TexasCHLforum.com

WildRose wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:15 pm

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:01 pm

WildRose wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:34 pm ....
No, you miss a key point. The entire campus and all the buildings are a school. The moment he entered the building he was in violation. The Wednesday offence actually took place in one of the classrooms.

Let me summarize.

Bozo charged federally with 18 USC 922q(2)A...for carrying a gun in a school zone.
At the time Bozo has a Texas LTC that meets the criteria of 18 USC 922q(2)B(II), therefore A does not apply. If his lawyer is worth 2 cents she’ll move to dismiss that charge when he’s arraigned. Move on to the next charge. The entire campus and all buildings are federally school zones....so what. That portion of the Federal statute does not apply.

Licensed or not he was in violation upon entering the school building while armed which he admitted to the arresting officer when he was first interviewed and of course there were several complaining witnesses as well.

Let me be clear, I'm still on the fence as to this being federal overreach, I am however relating what I have picked up from the PD, church members and close friends familiar with both the case and the man who was arrested.

Apparently he's fairly well known for being a nut.

WildRose wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:34 pm ....
No, you miss a key point. The entire campus and all the buildings are a school. The moment he entered the building he was in violation. The Wednesday offence actually took place in one of the classrooms.

Abraham wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:47 am ScottDLS,

Thanks for that great summation.

I think the amount of nonsense in this whole scenario reads like an Elmore Leonard novel.

WildRose wrote: ↑Tue Sep 25, 2018 12:33 am

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:00 am

WildRose wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:26 am
...
They don't have to, as soon as you are indicted on a disqualifying charge they can seize all of your firearms, ammunition, and permits.

Let's see how this case plays out, the Fed's frequently overreach just because they can but the more I look into this case I don't think that they are.

This guy is a walking, talking, living bad example that makes the rest of us look bad by association.

Since I assume you are talking about the Feds, I would like to know which law provides for the seizure of your property and state issued credentials prior to trial?

Of course, a magistrate judge could make it a term of your bail that you surrender your firearms, or they could be seized as evidence if the charge related to firearms (as it did in this case), but there is no law prohibiting you from possessing firearms until you are convicted or adjudicated. And a federal court has no jurisdiction to invalidate a state permit, though Texas provides for suspending it until the charges are tried.

The point being that when the guy was carrying in a school zone, he had a valid license. Whether he was a prohibited possessor remains to be determined.

AND.....he is still some kind of stupid.

Any judge can issue a seizure order when you've been arrested for a disqualifying offense. Your guns, ammo etc will be seized and held pending the outcome of the case. If you're lucky you may even eventually get them back. Many jurisdictions however make it virtually impossible even if the case is dropped or you are exonerated at trial.

If you can't legally possess a firearm you cannot have an LTC. Possession of illicit drugs is a disqualifying offense.

WildRose wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:26 am
...
They don't have to, as soon as you are indicted on a disqualifying charge they can seize all of your firearms, ammunition, and permits.

Let's see how this case plays out, the Fed's frequently overreach just because they can but the more I look into this case I don't think that they are.

This guy is a walking, talking, living bad example that makes the rest of us look bad by association.

WildRose wrote: ↑Sun Sep 23, 2018 4:31 pm

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Sun Sep 23, 2018 9:25 am

WildRose wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:46 pm

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:11 pm

WildRose wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:49 pm

ELB wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:44 pm I’m on my phone, which makes it really hard to look up stuff, but while the GFSZA House and exemption for license to carry, it may not apply if the person is engaging in an illegal activity.

I'm unaware of such an exemption other than for LEO's and Security. Have you by chance got a link?

From your later post.

(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;

There is no mention of the exemption not applying due to some other law being broken, so if the guy has a Texas LTC, then I think the US is going to lose that part of the case.

I did some checking just a few minutes ago with one of my more reliable sources in Amarillo.

Apparently they are using his drug use and possession to invalidate his exemption and his LTC completely thus making him completely in violation.

I don't really see how that works since the "LTC" exemption to the school prohibition has no language relating to drugs anywhere in it.

My guess is the Feds are in on this to deflect criticism from the Texas church shooting where they dropped the ball on the NICS check. I'm not sure they'd want to retry Lopez on this fact pattern, but doubt this case is going anywhere near SCOTUS.

This guy is some kind of idiot though.

Your LTC becomes invalid the second you can no longer legally possess a firearm.

Users of illicit drugs cannot legally possess a firearm. From what i learned yesterday, he also had enough dope in the house to warrant a felony conviction as well.

We'll see how it all plays out as the case goes forward.

ELB wrote: ↑Sun Sep 23, 2018 11:25 am

. I don't really see how that works since the "LTC" exemption to the school prohibition has no language relating to drugs anywhere in it.

There may be another section of the law that covers this. You can’t read an individual paragraph or section of the law in isolation and be sure you have the whole picture. This is why you need lawyers to sort out things And they don’t all agree I need a judge or six to sort it out.

Of course you as the citizens are expected to obey the law completely without error. Ignorance is no excuse!

WildRose wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:46 pm

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:11 pm

WildRose wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:49 pm

ELB wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:44 pm I’m on my phone, which makes it really hard to look up stuff, but while the GFSZA House and exemption for license to carry, it may not apply if the person is engaging in an illegal activity.

I'm unaware of such an exemption other than for LEO's and Security. Have you by chance got a link?

From your later post.

(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;

There is no mention of the exemption not applying due to some other law being broken, so if the guy has a Texas LTC, then I think the US is going to lose that part of the case.

I did some checking just a few minutes ago with one of my more reliable sources in Amarillo.

Apparently they are using his drug use and possession to invalidate his exemption and his LTC completely thus making him completely in violation.

WildRose wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:49 pm

ELB wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:44 pm I’m on my phone, which makes it really hard to look up stuff, but while the GFSZA House and exemption for license to carry, it may not apply if the person is engaging in an illegal activity.

I'm unaware of such an exemption other than for LEO's and Security. Have you by chance got a link?

(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;