep me, pound on double feeds, and pull triggers with TWO fingers, while at a civilian range, I tend to believe that the average LE is a better with firearms than the average gun owner. I specifically stated owner, not shooter.
     

    Indy317

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 27, 2008
    2,495
    38
    I know that IC 35-47-9 states the LEO is except from the IC code that restricts firearms at schools, but does that trump the 1995 Gun Free School Zone Act?

    (3) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), it shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the person knows is a school zone. (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the discharge of a firearm—
    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
    (ii) as part of a program approved by a school in the school zone, by an individual who is participating in the program;
    (iii) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in a school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual; or
    (iv) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity.

    It appears the part you emphasized only applies to the actual firing of a gun, not carrying.
     

    Chesh97

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 28, 2011
    316
    18
    NE Indiana
    I drive a take home car, am I not suppose to carry when I pick my sone up from school? Food for thought.

    Our SOP's state you cannot be in a marked unit without being armed. They have gone so far as to even issue off-duty carry weapons. (Baby glocks)
     
    Top Bottom