Where does "school" end?

[jedi]

MODS: Feel free to move this to a better sub-channel if need be.
Here is the map of the area in question. See questions in blue below.

The school is the large bldg on the south of the map between BROAD (west boundary), LAFAYETTE (east biundary), Oak (north boundary) and ELM (south boundary). On the same block where the school bldg is at is a parking lot, the priest house and the church.

Now per my understadning the entire block as defined above is a gun-free zone since it has a school. Right? So is it OK to park your vehicle on any of those streets (mentioned above) & leave your weapon in the car to go to church services? Or should the streest to the NORTH/SOUTH (not on the map) be used since they are the next blocks UP/DOWN?

Now to the east of LAFAYETTE is a large parking lot (used by the church for parking, not sure who it belongs to but would say the school/church) and then a big building that houses the school gym and a small hall they rent for various functions. BINGO is also held in the gym. IMMEDIATELY after the building is a public park. When you step out the back side of the big building you are literally steping onto the public park (grass).

So can one carry inside the gym/hall for non-school functions (when you attend a party at the rented hall, when the church does Fish Fridays, Bingo, etc..? Or is this building also considerd a school?

Now if the gym/hall is a school where does it's boundry end? Meaning I can carry in the public park but just can't step onto the actual building (gym/hall) property?

The playground on the SOUTH side of the gym/hall is part of the PUBLIC PARK btw.

Lastly once a year the church holds it's annual festival and they use up the entire parking lot (the big one) for the rides, booths, food stands, and the beer garden. The beer garden buts up against the WEST side of the gym and has one 1 entrance with local PD at the gate so that only over 21 go in. What I have noticed as well this past year (not sure about the year before) was a sign at the gate saying.

- 21 and over only
- No firearms beyond this point

Yet how can their be firearms on the parking lot "in the fair" if it is part of the school? That got me thinking about the rest of these questions.

Thanks!

 

[snapping turtle]

Is it a public or private school. Not sure if it makes a difference but it may.

 

[SSGSAD]

I do not know if I can answer your question or not, but here goes.... The law says something 1000 feet from a school, but I do not know if it is the school bldg, or the property, or the school zone... the school ZONE, begins and ends with the zone signs... If they hire an Officer, Security guard, or whatever, he is enforcing the rules THEY have laid out...
Each 'place' can make their own rules to allow carry, or not ex. Lucas oil stadium, Conseco field house, Pepsi Colisieum, etc... WE must obey their rules...

 

[Scutter01]

The law says something 1000 feet from a school,

That's federal law, and in Indiana it's trumped if you have a carry license. The IC says:

IC 35-47-9-2
Possession of firearms on school property, at school function, or on school bus; felony
Sec. 2. A person who possesses a firearm:
(1) in or on school property;
(2) in or on property that is being used by a school for a school function; or
(3) on a school bus;
commits a Class D felony.
As added by P.L.140-1994, SEC.11.

So the question becomes: "Where, in the photo posted, does school property end?"

Each 'place' can make their own rules to allow carry, or not ex. Lucas oil stadium, Conseco field house, Pepsi Colisieum, etc... WE must obey their rules...

We are not required to obey their arbitrary rules at all. Who told you that? All they can do is ask us to leave. Failure to leave when asked risks a trespassing charge.

 

[jedi]

Is it a public or private school. Not sure if it makes a difference but it may.

A school is a school is a school at least for IN. Meaning a school = public school, private school (accredicated by the state; which is the case for the image above; IE Catholic School), day care, pre-school. The only "school" that is not considered a school is "sunday school/bible school" when it's not held in a "school building" as defined by IN (for education).

Meaning if you hold "sunday school" at your home or at the Knights of Columbus hall those are NOT considered schools. Also if your church holds "bible school/sunday school" on the church (THAT DOES NOT HAVE A EDUCATIONAL SCHOOL) then the church is NOT considered a school.

 

[jedi]

So the question becomes: "Where, in the photo posted, does school property end?"

Here is what I feel comfortable with since it's reasonable.
BTW.. top of pic is NORTH; left is WEST

BROAD ST.
The west side sidewalk is OK since that is not school property. (There are biz on that side.)
The road is OK since it's not school property.
The east side sidewalk is NOT OK since the school is on that side.

OAK ST.
The north side sidewalk is OK since that is not school property. (There are homes on that side.)
The road is OK since it's not school property.
The south side sidewalk is NOT OK since the school is on that side (end of block).

ELM ST.
The north side sidewalk is NOT OK since the school is on that side.
The road is OK since it's not school property.
The south side sidewalk is OK since that is not school property. (There are homes on that side.)

LAFAYETTE ST.
The west side sidewalk is NOT OK since the school is on that side.

???The road is OK since it's not school property???
(Yes the road is NOT school property but can you park on the street with firearm left in car????) I don't know as this is the grey area.

The east side sidewalk is also an I don't know. The buildings are they school or not? Then we have the park which is OK yet on that same "block of land" we have the "other school buildings".

When I think of school zones I think of okay "blocks" zoned off. Yet in this example the gym/hall are on a block with a public park which is OK. So is it OK to have "partial blocks of free and non-free zones?" If you answer yes then why is the church NOT in a gun-free zone as well? Which we know it's not. Or is it because it's part of the school. If it was a say Baptist church NOT related to the school then it would be Ok thus creating another "partial block" zone?

 

[AFA1CY]

I do not know if I can answer your question or not, but here goes.... The law says something 1000 feet from a school, ... snip ...

The 1000' law has beem misquoted and improperly presented many times. Here is the facts about the 1000' law.

1. It is a federal law that you can not posess a gun within 1000' of a school.

2. If you have a permit/license issued by the state where the school is located the 1000' law does not apply.

note: If you have license/permit that is not issued by the state where the school is located (e.g. a KY permit in IN) the 1000' law applies.

3. If you have a permit/license Indiana law still prohibits you from being on school grounds or a school bus except under very narrowly defined conditions.

I have also heard that the 1000' law has been ruled against in the case of a person traveling through the area as long as they do not stop within the zone. (e.g. a state that does not require a license or a person with an out of state license)

So as far as an Indiana LTCH holder and Indiana schools, the 1000' law is moot.

 

[t413]

You need to talk to your local zoning board to find out where "school" officially ends.

 

[jedi]

You need to talk to your local zoning board to find out where "school" officially ends.

http://www.griffith.in.gov/cms?type=doc&name=/griffith/build-and-plan/zoning/zoning1.pdf

Looks like the park/gym/hall "block" is cut in 1/2 per the zone board map.
On the map the there is one big WHITE BLOCK for where the school/church sit one. Thus that entire block is considered a school (ie gun free). If you look at the "block" where the gym is located only 1/4 of that "block" is WHITE BLOCK and the rest is OPEN SPACE (green aka PARK). So based on that I would infer that the WHITE BLOCK is also one big block of ie gun-free zone **IF** we consider it a school as well.

Can't find the IC definition for a school but I think the arguement can be made that the gym/hall is a school as well and thus off-limits as well.

 

[minuteman32]

You need to talk to your local zoning board to find out where "school" officially ends.

That would be your best, 1st move. A school is a school 24/7/365 in IN. And, there are prosecutors in this state that DO consider a "Sunday School" to be a "school". I had a rather heated discussion w/ the Hamilton Co. Prosecutors office a few years ago, regarding this very question. (They mentioned the 1000' law, too, causing them to lose all credibility w/ me @ that point!)

Just one more (in a LOOOONG line) reason we need to change/do away with this law!!

 

[apovinelli]

You can park on the streets because they are public streets,not the schools. I would say no to the rest of the area owned by the church/school. (ps, I would hope to God that you would not need to be packing inside of a church or school or at any function hosted by either in any of their buildings.

 

[CountryBoy19]

(ps, I would hope to God that you would not need to be packing inside of a church or school or at any function hosted by either in any of their buildings.

We don't "plan" when/where an attacker or shooter is going to be, so we have to be prepared everywhere we go. Yes, we certainly hope we don't need to use our self-defense weapons, but to say you hope we don't need to be packing?

Let me show you why we may need to carry in a church/school setting.
Here are 4 of the top 6 or 7 google results for "church shooting":
Pastor Killed, 2 Hurt in Illinois Church Shooting - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
Colorado Church Gunman Had Grudge Against Christian Group, Cops Say - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
Knoxville church shooting News for Knoxville, TN from Knoxville News Sentinel
Suspects sought in California church shooting - CNN.com

"School shooting" is much easier, here is a timeline of all of them (1996-present), all in one place:
Time Line of Worldwide School Shootings — Infoplease.com


I am not condoning breaking the law by carrying at a school, just demonstrating that there is a need to do so (have the laws overturned).

 

[jedi]

(ps, I would hope to God that you would not need to be packing inside of a church or school or at any function hosted by either in any of their buildings.

Hum.. Why? Because of the breaking the law part or because you are troubled that someone would be armed inside a place of worship?

 

[kludge]

It would behoove you to check and see if the school owns the "property" that the "public park" is on.

In Wesfield we have a situation where the "public library" is adjacent to the schools. My wife nonchalantly asked about property ownership, and the library leases the land from the "school corporation".

I'm not going to risk it.

"Public sidwalks" are usually a different story and usually the actual land ownership is the "city". But still, I probably would not risk it.

 

[jedi]

It would behoove you to check and see if the school owns the "property" that the "public park" is on.

In Wesfield we have a situation where the "public library" is adjacent to the schools. My wife nonchalantly asked about property ownership, and the library leases the land from the "school corporation".

I'm not going to risk it.

"Public sidwalks" are usually a different story and usually the actual land ownership is the "city". But still, I probably would not risk it.

Thanks kludge, but I think the best solution & one I have been pushing on my other half is to find a new church which is JUST a church and NOTHING else. From the looks of the property map it appears that the PUBLIC PARK is indeed own by the city and not land the church/school has.

This is really all so stupid. Here I am trying to figure out a slew of laws that come into play, figuring out where I can and can not step/walk on all why carrying and yet some wacko who would want to shot up the school/church is just going to do it WITHOUT caring if s/he can/cannot have a gun in that location. Yet a little law on a piece of paper somewhere in Indy that was voted on is SURE going to stop that whacko alright.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

ps, I would hope to God that you would not need to be packing inside of a church or school or at any function hosted by either in any of their buildings.

(Assuming that you're aghast that anyone would consider bringing a firearm to church...)

Yes, God protects us. God also gives us all free-will. I carry to church in case God chooses me & my XDm to be his instruments of protection against someone exercising their free-will in a way which will harm others.

I also buy, store, & prepare food instead of waiting for manna from Heaven. The church pays for electricity & water/sewage instead of waiting for miracles. You probably put gas in your car Saturday night instead of praying for a full tank when you wake up Sunday morning. Etc. Etc. Etc.

(If my assumption was incorrect, please disregard.)

 

[JBusch8899]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica].
[/FONT]

 

[Glock21]

Not being from IN, could someone fill me in on how a License To Carry Handgun somehow exempts you from the 1000-foot rule with regard to shotguns and rifles?

Just curious since I have Indiana accepted permits.

 

[AFA1CY]

Not being from IN, could someone fill me in on how a License To Carry Handgun somehow exempts you from the 1000-foot rule with regard to shotguns and rifles?

Just curious since I have Indiana accepted permits.

Scroll down about 2/3 of the way...

From: NRA-ILA :: School Safety



School Safety In the past few years, students in several public schools went on violent rampages. The suspects range in age from 11 to 16 years old, as did most of their victims. The crimes not only involved guns, which all children are banned under both federal and state law from owning, but also involved gangs, drugs, social disenfranchisement, even matricide and Satanism.
As emotionally wrenching and tragic as these senselessly violent acts are, so exhaustively are they covered by the media that false impressions about the scope of school violence are created. The week prior to the March 24, 1998, schoolyard shootings in Jonesboro, Ark., in response to a request from President Clinton, the Department of Education`s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released its first survey on crime in the public schools. The study showed that the incidence of crime in schools has not grown significantly during the last two decades.
In an interview with the New York Times, Edith McArthur, one of the authors of the NCES report, discussed Jonesboro. "I`m a parent, too, and you get even one of these horrible shootings and it`s scary," she said. "But it`s such a rare event that they (sic) didn`t show up at all in our study, and as a statistician, I`d have to say that there`s no data showing an increase." ("Study Finds No Big Rise in School Crime," New York Times, p. A20, March 25, 1998)
The NCES report was based on a survey of principals at 1,234 of the nation`s 87,000 public schools. The survey found that more than three-quarters of the schools had some form of anti-violence program. But only 2% have become so concerned that they had hired guards and started metal checks.
The 1998 Justice Policy Institute report "School House Hype: School Shootings and the Real Risks Kids Face in America," concludes that: "Despite the recent shocking school shootings throughout the country, America`s public schools remain very safe. The likelihood of becoming a victim of a school-associated violent death is slightly less than one in a million."
The Justice Policy Institute report suggests that the media needs to do be better job of reporting if the nation is to set rational public policy in the important area of child killings.
No one expects the press to ignore tragic killings of kids, whether they occur on school grounds or in other places. But the data contained in this report show that the public and policy makers are done a great disservice if they are led to believe that school houses are a primary place for juvenile homicides in America.
As other school shootings occur and/or the juveniles involved in the previous shootings are brought to trial, the public discourse could tremendously benefit from the presentation of a broader perspective on juvenile killings. To provide greater context to such cases, the media should at least explain: that school killings are not on the increase; that such killings make up a small minority of all killings of and by juveniles; that the specific communities in which these killings occurred generally experience very few killings by juveniles; that children are three times more likely to be killed by adults than by other juveniles; and that there is no trend toward younger and younger juvenile killings. These data are readily available, and would tremendously benefit the public`s understanding of youth crime.
The overwhelming majority of American kids are good kids. The overwhelming majority of our schools are safe. It is our responsibility to help the small percentage of kids who are going bad from becoming bad, just as it is to face the fact that lawful citizens must not be penalized for that tiny percentage of kids who are violent.
Arrests of teenagers for violent crimes dropped for the third straight year in 1997. The 4% drop in 1997 followed a 9.2% decrease in 1996. Despite this encouraging trend, America needs to look hard at whether a greater percentage of young criminals should be tried as adults in state court. According to 1995 figures, "28% of arrests involving youth who were eligible in their State for processing in the juvenile justice system were handled within the law enforcement agency and then released. About two in three were referred to juvenile court, and 3% were referred directly to criminal court." (Dept. of Justice, "Juvenile Arrests 1995," Feb. 1997, p. 6)
According to the NCES study, school violence is more than 23 times more likely to be unrelated to guns as to involve them. The survey of school principals found that 20 times as many students were disciplined for physical attacks or fights, and 3 times as many students were disciplined for possession or use of a weapon other than a gun than were disciplined for possession or use of a firearm.
The violence that does infect our schools won`t be eradicated by focusing on guns. One of the nation`s foremost criminologists, Prof. Gary Kleck of Florida State University, writes: "[A]lmost none of the gun violence experienced by adolescents occurs in schools. While there is a good deal of violence in schools, virtually none of it involves guns." Prof. Kleck estimates "that under 0.1% of students are caught carrying guns in school in any one-year period.
"While even one student carrying a gun to school for protection would be one too many, the prevalence figures commonly proffered by journalists, politicians, and medical and public health writers should probably be treated more as instances of social problems promotion than as serious, technically sound estimates." (Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, pp. 202- 204, Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1997)
Calls for more juvenile gun laws are "more symbolic than practical." say Professors Joseph F. Sheley and James D. Wright of Tulane University, who in research funded by the Department of Justice, also note that "nearly everything juveniles do with their guns is already against the law." They write that "many jurisdictions are currently contemplating the passage of legislation that would make it illegal for juveniles even to possess guns," but they conclude, "it is difficult to see the exact point of this sort of legislation. As in many other cases involving `gun control,` the point seems more symbolic than practical; the intent is more to strike a posture of concern about the problem of juvenile violence than to provide police or the courts with legislative tools necessary to do their job." (In the Line of Fire: Youth, Guns, and Violence in Urban America, pp. 150-153, Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1995)
Indeed, there are already many laws at both the federal and state levels that address juveniles and guns. Federal law prohibits:
1) possession of a handgun or handgun ammunition by a person under age 18, except under certain circumstances, such as for target shooting.
2) possession of any firearm within 1,000 ft. of school property.
3) a dealer from transferring a handgun or handgun ammunition to a person under age 21 and non-dealers from transferring a handgun or handgun ammunition to a person under age 18, except under certain circumstances. [18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)]
4) dealers from transferring a rifle or shotgun, or ammunition for a rifle or shotgun, to a person under age 18. [18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)]

The Youth Handgun Safety Act (Title XI, Subtitle B), passed in August 1994 as part of the Omnibus Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, prohibits the possession of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile, or the private transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile. Included in the law are some exemptions, such a possessing a firearm for hunting, farming and other specified uses.
The Gun-Free Schools Act took effect on March 31, 1994, amending the current Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 (20 UCS 2701 et seq.). It stipulates that a local educational agency (LEA) receiving ESEA assistance must have a policy requiring the expulsion--for a period of not less than a year--of any student who brings a firearm to school. The LEA`s chief administering officer, however, may modify the expulsion requirement on a case-by-case basis. A second Gun-Free Schools Act, enacted in October 1994, requires LEAs to implement a policy of "referral to the criminal justice or juvenile delinquency system of any student who brings a firearm or weapon to a school served by such agency."
The Gun-Free School Zones Act was initially part of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-647) that took effect on Jan. 29, 1991. On April 26, 1995, the Supreme Court struck it down as unconstitutional. In U.S. v. Lopez, the Court stated that Congress had overstepped its constitutional powers to regulate interstate commerce when it passed the law banning gun possession within 1,000 ft. of a school. The decision turned on whether Congress had the power to pass the law under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which specifically grants Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce.
In September 1996, Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) offered as an amendment to the Treasury, Postal Appropriations bill a slightly modified version of the original Gun-Free School Zones Act. It passed and was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. In an attempt to satisfy the Court`s concerns, the amendment specified that the law would apply to a firearm that has "moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce." Virtually all firearms have crossed state lines and would potentially be covered by the new language.
Back in 1990, NRA had urged Congress to exempt certain generally recognized lawful activities, to ensure that law-abiding gun owners engaging in those activities would not be subject to possible federal felony charges under the Act. These exceptions were included in the Kohl Amendment and are now law. They are as follows:

** "School" means a school that provides elementary or secondary education.
** "School zone" means the grounds of a public, parochial, or private school, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from such grounds.

** The Act`s prohibitions do not apply to:

1) firearms on private property (including homes used for home schooling);
2) unloaded firearms in a locked container or locked firearms rack in a motor vehicle;
3) unloaded firearms possessed while traversing school grounds to access hunting land;
4) entry authorized by the school;
5) persons licensed by state or local authorities;
6) individuals using a firearm in a school program;
7) law enforcement officers acting in an official capacity.

**The prohibition would apply to the discharge of a firearm within the "school zone," but would not apply to the discharge of a firearm on private property, as part of a school program, an individual in accordance with a contract between the school and the individual, or by a law enforcement official acting in an official capacity.

The Act specifies that the federal government, in enacting the Gun-Free School Zones Act, does not intend to occupy this field of law. Therefore, individual states and localities may enact laws governing the possession of firearms on or around schools, as the vast majority of states have.
Contrary to some reports, the Gun-Free School Zones Act does not create any additional or special enforcement mechanisms such as roadblocks. Law enforcement officials are still required to observe Fourth Amendment limitations on search and seizure.
An individual who has been issued a right-to-carry license by the state, or a political subdivision of the state, in which the "school zone" is located may continue to carry in a "school zone" in compliance with existing state and local laws. Non-licensed individuals who drive through a "school zone" must have their firearms unloaded and locked in a container or firearms rack.
Gun-Free School Zones Act and Home Schools
NRA has received numerous questions regarding the impact of the Gun-Free School Zones Act on parents who teach their own children in "home schools" and possess firearms in their homes.
Those questions arise from a letter received by Sen. Dan Coats (R-IN) in July 1997 from John Magaw, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). In response to an inquiry from one of Sen. Coats`s constituents, BATF replied that "Should a `home` school be recognized by state law as a `school` as defined by [the Act], the possession of a firearm on the grounds of such school or within 1,000 feet of school grounds would violate the law. However, there are a number of exceptions to the prohibition, for example, firearms possessed on private property." The letter did not clarify how the Act would apply to those whose "home schools" were also their own private property, as is normally the case.
The concerns raised by that letter resulted in a lawsuit (Perez et al. v. Reno) in which several gun owners who home schooled their children sought a declaration by a federal court that the Act would be unconstitutional if applied to them. The Department of Justice moved to dismiss the case on the basis that the plaintiffs lacked standing, as they had never been indicted, arrested, or threatened with imminent prosecution.
More significantly, the government stated in its memorandum in support of the motion to dismiss that "In any event, the Department of Justice does not interpret the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1996 . . . to apply to the situation presented in the complaint, that is, to individuals who home school their children and otherwise lawfully maintain a firearm in their residence. Under these circumstances, plaintiffs clearly cannot demonstrate a genuine, credible threat of imminent prosecution under the Act." Based in part on that assertion, the complaint was dismissed. Clearly, both NRA and home school advocates will continue to monitor any changes in administration policy.
Posted: 7/29/1999 12:00:00 AM

 

[Glock21]

Scroll down about 2/3 of the way...

From: NRA-ILA :: School Safety



School Safety In the past few years, students in several public schools went on violent rampages. The suspects range in age from 11 to 16 years old, as did most of their victims. The crimes not only involved guns, which all children are banned under both federal and state law from owning, but also involved gangs, drugs, social disenfranchisement, even matricide and Satanism.
As emotionally wrenching and tragic as these senselessly violent acts are, so exhaustively are they covered by the media that false impressions about the scope of school violence are created. The week prior to the March 24, 1998, schoolyard shootings in Jonesboro, Ark., in response to a request from President Clinton, the Department of Education`s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) released its first survey on crime in the public schools. The study showed that the incidence of crime in schools has not grown significantly during the last two decades.
In an interview with the New York Times, Edith McArthur, one of the authors of the NCES report, discussed Jonesboro. "I`m a parent, too, and you get even one of these horrible shootings and it`s scary," she said. "But it`s such a rare event that they (sic) didn`t show up at all in our study, and as a statistician, I`d have to say that there`s no data showing an increase." ("Study Finds No Big Rise in School Crime," New York Times, p. A20, March 25, 1998)
The NCES report was based on a survey of principals at 1,234 of the nation`s 87,000 public schools. The survey found that more than three-quarters of the schools had some form of anti-violence program. But only 2% have become so concerned that they had hired guards and started metal checks.
The 1998 Justice Policy Institute report "School House Hype: School Shootings and the Real Risks Kids Face in America," concludes that: "Despite the recent shocking school shootings throughout the country, America`s public schools remain very safe. The likelihood of becoming a victim of a school-associated violent death is slightly less than one in a million."
The Justice Policy Institute report suggests that the media needs to do be better job of reporting if the nation is to set rational public policy in the important area of child killings.
No one expects the press to ignore tragic killings of kids, whether they occur on school grounds or in other places. But the data contained in this report show that the public and policy makers are done a great disservice if they are led to believe that school houses are a primary place for juvenile homicides in America.
As other school shootings occur and/or the juveniles involved in the previous shootings are brought to trial, the public discourse could tremendously benefit from the presentation of a broader perspective on juvenile killings. To provide greater context to such cases, the media should at least explain: that school killings are not on the increase; that such killings make up a small minority of all killings of and by juveniles; that the specific communities in which these killings occurred generally experience very few killings by juveniles; that children are three times more likely to be killed by adults than by other juveniles; and that there is no trend toward younger and younger juvenile killings. These data are readily available, and would tremendously benefit the public`s understanding of youth crime.
The overwhelming majority of American kids are good kids. The overwhelming majority of our schools are safe. It is our responsibility to help the small percentage of kids who are going bad from becoming bad, just as it is to face the fact that lawful citizens must not be penalized for that tiny percentage of kids who are violent.
Arrests of teenagers for violent crimes dropped for the third straight year in 1997. The 4% drop in 1997 followed a 9.2% decrease in 1996. Despite this encouraging trend, America needs to look hard at whether a greater percentage of young criminals should be tried as adults in state court. According to 1995 figures, "28% of arrests involving youth who were eligible in their State for processing in the juvenile justice system were handled within the law enforcement agency and then released. About two in three were referred to juvenile court, and 3% were referred directly to criminal court." (Dept. of Justice, "Juvenile Arrests 1995," Feb. 1997, p. 6)
According to the NCES study, school violence is more than 23 times more likely to be unrelated to guns as to involve them. The survey of school principals found that 20 times as many students were disciplined for physical attacks or fights, and 3 times as many students were disciplined for possession or use of a weapon other than a gun than were disciplined for possession or use of a firearm.
The violence that does infect our schools won`t be eradicated by focusing on guns. One of the nation`s foremost criminologists, Prof. Gary Kleck of Florida State University, writes: "[A]lmost none of the gun violence experienced by adolescents occurs in schools. While there is a good deal of violence in schools, virtually none of it involves guns." Prof. Kleck estimates "that under 0.1% of students are caught carrying guns in school in any one-year period.
"While even one student carrying a gun to school for protection would be one too many, the prevalence figures commonly proffered by journalists, politicians, and medical and public health writers should probably be treated more as instances of social problems promotion than as serious, technically sound estimates." (Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, pp. 202- 204, Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1997)
Calls for more juvenile gun laws are "more symbolic than practical." say Professors Joseph F. Sheley and James D. Wright of Tulane University, who in research funded by the Department of Justice, also note that "nearly everything juveniles do with their guns is already against the law." They write that "many jurisdictions are currently contemplating the passage of legislation that would make it illegal for juveniles even to possess guns," but they conclude, "it is difficult to see the exact point of this sort of legislation. As in many other cases involving `gun control,` the point seems more symbolic than practical; the intent is more to strike a posture of concern about the problem of juvenile violence than to provide police or the courts with legislative tools necessary to do their job." (In the Line of Fire: Youth, Guns, and Violence in Urban America, pp. 150-153, Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1995)
Indeed, there are already many laws at both the federal and state levels that address juveniles and guns. Federal law prohibits:
1) possession of a handgun or handgun ammunition by a person under age 18, except under certain circumstances, such as for target shooting.
2) possession of any firearm within 1,000 ft. of school property.
3) a dealer from transferring a handgun or handgun ammunition to a person under age 21 and non-dealers from transferring a handgun or handgun ammunition to a person under age 18, except under certain circumstances. [18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)]
4) dealers from transferring a rifle or shotgun, or ammunition for a rifle or shotgun, to a person under age 18. [18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)]

The Youth Handgun Safety Act (Title XI, Subtitle B), passed in August 1994 as part of the Omnibus Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, prohibits the possession of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile, or the private transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile. Included in the law are some exemptions, such a possessing a firearm for hunting, farming and other specified uses.
The Gun-Free Schools Act took effect on March 31, 1994, amending the current Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 (20 UCS 2701 et seq.). It stipulates that a local educational agency (LEA) receiving ESEA assistance must have a policy requiring the expulsion--for a period of not less than a year--of any student who brings a firearm to school. The LEA`s chief administering officer, however, may modify the expulsion requirement on a case-by-case basis. A second Gun-Free Schools Act, enacted in October 1994, requires LEAs to implement a policy of "referral to the criminal justice or juvenile delinquency system of any student who brings a firearm or weapon to a school served by such agency."
The Gun-Free School Zones Act was initially part of the Crime Control Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-647) that took effect on Jan. 29, 1991. On April 26, 1995, the Supreme Court struck it down as unconstitutional. In U.S. v. Lopez, the Court stated that Congress had overstepped its constitutional powers to regulate interstate commerce when it passed the law banning gun possession within 1,000 ft. of a school. The decision turned on whether Congress had the power to pass the law under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which specifically grants Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce.
In September 1996, Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) offered as an amendment to the Treasury, Postal Appropriations bill a slightly modified version of the original Gun-Free School Zones Act. It passed and was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. In an attempt to satisfy the Court`s concerns, the amendment specified that the law would apply to a firearm that has "moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce." Virtually all firearms have crossed state lines and would potentially be covered by the new language.
Back in 1990, NRA had urged Congress to exempt certain generally recognized lawful activities, to ensure that law-abiding gun owners engaging in those activities would not be subject to possible federal felony charges under the Act. These exceptions were included in the Kohl Amendment and are now law. They are as follows:

** "School" means a school that provides elementary or secondary education.
** "School zone" means the grounds of a public, parochial, or private school, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from such grounds.

** The Act`s prohibitions do not apply to:

1) firearms on private property (including homes used for home schooling);
2) unloaded firearms in a locked container or locked firearms rack in a motor vehicle;
3) unloaded firearms possessed while traversing school grounds to access hunting land;
4) entry authorized by the school;
5) persons licensed by state or local authorities;
6) individuals using a firearm in a school program;
7) law enforcement officers acting in an official capacity.

**The prohibition would apply to the discharge of a firearm within the "school zone," but would not apply to the discharge of a firearm on private property, as part of a school program, an individual in accordance with a contract between the school and the individual, or by a law enforcement official acting in an official capacity.

The Act specifies that the federal government, in enacting the Gun-Free School Zones Act, does not intend to occupy this field of law. Therefore, individual states and localities may enact laws governing the possession of firearms on or around schools, as the vast majority of states have.
Contrary to some reports, the Gun-Free School Zones Act does not create any additional or special enforcement mechanisms such as roadblocks. Law enforcement officials are still required to observe Fourth Amendment limitations on search and seizure.
An individual who has been issued a right-to-carry license by the state, or a political subdivision of the state, in which the "school zone" is located may continue to carry in a "school zone" in compliance with existing state and local laws. Non-licensed individuals who drive through a "school zone" must have their firearms unloaded and locked in a container or firearms rack.
Gun-Free School Zones Act and Home Schools
NRA has received numerous questions regarding the impact of the Gun-Free School Zones Act on parents who teach their own children in "home schools" and possess firearms in their homes.
Those questions arise from a letter received by Sen. Dan Coats (R-IN) in July 1997 from John Magaw, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). In response to an inquiry from one of Sen. Coats`s constituents, BATF replied that "Should a `home` school be recognized by state law as a `school` as defined by [the Act], the possession of a firearm on the grounds of such school or within 1,000 feet of school grounds would violate the law. However, there are a number of exceptions to the prohibition, for example, firearms possessed on private property." The letter did not clarify how the Act would apply to those whose "home schools" were also their own private property, as is normally the case.
The concerns raised by that letter resulted in a lawsuit (Perez et al. v. Reno) in which several gun owners who home schooled their children sought a declaration by a federal court that the Act would be unconstitutional if applied to them. The Department of Justice moved to dismiss the case on the basis that the plaintiffs lacked standing, as they had never been indicted, arrested, or threatened with imminent prosecution.
More significantly, the government stated in its memorandum in support of the motion to dismiss that "In any event, the Department of Justice does not interpret the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1996 . . . to apply to the situation presented in the complaint, that is, to individuals who home school their children and otherwise lawfully maintain a firearm in their residence. Under these circumstances, plaintiffs clearly cannot demonstrate a genuine, credible threat of imminent prosecution under the Act." Based in part on that assertion, the complaint was dismissed. Clearly, both NRA and home school advocates will continue to monitor any changes in administration policy.
Posted: 7/29/1999 12:00:00 AM

Maybe I'm missing something, it says exempt in a state where a "right-to-carry license" has been issued in the above post, but the terms of that license in IN is for a handgun, not a shotgun or rifle. Is there another law regarding the carrying of shotguns and rifles in IN that I'm not aware of?