Source: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?41457-OC-in-on-a-Safe-School-and-Recreation-Zone
Timestamp: 2016-10-24 16:05:58
Document Index: 7207562

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1457', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 222', '§ 5801', '§ 1444', '§ 1', '§ 12', '§ 8', '§ 1', '§ 222', '§ 1444', '§ 1442', '§ 1441', '§ 202']

OC in/on a Safe School and Recreation Zone
Thread: OC in/on a Safe School and Recreation Zone
OK, I'm not 100% sure I understand this Statute. It's found in our favorite section of the "Law": TITLE 11 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure of the Delaware Criminal Code, CHAPTER 5. SPECIFIC OFFENSES, Subchapter VII. Offenses Against Public Health, Order and Decency, Subpart A. Riot, Disorderly Conduct and Related Offenses.
§ 1457. Possession of a weapon in a Safe School and Recreation Zone
(1) Section 1442. -- Carrying a concealed deadly weapon
(2) Section 1444. -- Possessing a destructive weapon
(3) Section 1446. -- Unlawfully dealing with a switchblade knife
(4) Section 1448. -- Possession and purchase of deadly weapons by persons prohibited
(5) Section 1452. -- Unlawfully dealing with knuckles-combination knife
(6) Section 1453. -- Unlawfully dealing with martial arts throwing star
(4) In the event that an elementary or secondary school student possesses a firearm or other deadly weapon in a Safe School and Recreation Zone in addition to any other penalties contained in this section, the student shall be expelled by the local School Board or charter school board of directors for a period of not less than 180 days unless otherwise provided for in federal or state law. (70 Del. Laws, c. 213, § 1; 74 Del. Laws, c. 131, §§ 1-4.)
So, as long as I'm not:
1.CC w/out a license, 2.Possessing a destructive weapon, 3.Unlawfully dealing with or possessing a switchblade knife, 4.Possession and purchase of deadly weapons by persons prohibited, 5.Unlawfully dealing with knuckles-combination knife, and 6.Unlawfully dealing with martial arts throwing star ... then I can legally OC in/on a Safe School and Rec Zone??
The reason I ask is that I OC from work over to my kids' school (private school) and pick them up. I've been leaving my gun in the car when going inside to get them, simply because 1. the Student Handbook does NOT allow "possession of dangerous items" which is considered "unacceptable behavior,"and 2. I've been assuming that I can't bring a gun onto School grounds because it's considered a Safe School Zone.
Granted, #1 is in the STUDENT handbook, which may or may not technically apply to parents' carrying a weapon. I justdon't want to get my kids in trouble (or get grief from a teacher/principal) somehow by doing anything against school policy. And of course, I thought #2 applied to just possessing a gun in a Safe School Zone.
BUT, after reading this Statute, does it say that it's a bad thing ONLYIF you commit one of the other offenses AS WELL? And again, the "destructive weapon" might be the "catch-all" rule. Title 11 Chapter 2 § 222 General Definitions does NOT list what a "destructive weapon" is! And neither does this subsection that we're discussing in this thread. So, does that include firearms?? If it does, then no one can possess a firearm in a Safe School and Rec Zone, whether they're licensed to do it or not... Hmmmm...
Any help and clarification on this from anyone?
OK, I feel silly.... I think I jumped the gun (so to speak) on this one before. I just found the definition here: TITLE 11 Crimes and Criminal Procedure of the Delaware Criminal Code, CHAPTER 5 SPECIFIC OFFENSES, Subchapter VII Offenses Against Public Health, Order and Decency, Subpart A. Riot, Disorderly Conduct and Related Offenses:
(b) Possessing a destructive weapon is a class E felony. This section does not apply to members of the military forces or to members of a police force in this State duly authorized to carry a weapon of the type described; nor shall the provisions contained herein apply to persons possessing machine guns for scientific or experimental research and development purposes, which machine guns have been duly registered under the National Firearms Act of 1968 (26 U.S.C. § 5801 et seq.).
(c) The term "shotgun" as used in this section means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of projectiles (ball shot) or a single projectile for each pull of the trigger. The term "sawed-off shotgun" as used in this section means a shotgun having 1 or more barrels less than 18 inches in length or any weapon made from a shotgun (whether by alteration, modification or otherwise) if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches. (11 Del. C. 1953, § 1444; 58 Del. Laws, c. 497, § 1; 59 Del. Laws, c. 547, § 12; 67 Del. Laws, c. 130, § 8; 70 Del. Laws, c. 186, § 1.)
So, I suppose "normal" firearms are NOT included in the "destructive weapon" category. Although I fear that the whole "... or any other firearm or weapon which is adaptable for use as a machine gun" is a potential loophole for prosecutors.... since all handguns are probably adaptable to full auto fire.
Still, what's everyone's take on this whole "School Zone" thing? Would you feel "safe" and "secure" in OCing in these areas and NOT being arrested?
Essentially, you need to violate one of those pre-existing, on the book laws in order to violate the Safe Safe and Recreation Zone -- the charge would probably be filed in addition to the pre-existing charge (as stated in that statute).
Student handbook would, I assume, only apply to students. As for LEO's making the same distinctions or interpreting the law the same way, well... that's the million dollar question there. Reply With Quote 01-31-2008, 09:09 AM
Wynder, are there any cases or annotations you've come across pertaining to this abiguity in the definition, or OC in a Safe School Zone? It would be "convenient" if someone already put this part of the Statute to the "test" in a court of law.
Looking at the title of 1457 it's about Weapons. The state has different classes weapons ie; Deadly, Distructive and plain old weapons. Handguns fall under Deadly the most dangerous kind. Regular weapons would be like pocket knives. So the knife in your pocket would be the lesser crime and the handgun the greater. I wouldn't try to flip the law just because it says concealed and nothing about open.
I'd think that since there are no laws on the books about open carry any laws that list concealed would apply to open.
Also the section where it talks about concealed carry doesn't say anything about a license. So carrying concealed WITH the license is just as bad as carrying without the license.
dave_in_delaware wrote: Wynder, are there any cases or annotations you've come across pertaining to this abiguity in the definition, or OC in a Safe School Zone? It would be "convenient" if someone already put this part of the Statute to the "test" in a court of law.
Negative, no annotations for that law. It's apparently not used too often.
Probably because people who OC/CC avoid the School Zones like the plague!
(just to be on the "safe" side of things....)
stephpd wrote: Looking at the title of 1457 it's about Weapons. The state has different classes weapons ie; Deadly, Distructive and plain old weapons. Handguns fall under Deadly the most dangerous kind. Regular weapons would be like pocket knives. So the knife in your pocket would be the lesser crime and the handgun the greater.
The definition of deadly weapons, dangerous instrument, firearm and disabling chemical spray are covered in § 222 in Title 11, Part I, Chapter 2. A destructive weapon is defined in § 1444.
I wouldn't try to flip the law just because it says concealed and nothing about open. I'd think that since there are no laws on the books about open carry any laws that list concealed would apply to open.
Actually, it's just the opposite... laws must specifically define illegal actions or ommissions of action -- if it's not specifically listed, its lawful behavior. Otherwise, OC would be illegal in Delaware and 43 other states. This particular statute is saying that, in order to be found guilty of violating it, you must violate one of the pre-existing weapon offenses that are specifically listed in this law (1442, 1444, 1446, 1448, 1452 and/or 1453). In addition, you could be charged with both offenses, e.g., carrying a concealed deadly weapon AND possession of a weapon in a Safe School and Recreation Zone.
It's actually refering back specifically to § 1442 which states: A person is guilty of carrying a concealed deadly weapon when the person carries concealed a deadly
weapon upon or about the person without a license to do so as provided by § 1441 of this title.
So it's basically just like the body armor Statute: if you wear body armor WHILE comitting a felony, then you're busted on both counts.
So in this School Zone thing, I have to be busted on one of the six "conditions" and then they can slap the additional "and it was in this special Zone" thing on top.
Sounds like a desperation "crime" just to keep the schools safer....
dave_in_delaware wrote: So it's basically just like the body armor Statute: if you wear body armor WHILE comitting a felony, then you're busted on both counts.
I've read somewhere that it's honestly not used all that often. Though, there was actually a story last week about a boy who had brought an unloaded handgun to school and was charged with that offense.
But, yes -- that's the gist of it, both conditions have to be true in order for them to be able to charge you with it.
Man, once I relate law logic with programming logic, it seems to make a lot more sense, heh.
So, in essence, if I OC into my kids' school after work, I'm not breaking any laws.
It'll just come down to how the school "feels" about it (and how the teachers who handle after school care "react"). I know one of the other kid's Dads is a cop, but a civilian is looked at totally different I'm sure.
Maybe I should discuss this w/ the Principal and Pastor (it's a Christian School, and my church!)....
dave_in_delaware wrote: So, in essence, if I OC into my kids' school after work, I'm not breaking any laws.
IANAL, but, in my opinion, that's correct.
Citizen! The cop is a civilian, too. But I'm sure how they're going to *feel* about it.
It's easier to ask for forgiveness instead of asking for permission. Reply With Quote 01-31-2008, 10:45 AM
Wynder wrote: Citizen! The cop is a civilian, too. But I'm sure how they're going to *feel* about it.
Yes, I know a cop is a civilian, too. But the general public doesn't see it that way. They see two totally different people: 1 ispublic servant who supposedly has tons of weapons training, it's their job to carry a gun, and never mind the whole uniform and "official" position... the other is a student's Dad (i.e. possible "renegade citizen") who is trying to cause a public riot and fear, and has no right to carry a firearm (or even own one), and probably has never had any training, and is just looking for a reason to use it....
Althoughwe all know thatus "renegade citizens" usuallyget way more trigger time and practicethan policedo.
It's easier to ask for forgiveness instead of asking for permission. Yeah, I've heard that before, but this isn'ta "sorry honey, I had to buyanother one" kind of situation we're talking about. This is my kids' education, and I don't want to affect that in any way.
dave_in_delaware wrote: Maybe I should discuss this w/ the Principal and Pastor (it's a Christian School, and my church!)....
Dave I strongly disagree with this statement. what matters is the law not two other persons opinion. IMO if you want to OC, do so from your position of IT IS MY RIGHT, I'M NOT VIOLATING ANY LAWS. if you ask permission you either have to accept what they say or defy them. seriously, do you think someone in a principals position will ever say "its alright"? Not when it may come to the soccer moms attention! the best you can hope for is he will say " while its not against the law we strongly advise against it". what it comes down to is you're asking legal advice from someone not qualified to give it.
and My disclaimer: IANAL
What I meant by fliping the law was that it wasn't listed as one of the 6 statutes. CCDW was listed and no reference to license. Since there are no laws on the books about open carry there is no provision. But if you can't CCDW even with a license I doubt that open carry be allowed.
If you have plenty of money laying around for good lawyers you could try open carry on school grounds since they say nothing abut it but I don't think you'd win in court.
Again the statute is for any weapon. The discription of weapons those that aren't covered under desructive or deadly. Firearms are listed under deadly. So the law is about prosecuting you for pocketknives or sharp pointy sticks (arrows, spear,pencil or pen) if they find that you are in possession of more lethal or destructive weapons. The pocket knife would be the lesser offence. The deadly or destructive weapon would be the greater offense.
Further down it talks about afferamitive defense. Sports clubs or martial arts may allow certain items that would be used in that class;arrows for an archery class, that bamboo sword type thing or throwing stars for a martial arts class. I don't think that open carry is even given a thought in this law but if they don't want lesser weapons at school I think you would definitly be pushing the open carry to the limit at schools. But what do I know. Go for it. See what happens, add it to your log on open carry.
stephpd wrote: What I meant by fliping the law was that it wasn't listed as one of the 6 statutes. CCDW was listed and no reference to license. Since there are no laws on the books about open carry there is no provision. But if you can't CCDW even with a license I doubt that open carry be allowed.
I'm a bit confused -- according to the staute, with regards to carrying concealed, you must violate 1442 which is carrying a concealed deadly weapon without a license. Where are you getting that you can't carry concealed even with a permit?
You're right that 1442 is CCDW without a license. My bad. My understanding of this law is about weapons in school could still be used for firearms. The beginning of the statute says weapons. I beleive this to mean all things that can be used as weapons. Take knives for example. Under the law 3" or more is considered a deadly weapon. Less then 3" is still a weapon. If you commit a crime on school property and they find the knife with a blade less then 3" that lesser charge would be added to the greater crime. Now as far as CCDW and open carry, staying with knives, do you think they would allow a bowie knife or any fixed blade knife at school if it were hanging on a belt?
Same thing for a pointy stick. You get in a fight and jamb a pencil in to someones body. The greater crime would be assault the lesser would be possesion of a weapon.
This statute is for lesser crimes. You have to commit a greater crime to be prosecuted for the lesser crime.
Granted this statute vaguely cover the greater crime as far as the six listed but I'd guess that they would apply other statues then this one for carrying deadly weapons.
Also aren't schools a county thing and not state. I know the county collects school tax. Also you have private schools with their own laws. And the Fed have something to say about all schools. Don't private schools that get no federal funds fall under the 'no child left behind"? The states have almost no control over schools anymore.
But under this statue there is nothing preventing open carry or CCDW with a license. Might try looking into federal and county laws. But I'm pretty sure (though I can't quote any specific laws) that someone will call the police. You can expect to be detained until someone finds some law somewhere. If not more people would be carrying at school. Nothing in this statute restricting teachers from carrying either but I heard they aren't allowed either.
My best advise would be to spend some money on a lawyer before attempting to use this statute as an excuse for carrying a deadly weapon on school grounds.
ps. I'm not a lawyer and nothing I say should be construed to be an interpretation of any law. Matter of fact I have no understanding of most of the laws written and I'm usually wrong when I try to interpret anything written by lawyers. They speak a different language from the rest of us and my head hurts trying to figure out what they are saying.
pss. Wynder, you work at a school. Couldn't you ask around and see what the administration at your school has to say? Ask about specific laws. Show them this statute.
I found something. It's called the gun free school act. Federal law first inacted in 1990. overruled in 1995. Reenacted in 1995. Couldn't find anyone getting it overturned in court since. Included it the DE state AG statement. Looks like a federal law and unlikely to be overturned anytime soon.
http://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/...ws/gunfree.htm
LAW: ON GUN FREE SCHOOL ZONE 18 USC 922(q)(1) Federal Gun-Free School Zones
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm-- (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(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;
(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;
(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.
I knew there had to be something on the books somewhere. Loks like the feds trump state law until someone tries to overturn this law.:?
http://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/.../schzone.shtml
The statute is in addition to the federal law according to the AG and covers more then just guns. His opinion not mine.
DELAWARE ATTORNEY GENERAL SCHOOL ZONE PENALTY ENHANCEMENT FOR WEAPONS Federal Gun-Free School Zones
The federal law makes it unlawful for anyone to possess a firearm (that affects interstate or foreign commerce), at a place that the person knows, or has reasonable cause to believe is a school zone. Schools Zones include a distance of 1,000 feet from the ground of a public, parochial or private elementary or secondary school.
The federal law in pertinent parts states:
18 USC 922(q)(1) The Congress finds and declares that... Click here to view the statute State Weapon Free School Zones
Delaware law prohibits Possession of a Weapon in a Safe School and Recreation Zone. This law expands the federal law by prohibiting other weapons in addition to firearms and by expanding the definition of a school. This statute requires first an underlying weapons offense, and second, that the possession occur in a safe school zone. The School Zone is defined much more broadly in the State statute than in the Federal Statute.
The statute also expands the definition of a deadly weapon to include BB guns and disabling chemical sprays.
If the offense is committed by a student, the student must be expelled for a period of not less than 180 days unless otherwise provided for in federal or state law.
11 Del. C. Section 1457 states in full: Click here to view the statute
Other Weapon Statutes
Juvenile Possession of a Handgun
All juveniles are persons prohibited from possessing handguns, except for the purpose of engaging in lawful hunting, instruction, sporting or recreational activities while under the direct or indirect supervision of an adult. Juveniles who are 14 years or older who are found guilty of violating this prohibition will be sentenced to a minimum mandatory incarceration of 6 months.
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THIS WEBSITE IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF ISSUES RELATED TO SCHOOL LAW general overview of issues related to school law
[size=Delaware Criminal Code]
[size=CHAPTER 2. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING OFFENSES]
Delaware law is very clear on this. If you are juvenile who possesses a firearm or other deadly weapon in a schoolzone or are in voilation of 1-6 you can be charged under this. you can (as an adult) carry the bowie knife openly look carefully at § 202. yes you are right they could charge you for the pointy stick... if you are a juvie or in voilation of 1-6. otherwise you are legal.
(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;Sec. 921. Definitions
(25) The term "school zone" means&amp;endash;&amp;endash;
if you have yourDE CCDW then you're good by federal standards, and stay away from 1-6 and you're good by state.
Does anyone have a cite for the fed school zone being ruled unconstitutional and then reinstated?
In the recent thread about the Florida reporter arrested for CC while in front of a school, the charge of carrying on school property was dropped as he was on the sidewalk. but he was surely within 1000 ft. so why didn't the fed school zone get him?
What I could find I'll try to list. The original act was 1990, overturned in US vs Lopez 1995. Rewritten in 1995 and signed and passed in 1996.
http://www.gunlaws.com/Gun_Free_School_Zones_Act.pdf The links I gave in the pevious post were from the State of Delaware's Attorney Generals web page.
thanks stephpd,
SCHOOL ZONE PENALTY ENHANCEMENT FOR WEAPONS
Federal Gun-Free School Zones
it is pretty bad when the AG either can't read the law or puts out false info.
That's why they're lawyers and not judges. Lawyers are taught to argue law, they can take either side and say what THEY think it say. Got to have lots of money to challenge the law and have the courts decide.
USvs Lopez tried it once and won and the lawyers went in and change just a few words and reinstate the law as rewritten. Since non of the gun lobbies have challenged it in court since gives me the idea that it means what THEY want it to mean no matter how the general population reads the same thing.
Like I said I'm no lawyer. Everytime I have to read laws my head starts hurting cause I have so many problems with what is actually written down as law. I usually get it all wrong. As Dave in Delaware wrote:
I'm not willing to test the waters. If you got money give it a try.
Reply With Quote 02-01-2008, 05:29 PM
I don't have the time or the money, so on school grounds I cc. (with my state licence)the law is weird, sometimes I think the legislators should have a Breathalyzer and pee in a cup before they propose any laws. the 1000 feet school zone wouldn't apply to someone who's property butts up to school grounds (private property) so he could sit on his property line with his gun, but if hesteps off the far side of his property onto a public sidewalk 999 feet from the school grounds he is a criminal?