Posted on 02/29/2012 12:22:59 PM PST by marktwain
GRAND RAPIDS — Nicholas Looman says he carries a gun on a regular basis to exercise his rights as a licensed firearms holder.
He’s carried a pistol while grocery shopping, attending public events and while going about other parts of his daily routine. Looman believes he’s well-versed in the state’s right-to-carry laws.
So when he was stopped outside a voting precinct after casting his ballot in Tuesday’s primary election, Looman, 25, said he was frustrated, more than anything, with what he believes is a lack of understanding over what the laws are.
“I don’t want to be a problem. I don’t want to win a lawsuit, but I think there needs to be justice,” said Looman on Tuesday evening, hours after he was told to leave Aberdeen Elementary following a discussion with police. “I would like a public apology.”
Looman said he had already cast his ballot at the Grand Rapids elementary school and was headed out the door Tuesday when a school staff member stopped him and called his pistol into question. The weapon was holstered, in clear view, at his waist, Looman said.
State law prohibits carrying a concealed weapon on school property, Looman said, but his weapon was clearly visible. And he believes he had every right to bring it along to vote.
Looman said Grand Rapids Public Schools staff banned him from school property until further notice.
District Spokesman John Helmholdt said the state school code states that weapons of any kind are not allowed on school property.
He was told Looman came into the school through an entry designated for voters, then after voting, walked into the main portion of the school with a weapon clearly visible. He was stopped at that point by a school worker.
Helmholdt said visitors should know not to bring a weapon into a school.
“Our number one issue is school safety,” he said. “Common sense tells you don’t bring a gun into a school.”
But Looman says he believes his rights as a voter were violated on Tuesday when school staff and authorities confronted him at a polling location. He’s taking a stand in hopes authorities will take a closer look at what the laws are.
“It became a civil liberties infraction because it was a voting day, and that’s disappointing,” he said. “I just wanted to go home to have lunch.”
‘gun free’ school zone violation is a Federal beef.
From Chip Hoyboer in the comments:
“The consensus of whether or not what this man did was legal or not seems to be that it was indeed legal, and I am not qualified enough in the specifics of gun laws to refute anything that has been sited, so I will take the consensus to be true. However, regardless of the legality, I find the ramifications of this act potentially disturbing. As a school teacher, how does one now handle a situation like this? Do I just allow a individual with a gun to stroll through our hallways because he or she has a permit? Does this act change the strategies of those that intend to do harm in a school? Get a permit, have a gun in plain site, walk into the school because there is no legal reason for you not to do this, and then open fire? As a parent, should I feel comfortable with my children being in a school that has a stranger walking the hallways with a unconcealed firearm? As adults we are so quick to site our individual rights of freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom of expression, etc., we forget another cornerstone upon which our country was founded on, and that is our citizens responsibility to the common good. I am disappointed that very little has been mentioned here on the hundreds of children that were involved in this incident. I think we have lost focus on the message this acts sends to the students in a school that this happens to. I support the right of our citizenry to bear arms legally, but I also feel that a citizen who shows such a lack of judgement, responsibility, and common sense to be unworthy of licensing for such a right.”
|
From your lips to God's ears. |
In Iowa, you can’t carry any weapon into a school and you can’t bring a gun into a voting place. No if’s, and’s or butt’s.
I believe this guy may be saying goodbye to his right to carry after this.
Were the police armed when they arrived at the school? If so, how does that not violate the “school code”?
I’m all for individuals controlling their own property rules, but this is public property.
It was especially idiotic to do this on the day of a school shooting in a neighboring state. I can’t imagine why he felt this display was necessary.
I wonder how Chip handles the police when they walk down the hall at his school?
That's the problem with "teachers" (this person claimed to be one) today: Too much "feeling" and not enough "thinking." I would agree with this person that carrying into a school wasn't necessarily good judgement, but poor enough to deny this guy the right to carry anywhere at all? Phhhsh. I hope this person is kept as far away from the levers of power as possible. No wonder our kids are stupid.
Sometimes people on our side do some of the dumbest things.
My step brother just got his carry permit a year ago when the laws were relaxed. I’ve been a CCW permit holder for 31 years. He has been for 1 year. He carries open because he likes how people react to him and his wife carrying their guns where everyone can see them.
I told him, you lose the element of surprise that way. He believes that he keeps from being a victim because he shows them he is armed. I asked him if he plays poker and if so does he show everyone at the card table his hand as he plays? To me, carrying open is like playing poker with your cards exposed. It tips your hand to those who are betting against you.
I showed him and his wife how easy it is to use their guns against them by walking up behind her and pulling her gun from her holster. I gave it back and said, you brought the weapon to me that I could use to take you both out. He looked very shocked but not enough to stop doing this. Now he is one of the people who is getting stores and businesses to post signs that say “No Guns Allowed”.
Sometimes those we think are on our side do us the most harm.
I know this guy voted, but was retaliated against for voting and how many others in the gun toting public didn’t vote because they feared intimidation.
I wonder if by placing a polling place in a school where the “right to carry” is presumably denied creates a violation of his rights under the voting act of 1965?
After all one is protected from discrimination because of other Constitutionally protected conditions, i.e. race, color, creed, national origin, and religion. Well the Second Amendment provides protection for the gun carrying class. Isn’t it as good as the first?
Where’s the ACLU?
Even if he can claim a right to enter the polling place so armed (and I don't profess to be knowledgable in the Michigan law) I doubt that right then extends to rest of the building. If he was in an area where voters aren't privileged to enter, then he likely IS in violation.
All in all, he forced a stupid confrontation in order to become a test case. I don't think that it is wise, and I think it hurts the whole 2nd Amendment effort by giving the opposition an argument that the lay person would see as a reason to be distrustful of armed citizens.
So is trying to prevent someone from voting:
18 USC § 245 - Federally protected activities
(b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with—
(1) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from—
(A) voting or qualifying to vote, qualifying or campaigning as a candidate for elective office, or qualifying or acting as a poll watcher, or any legally authorized election official, in any primary, special, or general election;
As a secondary issue, if the argument is that someone who is legally carrying a weapon may shoot children then what is to stop that same person from shooting children at a ball game, ice skating rink, shopping mall, etc. If he's a licensed carrier, I would assume that he has had some basic screening to determine that he has no criminal record or mental issues. This basic argument is a stepping stone for not allowing anyone to ever carry a weapon, aka "A slippery slope".
That’s a violation of federal law: See 18 USC § 245 - Federally protected activities Specifically section b.1.A
Part of that whole "laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding" clause in that Constitution thingie...
>It was especially idiotic to do this on the day of a school shooting in a neighboring state. I can’t imagine why he felt this display was necessary.
So, you would disparage another of rights because it’s ‘insensitive’?
Oh boy...
Kinda hard to stop an active shooter if you need to run back out to your car to retrieve your firearm.
At least he got to vote first.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.