Yesterday the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in a criminal case called United States v. Allam, regarding the federal restriction on carrying a firearm without a license within 1,000 feet of a school. The California Rifle & Pistol Association, the Second Amendment Law Center and the Second Amendment Foundation submitted an amicus brief. We argued that regardless of Mr. Allam’s particular facts, the law is facially unconstitutional because there is no sufficient historical tradition of expansive “buffer zones” around the few sensitive places that did exist in the past.
While it remains to be seen how the Court will rule given that the judges were tough on the lawyers for both sides, we were pleased to hear that our amicus brief was mentioned a few times, indicating the judges had read and considered it. Multiple references were made to a map of Dallas we submitted, which pointed out the dozens of schools (and thus expansive school zones) that covered the city.
These sometimes-overlapping school zones make carry difficult for someone carrying without a CCW permit under Texas’s constitutional carry regime. One judge also referenced our argument against the purported analogue of polling place buffer zones. We argued that those laws were not similar because they applied only a couple times a year at most, not every day as the modern school zones do.
Watch this space.
Chuck Michel is the president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association. CRPA has launched its CCW Reckoning effort to ensure that all of California’s 58 counties are in compliance with the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision. You can help with that here.
I’ve always thought the school zone no-guns 1,000 foot thing was ridiculous, especially considering it doesn’t actually do anything ‘protective’ or ‘reactive’ or ‘stopping’ to keep a bad guy from simply going “a school zone, pffffttt…” and going ahead and doing bad things anyway. And in terms of actual schools and bad guys wanting to cause harm, its like all non-guns zones, it simply attracts them because its less likely there be any or enough armed people that can stop them – its why over 94% of mass shootings (which includes school shootings) take place in no-gun zones, less likely there be any or enough armed force to stop them. Time and time again we have seen mass/school shooters not stopped by this make-believe force field of non-guns zones, wev’e read their writings where they pointed out it was less likely there be people with guns that can stop them as one of the parts of their planning in their target selection and execution.
gun free zones (AKA no-guns zones, including this ridiculous non-guns school zones thing), defined:
“gun (gŭn) free (frē) zone (zōn)
* Trap in which people congregate and are falsely promised safety by a make believe force field of a ‘No Guns” prohibition.
* A place where people are disarmed and not permitted self-defense with firearms.
* Hunting grounds for predator criminals where defenseless prey is guaranteed by law.
* Place where existing laws against violent crimes do not work to prevent violent crimes the laws are touted to be able to prevent.
* Places designed to attract violently mentally ill predators.
* Places where police forces cease to operate to protect before the fact of a violent crime as they are touted to be able to do by politicians implying.
The Hi-Power on that sign is either inert (hammer down) or has the SFS system. Usually sign designers choose a Beretta 92 or 1911 or revolver.
In most areas, it’s impossible to go about one’s day and not pass through multiple school zones. I used GIS to map out all the 1000 foot zones in my state and every major road and most secondary roads are excluded. Most cities are so dense that the entire city becomes a GFZ if one doesn’t have a carry permit from that state.
Political reality check here. Panel consists of Graves, Higginson, and Wilson. First two are Obama appointees; Wilson is a PDT appointee.
I predict this panel will vote 2-1 to affirm, over a strident dissent from Wilson. The question will be whether the Fifth Circuit will then take the case en banc and reverse.