School Property

[Guest benchpresspower]

Ok I'm sure somewhere this has been discussed before I just cannot find it through the search.

My wife works for a before and after school program for the YMCA at a local elementary school just up the road from us. She is planning on getting her HCP after the first of the year. I know that you cannot carry in a school and that you can drop your kids off as long as its locked up yadda yadda yadda. Would she be in violation (aside from possible company policies) having it locked in her vehicle while at work?

[Oh Shoot]

Ok I'm sure somewhere this has been discussed before I just cannot find it through the search.

My wife works for a before and after school program for the YMCA at a local elementary school just up the road from us. She is planning on getting her HCP after the first of the year. I know that you cannot carry in a school and that you can drop your kids off as long as its locked up yadda yadda yadda. Would she be in violation (aside from possible company policies) having it locked in her vehicle while at work?

Well, all "not a lawyer" disclaimers apply, but, law says:

"It is an offense for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, with the intent to go armed ..."

"possess" would imply that having it in car would be a violation...

"intent to go armed" would imply that having it in car, especially if unloaded, separated from ammo, (even better, in locked case) would not be a violation.

In real world sense, why would anyone search her car, and how could they without a warrant, or at least by calling in a LEO of some sort? And why would they ever do that? Odds close to zero, I'd say.

And in extended real world sense, even if the above did occur, what is the actual likelihood of an otherwise reasonable and law-abiding woman having an unloaded and locked up weapon actually being charged? Odds also close to zero, I'd say.

I taught high school in a previous incarnation many years ago; if I did now, I would have no hesitation to keep a firearm locked and unloaded in my vehicle on school grounds, as far as being "caught". But I would be much more concerned with it being stolen during a random car theft than anything else.

Oh "again, my legal opinions worth same as my retainer" Shoot

Edited December 13, 2008 by OhShoot

[ZenDog]

these laws are in the references at the top of this forum, btw. I would get one of those underseat lock boxes- they stop the casual common thief.

39-17-1309. Carrying weapons on school property. —

It is not an offense under this subsection © for a nonstudent adult to possess a firearm, if the firearm is contained within a private vehicle operated by the adult and is not handled by the adult, or by any other person acting with the expressed or implied consent of the adult, while the vehicle is on school property.

[alwayspackin]

I would definitely recommend a lockbox. A school has the right to search any vehicle on there property at any time. Let’s just look at this example: What if they were going a drug check and the dog accidentally hit on her car. They would then search that vehicle and find the gun under the seat or where ever it is unsecured. She would be fired for bringing a weapon on school property. But if it was in a locked box they might not act on it (you hope). The bottom line is: Is it worth taking the chance of getting fired over? They don't and can’t discriminate staff, visitors or students, as far as the law is concerned. The law is the law and I never said it was right but it is what it is.

Piece of mind is worth a million dollars.

[Oh Shoot]

these laws are in the references at the top of this forum, btw. I would get one of those underseat lock boxes- they stop the casual common thief.

39-17-1309. Carrying weapons on school property. —

It is not an offense under this subsection © for a nonstudent adult to possess a firearm, if the firearm is contained within a private vehicle operated by the adult and is not handled by the adult, or by any other person acting with the expressed or implied consent of the adult, while the vehicle is on school property.

Yeah, there's that, too. However it is not a defense against section (, which says essentially the same thing.

And that has always bemused me - what is the DIFFERENCE between these two sections, as far as firearms are concerned?? :

"( (1) It is an offense for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, with the intent to go armed, any firearm, explosive, explosive weapon, bowie knife, hawk bill knife, ice pick, dagger, slingshot, leaded cane, switchblade knife, blackjack, knuckles or any other weapon of like kind, not used solely for instructional or school-sanctioned ceremonial purposes, in any public or private school building or bus, on any public or private school campus, grounds, recreation area, athletic field or any other property owned, used or operated by any board of education, school, college or university board of trustees, regents or directors for the administration of any public or private educational institution.

(2) A violation of this subsection ( is a Class E felony.

© (1) It is an offense for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, any firearm, not used solely for instructional or school-sanctioned ceremonial purposes, in any public or private school building or bus, on any public or private school campus, grounds, recreation area, athletic field or any other property owned, used or operated by any board of education, school, college or university board of trustees, regents or directors for the administration of any public or private educational institution. It is not an offense under this subsection © for a nonstudent adult to possess a firearm, if the firearm is contained within a private vehicle operated by the adult and is not handled by the adult, or by any other person acting with the expressed or implied consent of the adult, while the vehicle is on school property.

(2) A violation of this subsection © is a Class B misdemeanor."

B is felony C a misdemeanor, but I can't really see any diff as far as firearms?

- OS

[alwayspackin]

Section c is just a little bit more specific. It probably came about when someone got caught with a gun in there car and they where just picking up there kid.

The last sentence talks about if the weapon is contained in the vehicle. Contained can mean different things to different people. To most LEOS it means locked in a box out of reach. In the trunk or behind the seat, not under the drivers seat or locked in the console or the glove box.

But its kind of a gray area. Most local school systems have a policy on this that forbids staff or students of even bringing a weapon onto the property.

I usual leave my weapon in my vehicle (at home I mean) anytime I enter the school. But my back up weapon never leaves me. I just can't get it to go away. Hint hint!! Notice that I said usually. If you go looking for trouble it might just find you. Never run above the radar always go below it if possible.

[Fallguy]

these laws are in the references at the top of this forum, btw. I would get one of those underseat lock boxes- they stop the casual common thief.

39-17-1309. Carrying weapons on school property. —

It is not an offense under this subsection © for a nonstudent adult to possess a firearm, if the firearm is contained within a private vehicle operated by the adult and is not handled by the adult, or by any other person acting with the expressed or implied consent of the adult, while the vehicle is on school property.

+1

[Oh Shoot]

Section c is just a little bit more specific. ...

So why are there different penalties for the two sections?

One is felony, one is misdemeanor.

- OS

[Guest Revelator]

Yeah, there's that, too. However it is not a defense against section (, which says essentially the same thing.

And that has always bemused me - what is the DIFFERENCE between these two sections, as far as firearms are concerned?? :

"( (1) It is an offense for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, with the intent to go armed, any firearm, explosive, explosive weapon, bowie knife, hawk bill knife, ice pick, dagger, slingshot, leaded cane, switchblade knife, blackjack, knuckles or any other weapon of like kind, not used solely for instructional or school-sanctioned ceremonial purposes, in any public or private school building or bus, on any public or private school campus, grounds, recreation area, athletic field or any other property owned, used or operated by any board of education, school, college or university board of trustees, regents or directors for the administration of any public or private educational institution.

(2) A violation of this subsection ( is a Class E felony.

© (1) It is an offense for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, any firearm, not used solely for instructional or school-sanctioned ceremonial purposes, in any public or private school building or bus, on any public or private school campus, grounds, recreation area, athletic field or any other property owned, used or operated by any board of education, school, college or university board of trustees, regents or directors for the administration of any public or private educational institution. It is not an offense under this subsection © for a nonstudent adult to possess a firearm, if the firearm is contained within a private vehicle operated by the adult and is not handled by the adult, or by any other person acting with the expressed or implied consent of the adult, while the vehicle is on school property.

(2) A violation of this subsection © is a Class B misdemeanor."

B is felony C a misdemeanor, but I can't really see any diff as far as firearms?

- OS

I believe the difference is that subsection © was pretty much written specifically for handgun carry permit holders. Notice that ( says "intent to go armed" and © does not. Also ( deals with all types of weapons and © applies just to firearms. I think that for this particular section, "intent to go armed" means carrying a handgun without a permit. What's more, the "It is not an offense" language in © applies nicely to parents who have permits and are picking up or dropping off their kids. I think that was written specifically for them. Anyway, if you look at © applying to permit holders and ( applying to non-permit holders (at least as far as handguns are concerned), it makes more sense. Plus I'd like to think that if I were caught carrying on a school campus I'd be looking at a B misdemeanor rather than an E felony.

[Guest oldhack62]

To repeat what an earlier poster stated: virtually all public school systems in Tennessee have a policy precluding private firearms on school properties. This is much like businesses posting their premises to prohibit them.

Thus, it really doesn't matter so much what the law says if the school system prohibits them anyway. Not unless, anyway, your attitude is, "Nyah, nyah -- you CAN fire me, but you can't have me arrested!"

[Oh Shoot]

I believe the difference is that subsection © was pretty much written specifically for handgun carry permit holders. Notice that ( says "intent to go armed" and © does not. ...

Okay, let's say you are right, and being a lawyer, I'd certainly lean toward your explanation.

But then what's your take on the municipal/state park/recreational statute?

It's only an offense to carry with "intent to go armed".

So it doesn't apply to permit holders?

I've often thought that statute could well be challenged for that reason, and of course the fact that it is worded only to apply to "prohibited weapons" listed in 39-17-1302 (a), which does NOT include firearms.

(and yes I know the TN AG has opined that the INTENT of it was to include firearms).

But if "going armed" can be construed to mean "carrying a loaded weapon without a HCP", then hmmm....

- OS

[Fallguy]

To repeat what an earlier poster stated: virtually all public school systems in Tennessee have a policy precluding private firearms on school properties. This is much like businesses posting their premises to prohibit them.

Thus, it really doesn't matter so much what the law says if the school system prohibits them anyway. Not unless, anyway, your attitude is, "Nyah, nyah -- you CAN fire me, but you can't have me arrested!"

Thankfully I don't work for the school system.

[dralarms]

This is an interesting discussion, however I thought I was clear on "school property" until I read this stuff here.

I was under the impression that if you didn't touch it or let anyone else touch it then it was ok to have it in the car.

I do a lot of work on school property and always disarm before getting to the property and lock them in my portable safe. They are not touched again until I'm off the the school property.

Clarification of this is very important to me since I am on school property quite a lot.

I will tell you this, when I disarm I do not take off my holster, and during the course of the work it has become "exposed" to teachers, maintance men, SRO's (School resource officers) and the like. No one has ever said anything.

[alwayspackin]

People don’t care about the holster. They only scream murderer when they see the gun. Those damn bleeding hearts. Someday they will wont there staff to have weapons. We as humans learn by experience not by the bleeding heart written orders.

[Guest Revelator]

Okay, let's say you are right, and being a lawyer, I'd certainly lean toward your explanation.

But then what's your take on the municipal/state park/recreational statute?

It's only an offense to carry with "intent to go armed".

So it doesn't apply to permit holders?

I've often thought that statute could well be challenged for that reason, and of course the fact that it is worded only to apply to "prohibited weapons" listed in 39-17-1302 (a), which does NOT include firearms.

(and yes I know the TN AG has opined that the INTENT of it was to include firearms).

But if "going armed" can be construed to mean "carrying a loaded weapon without a HCP", then hmmm....

- OS

I'm not really sure why the school carry law is different that those others. Legislatures are mysterious and not always consistent.

[Guest Ggun]

Okay, let's say you are right, and being a lawyer, I'd certainly lean toward your explanation.

snip

But if "going armed" can be construed to mean "carrying a loaded weapon without a HCP", then hmmm....

- OS

The only reasonable construction of "going armed" would apply to whether one has a HCP or not. There would have to be a statutory definition that a HCP means one that is not "going armed" because carrying a loaded firearm is going armed in its true meaning. $.02

[Oh Shoot]

The only reasonable construction of "going armed" would apply to whether one has a HCP or not. There would have to be a statutory definition that a HCP means one that is not "going armed" because carrying a loaded firearm is going armed in its true meaning. $.02

I'll tell the arresting officer your opinion if I'm ever caught on the bike trail with my heater (not that I would actually carry one there, of course).

I'll mention it to the TN Attorney General also, who has published an opinion that disagrees with your viewpoint, too.

(although I agree with you)

- OS

[Fallguy]

The only reasonable construction of "going armed" would apply to whether one has a HCP or not. There would have to be a statutory definition that a HCP means one that is not "going armed" because carrying a loaded firearm is going armed in its true meaning. $.02

39=17-1308 Defenses to unlawful possession or carrying of a weapon.

(a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:

(2)

By a person authorized to possess or carry a firearm pursuant to §

39-17-1315

or §

39-17-1351

[mousegunner]

The law that prohibits everyone from going armed on a school campus is blatantly and simply a bad law. The badness of the law is not self-evident yet to the public at large because our schools are presently very safe places. If terrorism ever increases within our borders, and if terrorists target schools, I believe people will insist that the bad law be eliminated. I remember reading a few months ago about a terrorist in an Israeli school that got dropped by a teacher with a firearm (legal in Israeli schools). I would love to see that trained and licensed school personnel be allowed, and even encouraged, to carry concealed weapons. (Concealed is best, lest they become first targets of bad guys). Anyway, my point is: THIS IS A BAD LAW. I hope the badness of it won't become evident in years to come, but it might.

[Mike.357]

so has this thread ever drawn a conclussion as to if you can leave your loaded gun in your console or glovebox while you are inside conducting your business?

[Guest 270win]

If i was dropping off or picking up a student, i wouldn't see a problem having a loaded handgun in your car. If i was doing business at a school, i would unload it and put it in a lock box or in the trunk, so that i wouldn't have 'intent to go armed'. I am not big on playing with a possible felony charge when that 'intent to go armed' clause falls into place and you don't meet an exception. You can possess anytime on school property in your car, but not always have intent to go armed. Unloading and casing/trunk throws out intent to go armed and you are just possessing the firearm.

[Guest Revelator]

so has this thread ever drawn a conclussion as to if you can leave your loaded gun in your console or glovebox while you are inside conducting your business?

It's unlawful under the school carry law only if you're possessing or carrying the gun. You wouldn't be doing either one of those if you've got it locked in the car while you're inside, so there is nothing illegal about that. I guess they could ask you to leave, but as stated it's very, very unlikely they'd even find out.

[Guest wordsworth]

A visible empty holster could provide some overly cautious school worker to have you reported if they so desire or dislike you- could lead to a car search. You might want to leave the holster contained in the car too.

[dralarms]

A visible empty holster could provide some overly cautious school worker to have you reported if they so desire or dislike you- could lead to a car search. You might want to leave the holster contained in the car too.

This I'm not worried about. Eveybody knows who I am and what I'm doing there so "seeing a holster" should not be a problem.

[Guest oldhack62]

This is an interesting discussion, however I thought I was clear on "school property" until I read this stuff here...

I will tell you this, when I disarm I do not take off my holster, and during the course of the work it has become "exposed" to teachers, maintance men, SRO's (School resource officers) and the like. No one has ever said anything.

Let's face it, Tennessee has a somewhat different 'culture' than many places regarding firearms. Most 'natives' are quite comfortable with them, and most teachers/school employees are natives (we won't go into nepotism here;)). So, it's not that surprising that an empty holster raises few alarms, though that may not always be the case.

I'm recently permitted in Tennessee to carry, and I'm going to have a frank, private discussion with the SRO at my school soon, about how he interprets the laws. If he objects to me having separated ammo and firearm hidden (safely and appropriately) in my vehicle, I'll demur. If he appreciates knowing he has some potential, legally-qualified backup in a shooting emergency, well...

Edited December 19, 2008 by oldhack62