The SAF has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting the defendant in a Montana case challenging the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. The case is the United States of America v. Gabriel Cowan Metcalf.
Metcalf, a resident of Billings, Montana, lives across the street from an elementary school. He was charged under the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act after local police received reports of him carrying a firearm while patrolling his yard and neighborhood. Metcalf stated he was protecting himself and his mother from a stalker against whom she had a protection order. Montana law does not prohibit carrying firearms near schools.
“This case exemplifies the flaws of the ‘gun-free school zones’ law,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “While intended to address school shootings, the law unfairly disarms and legally jeopardizes law-abiding citizens who live or travel within arbitrarily designated 1,000-foot perimeters around schools. In many rural areas, schools are near essential community hubs, making this law unworkable and unconstitutional.”
SAF is joined in the brief by the California Rifle & Pistol Association, Second Amendment Law Center, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, Second Amendment Defense and Education Coalition and Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois.
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut emphasized the broader issue, noting, “Buffer zone laws create accidental violations and make it nearly impossible for people to legally carry firearms in overlapping school zones. These restrictions are unconstitutional and erode fundamental Second Amendment rights.”
The Ninth Circuit’s decision could have nationwide implications for gun-free zone laws.
On multiple levels I am surprised and wish the defendant good fortune. Now to see if this case has a donation portion yet.
The 1,000 foot zone thing is ridiculous, one of the most stupid things ever done. And I don’t mean that just ’cause guns. Its arbitrary, its useless, its logic defying and false logic that some way or another schools are protected by yet another imaginary ‘force field’ of the 1,000 foot zone that has never, not even one time, stopped any bad person wanting to be a threat to the school, and it stops zero. Like all ‘gun free zones’ its another ‘false promise’/’false logic’ lie of politicians anti-gun people that people within such zones are somehow ‘safer’ when the facts show that is definitely not true.
gun free zones (which includes this 1,000 foot school 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 and killers.
* 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.
darn…fix this moderation thing TTAG.
Did you say bad things? Like Booger or something?
no
😆
not sure it is seen as a bug…
Parading around your yard with a gun near a school zone.
Why?
Because.
his yard AND neighborhood. Basically making a spectacle of himself and probably intimidating the school staff and students more than the neighbor who was threatening him. Although, neighbor doesn’t appear to have threatened him further, so could be argued that the deterrent worked.
“Metcalf was arrested in August 2023 following multiple reports that he was wielding a rifle on his property across the street from Broadwater Elementary. While he was mostly on his property, he also took the gun onto the public sidewalk, street and alleyway, which led to his arrest because he was within 1,000 feet of a school, according to authorities.
At that time, Metcalf told MTN News that he was wielding the gun in self-defense following a dispute with his neighbor, and he did not intend to cause alarm at the school. Nevertheless, school officials went into lockdown and closed access to the front playground, which was closest to Metcalf, in an effort to protect students until he was arrested.
On Aug. 17, 2023, Metcalf told authorities he followed cars, walked to a nearby business and escorted his mother across the street, all while carrying a firearm, according to Laslovich.”
https://www.ktvq.com/news/crime-watch/billings-man-who-carried-gun-across-from-school-avoids-federal-prison
No one stood and held those who mandated signs that left the law abiding unarmed and criminals armed accountable. Instead the Gun was shoved under the microscope while Gun Control zealots behind the insane signs skated by…business as usual.
A sign left the law abiding unarmed? Strong sign. Yeah I know what you mean. How about giving to those on the front lines like the SAF, FPC, NAGR, RMGO, NRA/ILA and others? They have the ability to exact change far more than I could telling newcomers to this site about the racism behind gun control. History is absolutely important but you never add any information those about where to go to foster change.
I remember many years a go some anti-gun zealot floated a similar idea. Fortunately it was ruled as unworkable as schools are often on main roads or major secondary roads. Going to and from my range I drive directly past six schools and could be within a thousand feet of a lot more.
The Gun Free School Zone Act is a Federal law passed in 1990. Millions of people drive by schools every day with guns that are loaded or not in locked containers and are therefore in violation. I drive by 2 schools twice a day to and from work. I have a MT CWP so i’m NOT in violation of this unconstitutional law.
Per USC:
Federal law states:
“/I(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 oft:he State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtain 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;”
This is one reason why I have a MT CWP and we also have constitutional carry.
It will be interesting to see how this lawsuit goes, with schools being the proverbial “sacred cow” and all.
stop exempting cops and security personnel and all this goes away over night.
Want to stop this, just pass a law that no one, not the secret service, not cops, not army outside of a declared war, may be exempted from any firearms laws.
Not even SWAT.
All these insipid laws go away instantly when the only way the president, Governors, etc can address a crowd is via zoom. And cops get 10+1 mags and no select fire options. No grenade launchers.
Probably take a constitutional amendment, but seems like we’re going to need one, since “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” is just not clear enough.
Comments are closed.