Handgun on school property

[cadillacdude1975]

i had an event at the elementary school here last week. it was friday, donuts for dads, where you can go get juice and a donut with your kid before school, they pay for it from the pta funds.

so im sitting there about to take him to class, and low and behold, an armed police officer walked in with his kid and sat down for donuts and juice. talk about a double standard huh.

i thought about calling the local PD and raising hell, but i figured it was not worth my time.

[Guest mikedwood]

Good job of laying it out Fallguy.

My understanding is that:

When they 1st had HCP in Tennesse if you were driving though a school zone carrying you were breaking the law. Not the school itself even. The zone where you have to slow down to 20 mph or whatever.

Then they changed the law to make it where that was legal (cause it was ridiculous) to drive through a school zone.

They also made it where you can pick up a child from school and not worry about having to unholster. As long as the gun is secure on your person and no one is monkeying with it.

They also had the foresight to make it where if you were carrying and your precious little angel was sick or for some reason you had to enter the school. You wouldn't have to take the gun home 1st or leave it somewhere else. Unload it off school property and lock it up, probably the ammo locked in a seperate place from the firearm. Then you can enter school property and as a result of being unarmed the school itself.

All that said, I try my best to stay away from schools.

[Guest Patty]

i had an event at the elementary school here last week. it was friday, donuts for dads, where you can go get juice and a donut with your kid before school, they pay for it from the pta funds.

so im sitting there about to take him to class, and low and behold, an armed police officer walked in with his kid and sat down for donuts and juice. talk about a double standard huh.

i thought about calling the local PD and raising hell, but i figured it was not worth my time.

Excuse me Sir, are you here as a parent or are you here on Police Business. Would you mind removing your weapon from the school property, now. Or do I need to call the dispatcher now. Just loud enough to be heard all over the room.

[Guest Patty]

Good job of laying it out Fallguy.

My understanding is that:

When they 1st had HCP in Tennesse if you were driving though a school zone carrying you were breaking the law. Not the school itself even. The zone where you have to slow down to 20 mph or whatever.

Then they changed the law to make it where that was legal (cause it was ridiculous) to drive through a school zone.

They also made it where you can pick up a child from school and not worry about having to unholster. As long as the gun is secure on your person and no one is monkeying with it.

They also had the foresight to make it where if you were carrying and your precious little angel was sick or for some reason you had to enter the school. You wouldn't have to take the gun home 1st or leave it somewhere else. Unload it off school property and lock it up, probably the ammo locked in a seperate place from the firearm. Then you can enter school property and as a result of being unarmed the school itself.

All that said, I try my best to stay away from schools.

They make jail cells big enough for two people at a time., lol

[TNTitan]

If its your car, and your gun. You would be charged. But you might be charged with a different crime than possession.

what charge would that be?

[Oh Shoot]

what charge would that be?

Intent to go disarmed, I guess.

Right, Patty?

- OS

[Fallguy]

If its your car, and your gun. You would be charged. But you might be charged with a different crime than possession.

How can they prove who the gun belongs to? Remember, there is no firearms registration in TN.

So what other charge could there be?

[Fallguy]

i had an event at the elementary school here last week. it was friday, donuts for dads, where you can go get juice and a donut with your kid before school, they pay for it from the pta funds.

so im sitting there about to take him to class, and low and behold, an armed police officer walked in with his kid and sat down for donuts and juice. talk about a double standard huh.

i thought about calling the local PD and raising hell, but i figured it was not worth my time.

As long as the officer informed the principal, or if he was unvailable, someone in the office, he was 100% legal.

[Guest Mugster]

How can they prove who the gun belongs to? Remember, there is no firearms registration in TN.

So what other charge could there be?

Trespassing and resisting arrest with your gun seized?

I'm just tossing some fuel on the fire, I don't really have a dog in the fight.

[Fallguy]

Trespassing and resisting arrest with your gun seized?

I'm just tossing some fuel on the fire, I don't really have a dog in the fight.

Huh, If you are at school for the ball game, to see your child's teacher or the like, how are you trespassing?

Resiting arrest by the fact there is a weapon in your vehicle?

If the gun is seized, you may have to prove it is yours to get it back, but I grant the gun being in your vehicle, it's yours whether it really is or not.

Wrong fuel for this fire.....

[Guest Patty]

I am not sure, of which. What charge would you plea out to.

[Guest Patty]

Intent to go disarmed, I guess.

Right, Patty?

- OS

I think that if he wanted to go armless, that would be ok, lol.

[Fallguy]

I am not sure, of which. What charge would you plea out to.

First I'm not sure how anyone would ever know there was a handgun in my vehicle in the first place.

But if somehow it was discovered and I was charged (which is not a certainty), I would not plead guilty to anything.

[Oh Shoot]

I am not sure, of which. What charge would you plea out to.

Intent to go disarmed.

Improvised non-explosive device.

Actually you can't cop a plea until you're charged with something.

You're really trying to find a problem within a solution that already exists.

- OS

[Fallguy]

FWIW

I can not find a case on the TN Courts website that specifically deals with this.

Also I think there was a bill introduced to clarify this, but I believe Rep West was the sponsor and it was one of the bills delayed because of his health.

A simple solution to this, parks, employer's parking lots and so on, would be to simply make the possession of weapon in your car the same as being in your home.

[Guest Patty]

Intent to go disarmed.

Improvised non-explosive device.

Actually you can't cop a plea until you're charged with something.

You're really trying to find a problem within a solution that already exists.

- OS

Thats what I said. And the solution would be to avoid the problem in the first place. And what was being suggested was not a solution.

[Fallguy]

Found the bill Tennessee General Assembly Legislation

With a little luck this will be clearly legal next year.

[Guest mikedwood]

A public park, and being on school property are not the same.

They are if there is a school function taking place in a public park.

[Guest Patty]

Found the bill Tennessee General Assembly Legislation

With a little luck this will be clearly legal next year.

Isn't it clearly illegal now, lol

[Fallguy]

Isn't it clearly illegal now, lol

Not to me..

All it really seems to be changing is the fact you can leave it in any private vehicle and not just one operated (not necessarily currently operating) by you.

It also adds it as an exception instead of saying "it is not an offense".

Edited September 6, 2009 by Fallguy

[Guest Mugster]

Seems like there was a ruckus where one guy threatened another guy with a knife on school property. So the guy that got threatened showed knifeboy his gun and knifeboy drove off. Seems like gunboy called the cops after knifeboy left and got prosecuted for something. I can't remember what that something was though.

I looked for the thread but couldn't find it. Seems like that incident might throw some light on this thing. The laws are still the same I think.

[Guest Bill Lumberg]

For non-law enforcement, no showee no touchee.

[Fallguy]

Seems like there was a ruckus where one guy threatened another guy with a knife on school property. So the guy that got threatened showed knifeboy his gun and knifeboy drove off. Seems like gunboy called the cops after knifeboy left and got prosecuted for something. I can't remember what that something was though.

I looked for the thread but couldn't find it. Seems like that incident might throw some light on this thing. The laws are still the same I think.

Once he touched his gun, he was no longer covered by the law I have cited. So that is why it doesn't directly address the issue we are discussing now.

However he claimed self-defense and the original trial judge agreed and dismissed the charged based on 39-17-1322.

However the state appealed saying the trial judge could not determine it was self-defense at a pre-trial hearing.

The appellate court agreed and submitted the case back for trial.

He later was convicted, not sure of what now. Main reason is the guy with gun said in the trial he just retrieved the handgun and never actually displayed it or used in self-defense. The trial judge actually said had he used it or displayed it in self-defense he probably would not have been guilty. But this case has more to do with 39-17-1322 and not so much 39-17-1309.

[Guest Mugster]

Found some it:

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/21598-when-threaten-judge-says-least-point-your-gun.html

I'd still like to read the legalthinkspeak if you can find the brief online someplace.

[Guest Mugster]

Update.

Actually, I think it is topical. He was convicted of 39-13-1309((1). Here's a quote I found in an opinion piece from woodall, the judge in the case:

"For Appellee to be found guilty as charged, the State would be required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that Appellee knowingly possessed or carried, with the intent to go armed, and whether openly or concealed, any firearm on a public or private school grounds."

And remember the handgun was not loaded (or at least thats what the guy said). It could be the jury didn't believe that.

Since he was found guilty, the guilty verdict had nothing to do with the incident with the knife fighter. IE, he would have been found guilty if it hadn't happened.

So the only question in my mind as to what is legal is exactly what constitutes possession or intent to go armed. If we apply the same rules for "intent to go armed" as when you are driving to the range or something, no ammo or separately locked up ammo or a disabled gun (in theory) removes "intent to go armed". But in this case that didn't keep the guy out of anger management training. Based on this verdict, a non-functional weapon is not a defense, or at least an effective one, for intent to go armed. I did not see if he had ammo in the car or they didn't elaborate.

Thankfully, I have an HCP for driving down the road and they included long guns. This had been one of my worst fears in the last 5-10 years or so. This may now be your only defense from an aggressive DA or police.

I also do not know if a functional loaded weapon locked in the trunk constitutes possession. Thats really the only thing at issue here, imo.