TexasCHLforum.com

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I would advise no one to be the test case.

Nor would I, or anyone who did not have a million-dollar legal fund on hand. But millons of citizens do it every day.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:The original act was overturned because it stretched the Commerce Clause too far. So they wrote the new one to only cover cases where the gun had moved in interstate commerce.

Since this is true of almost every gun, the effect is to cover nearly all situations.

This law is less likely to be overturned than the previous one.

The Supreme Court is now more constitutionalist than the one that was overturned in Lopez, in 1995. The Department of Justice has been correspondingly cautious.

- Jim

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I wonder if some crusading DA like that guy in Houston will hit on this as a way of harrassing law-abiding gun owners?

A state DA cannot prosecute a federal law. All he can do is refer the case to the U.S. attorney.

This law is like a house of cards. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned an earlier version of it, and they would most likely overturn this one.

- Jim

The Texas state law is very different from the federal law. The federal law makes it an offense to possess a loaded weapon within 1,000 feet of school ground, period (with some exceptions). The state law enhances the penalty if the subject commits an actual crime, like assault.

- Jim

mikeloc wrote:It does not say you must have a license from the state you live in, but the state the school zone in located. Therefore, if you drive by a school in another state that accepts your Texas license you're not covered unless you have a license from the state you're visiting.

I would argue that reciprocity means that if you have a license issued by another state, you are licensed by the state that grants you reciprocity.

If they tried to prosecute someone under this law for driving past a school, it would be struck down, like it was the last time. The U.S. attorneys know that, and they prosecute only people who perform criminal acts inside schools.

- Jim

I agree this scenario is possible, but the child would have to be in the vehicle without adult supervision. If an adult is present, no offense has been committed.

I think leaving children in a parked vehicle with a handgun is just nuts, as is leaving them in a vehicle with the keys. Children are always at more risk than adults.

- Jim

BadCo45ACP wrote:Wouldn't it also require a federal officer to enforce it?

I'm confused about how violations of federal law are handled.

Many federal laws have corresponding state laws that state officers can use as a basis for an arrest. If local authorities arrest someone and decide that a federal law was violated, they can inform the U.S. attorney, who may press charges.

I don't know how violations of this type, which have no corresponding state law, are handled.

- Jim

rx9790 wrote:Are you sure there isnt an exemption for roads or driving?

I am sure there is no such exception.

The main exceptions are

• having a firearm in your home
• having an unloaded firearm in a locked case or rack
• having a qualified state license (CHL)

Wikipedia is not entirely reliable, but this article is correct according to my independent research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act

Here's a more thorough but somewhat alarmist interpretation: http://www.gunowners.org/fs9611.htm

The reason this law is not enforced often is that it is quite likely to be found unconstiutional if appealed.

- Jim
[edited to correct typo]