Reciprocity is Currently Banned Under Federal Law (Very Important Please Read)
- Thread starter Cougar
- Start Date
An update, I talked with one of the higher ups at NRA last week, and they told me they recently received information that someone is currently being prosecuted under the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act of 1995 as a stand-alone charge.
Would like to hear details of that.
Cougar, do you have any info on this case? I would love to help the defense out in any way I can, pro bono.
The Federal Gun Free Schools Act, as reenacted, basically just added some language to the law that rehashed the argument that the feds made in Lopez... the same argument that the SC rejected. In Lopez, the feds argued that the gun involved had moved in interstate commerce, and that the aggregate effect of guns in school zones would effect interstate commerce because kids would not get good education, and would have lower paying jobs, etc... basically the feds made any argument they could to connect the possession of guns in a school zone with interstate commerce, and the Supreme Court didn't buy any of it. They said the connection to interstate commerce was too remote.
The new GFSZA just says that the gun must move in interstate commerce or must affect interstate commerce. Since this rationale for the law has already been rejected, it is widely believed that if the feds attempted to enforce this law and it's constitutionality was challenged, it would be ruled unconstitutional again.
I would like to do anything I can to help achieve that outcome.
It would defintely help me, since I am going with the Maine CCL so I can avoid the outrageous fingerprinting requirement here in Oklahoma. Actually the whole notion of having to ask permission to exercise a natural right is pretty outrageous to me, but now that I am a lawyer, I figure I should probably try to stay legal... even a misdemeanor "carrying a concealed weapon" charge could be trouble for me.
The Federal Gun Free Schools Act, as reenacted, basically just added some language to the law that rehashed the argument that the feds made in Lopez... the same argument that the SC rejected. In Lopez, the feds argued that the gun involved had moved in interstate commerce, and that the aggregate effect of guns in school zones would effect interstate commerce because kids would not get good education, and would have lower paying jobs, etc... basically the feds made any argument they could to connect the possession of guns in a school zone with interstate commerce, and the Supreme Court didn't buy any of it. They said the connection to interstate commerce was too remote.
The new GFSZA just says that the gun must move in interstate commerce or must affect interstate commerce. Since this rationale for the law has already been rejected, it is widely believed that if the feds attempted to enforce this law and it's constitutionality was challenged, it would be ruled unconstitutional again.
I would like to do anything I can to help achieve that outcome.
It would defintely help me, since I am going with the Maine CCL so I can avoid the outrageous fingerprinting requirement here in Oklahoma. Actually the whole notion of having to ask permission to exercise a natural right is pretty outrageous to me, but now that I am a lawyer, I figure I should probably try to stay legal... even a misdemeanor "carrying a concealed weapon" charge could be trouble for me.
I was told the NRA wouldn't be able to tell me specific details due to privacy concerns. Whether the US Supreme Court would strike the law again is anybody's guess. The changes made in the revised law have been upheld by the first, third, sixth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh circuits at the appellate level... I personally doubt the US Supreme Court would strike the revised law if it came before them. The circuit courts are all in agreement that the changes made in 1995 correct the issue that caused the original law to be struck.
Just curious, but didn't you have to get fingerprinted to take the bar in OK? AR requires it.
Yep. Passport photo too.
Update: Here is a February 2012 letter from our US Senator Tom Coburn in which he states, "(GFSZA) does result in otherwise law-abiding citizens being arrested when they did not know they were breaking the law."
There you go, straight from our US Senator's mouth.
US Senator Coburn's February 2012 Letter
There you go, straight from our US Senator's mouth.
US Senator Coburn's February 2012 Letter
M
Metatron
Guest
Wow, considering i cant even hardly leave my house without hitting a school zone.
Similar threads
