Firearms on School Property SB0319

[revance]

Everyone needs to SUPPORT THIS!

Indiana General Assembly

Firearms on school property. Makes unlawful possession of 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; a Class A misdemeanor instead of a Class D felony. Provides that the law concerning unlawful possession of a firearm in or on school property or in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function does not apply to a person who may legally possess a firearm, possesses a valid license to carry a handgun, is not a student enrolled in the school, and stores a firearm: (1) in a motor vehicle that is parked in or on school property or parked in or on property that is being used by the school for a school function; and (2) that is locked in the trunk of the motor vehicle, kept in the glove compartment of the locked motor vehicle, or stored out of plain sight in the locked motor vehicle

 

[John Galt]

Looks WAAAAAAY better than what we have now!

 

[jblomenberg16]

I agree. It is much closer to a common sense rule, and is less intrusive to a gun owners rights. I think it has a chance of success, since some of the language appears to be similar to the "parking lot" bill from last year that prevented employers from banning posession of guns in parking lots.

 

[Que]

Everyone needs to SUPPORT THIS!

Indiana General Assembly

Firearms on school property. Makes unlawful possession of 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; a Class A misdemeanor instead of a Class D felony. Provides that the law concerning unlawful possession of a firearm in or on school property or in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function does not apply to a person who may legally possess a firearm, possesses a valid license to carry a handgun, is not a student enrolled in the school, and stores a firearm: (1) in a motor vehicle that is parked in or on school property or parked in or on property that is being used by the school for a school function; and (2) that is locked in the trunk of the motor vehicle, kept in the glove compartment of the locked motor vehicle, or stored out of plain sight in the locked motor vehicle

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

 

[singlestacksig]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

well, it is a step in the right direction..

"Section 32. Arms--Right to bear
Section 32. The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

 

[revance]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

The part about being able to leave your gun locked in your car at a school would be a pretty big win for us.

Also, if you take time to research all the crazy places that count as "school property", and the fact the laws are strict liability (so having no way to know you were on school property is NOT a defense), having it be a misdemeanor is GREAT for anyone who carries a gun.

As far as I am concerned, we should be allowed to carry our firearms on our person while in a school.

 

[LPMan59]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

well for one it's a lot better for me if/when i have to go inside my kid's school; i won't have to park in BFE.

 

[mms]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

when i first read it i thought that the statement ment that if you had a license it would no longer be a crime but now that i have reread it several times im in the same boat as you. does it really say that it is a lesser crime if you dont have a license

 

[.40caltrucker]

Am I reading this right?

As long as we have a LTCH we can carry like normal.

Edit: Never mind I read that to fast and got excited.

It's a step in the right direction though.

 

[revance]

Here is an example:

Lets say you park in a vacant lot that is allowing people to park there for a fee. You have your handgun on you. A police officer notices you are carrying a handgun and arrests you for carrying on school property. Little did you know that vacant lot was owned by a school corporation and was leased to a 3rd party that then used it as a parking lot.

There was NO way for you to know who owned the land, but according to the IC it is "school property" just the same and our laws on carrying guns on school property are STRICT LIABILITY! So it doesn't matter that you didn't and couldn't know... you are now a FELON.

So as far as I am concerned, changing that to a misdemeanor is a step in the right direction. Now if they want to still charge those without a LTCH with a felony (because they obviously didn't even attempt to follow the law and probably were up to no good) that is fine with me.

 

[revance]

I added bolding since so many of you are missing the real point here...

if passed we can legally leave our guns in our cars at a school!!!

 

[DocBoCook]

Kinda like Virginia's law. If you stay in the car, you can carry, if you leave your car, you have to put it in your trunk

 

[revance]

when i first read it i thought that the statement ment that if you had a license it would no longer be a crime but now that i have reread it several times im in the same boat as you. does it really say that it is a lesser crime if you dont have a license

No, it says you can leave it locked in your car in the parking lot.

 

[Hoosierdood]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

I would imagine that a person who is not licensed, and who carries a firearm onto school property, a school bus, or a facility being used for a school function would also be commiting other felonious acts as well. How about illegal possession of a firearm? Assault with a deadly weapon? (if it came to that)

The possession on school property would be the least of their concerns.

 

[critter592]

Kinda like Virginia's law. If you stay in the car, you can carry, if you leave your car, you have to put it in your trunk

How do you put it in your trunk without leaving your car? So in your car you are legal but out of car illegal? Then I say again how do you get it to your trunk legally? Gotta put language about car "footprint" or some distance from vehicle is still legal. I get concerned about that too just buckling my little one in his car seat while carrying. I have to stand at the side door to buckle him in. Am I in violation? I'm thinking yes if I'm carrying.

 

[Que]

I added bolding since so many of you are missing the real point here...

if passed we can legally leave our guns in our cars at a school!!!

I'm dense, but not absolutely dumb. I get the point that we can now legally leave our guns in the trunk, as long as we are not a student. However, since the Council is now ran by those who are supposed to be on our side, I anticipated they would find a way to refrain from labeling me a criminal, instead of pacifying my right to bear arms.

Also, I definitely understand you have to crawl before you walk, but we've been crawling a long time concerning this matter. I just expected more. Besides, as a current college student, I am still without the right to protect myself and still can't even keep my firearm in the car, according to this proposal. I hope this explains my ambivalence for the most part.

Also, I'm not killing the messenger. This is a great post that concerns most of us. I just have many questions for the author(s) and I understand you can't answer those.

 

[Bill of Rights]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

It's better because being charged with a felony means you lose not only your LTCH but your ability to lawfully own any gun or ammo. With the misdemeanor, you might still lose the LTCH but maybe not, if you can show that you had no intent, etc. It's a step toward removing that stupid, asinine, law that does nothing at all other than create a Criminal Protection Zone.

Make no mistake, it's still nowhere close to the way things should be or the way they WOULD be if I had anything to say about it, but it moves us toward laws that are less restrictive on those who follow them.... Those who do not follow them are obviously not restricted by them at all.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Que]

It's better because being charged with a felony means you lose not only your LTCH but your ability to lawfully own any gun or ammo. With the misdemeanor, you might still lose the LTCH but maybe not, if you can show that you had no intent, etc. It's a step toward removing that stupid, asinine, law that does nothing at all other than create a Criminal Protection Zone.

Make no mistake, it's still nowhere close to the way things should be or the way they WOULD be if I had anything to say about it, but it moves us toward laws that are less restrictive on those who follow them.... Those who do not follow them are obviously not restricted by them at all.

Blessings,
Bill

Bill, I get everything you said. However, not being one who leans to the left nor right, I understand that -- supposedly -- those who are currently in the majority are more supportive of our rights as citizens. At least those are the sentiments that have been proffered on this forum. If they (Republicans) are in charge, why take baby steps? They have the votes to give us the ability to carry our guns anywhere we desire as long as we are in possession of the LTCH.

If they want to take baby steps, I would prefer they take the baby step of giving me my rights, THEN work on alleviating citizens of the necessity to purchase the LTCH. After all, aren't they (Republicans) supposed to be the friends of the 2A?

Now, I am not sure who authored this proposed amendment, but if it was a Democrat, I would say great move forward. However, if it was a Republican, I say, FAIL.

 

[sj kahr k40]

Que as a COLLEGE student you can LEGALLY have your gun on you on campus as well as locking it in your car, this law has nothing to do with colleges as according to the IC they are not schools

 

[E5RANGER375]

So, basically, a person without a license is charged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony? How is this better for us? What am I missing?

well we shouldn't have to even get a license, so I have no problem with lowering it to a misdemeanor if they are caught. If someone with a gun is going into a school with malicious intent, do you think they care what they are charged with?

I will support this bill. even though, it still falls short of what is constitutional its better than the way the law is now written. lets see how many LE groups stand in this ones way.