Gun free zone and printing

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do not carry where legally prohibited out of an abundance of caution. I generally avoid these areas when possible. If I go to a baseball game or a school or a place where no guns carries the weight of the law I weight the value of going, knowing I must do so unarmed.

I feel safer having gun rights and going unarmed occasionally than I would carrying after my rights had been revoked. Then it's like you're carrying at a school all day anywhere.

That said I wouldn't report him, or even care. I'm assuming you know for a fact it's a parent. If I saw who knows who carrying at a school I would definitely size them up, but like they say "we're not cops" so when it comes to potential crime, suspected crime, or pre-crime I don't presume to play cop and I don't get involved.

Do we follow scruffy looking teenagers walking in gated communities just in case maybe they're up to no good? Should we? Should we view this any differently?

I would only intervene in any way if harm were occurring or imminent.
 
So the guy who you say was "printing" ( which we naturally interpreted as meaning visual gun evidence through clothing ) , who you initially said you don't know but later stated that you've conversed with and asked about his gunsmithing , who you at least know to be a parent (of a kid in the school , I presume) was printing a cell phone and a magazine? No gun?

If I were Joe Friday I'd be saying "Ok pal , let's take it from the top..."
 
Usually I am with the mind your own business crowd. Today though, we have to police each other. I'm alright with open carry, and do so myself at times, but there is a time and place. For printing, I usually care less too.

The last thing we need right now is THAT GUY who becomes another talking point or statistic to be used against the RKBA. Observe, then discretely mention it to him, remembering you don't want a scene.
 
So, you didn’t see a firearm “print,” you saw what you believe was a magazine? Could be he left the gun in the car...

Magazine on gun is what printed, at angle that it was in a gun. May have been unloaded who knows. It wasn't a spare mag, it was angled Nd at a height that it was clear.
 
Some fairly reasonable conversation here. But the OP didn't have all the info in it that should have been in it. Yo Mama added information later that would have been nice to know in the OP. So the alleged "printer" was known to Yo, who had spoken to him before, was known to be a gunsmith, didn't actually see the firearm, but did see the magazine. I suppose if one was going to say anything at all to the fellow, being in possession of the knowledge Yo was, the remarks in posts 17 and 24 might be the best.

I'm opposed to gun free zones myself. They have proven to be abattoirs. Ironically in my state a citizen can't carry concealed in a school, but you can open carry on school grounds or in schools if you have a Michigan CPL. However the entire issue is still unsettled. The best advice is to know the laws and abide by them.
 
Go back 45 years to my high school parking lot. Probably 1/3 of the male students had a long gun in their vehicle this time of year.
What a bunch of “Molon maybe’s”.

We live in a different era for sure. Like it or not.
 
^ you bet we do!

Because he’s talking about having them visible in the back window of the truck, not just inside hidden somewhere.

Not to mention that wasn’t even a very good spot in trucks of the day. They were single cab back then and the rack was always hitting one of the 3, 4, 5 or 6 folks in the bench seat, in the back of the head...
 
1. Mind your own business unless it is directly affecting you.

2. Obey the law - report if required or if your gut tells you to. If someone’s mad about being jammed up for breaking the law, well, who’s really to blame?

Sometimes I feel the need to not mind my own business in the interest of public safety - drunk drivers, the guy at the range who mag dumped over the berm toward a housing area, etc.

A guy hard printing in a school? I’d quietly tell him to do a better job not printing without actually saying I know he’s breaking the law.

“Things aren’t always as hidden as we think.” If that doesn’t work, well, he’s an idiot and deserves someone else to report him.

I would only add two things to this, the first would be if you're uncertain of what to do don't do anything.

The second thing would be, I wouldn't say a word to the other person. Not my circus. Not my monkeys.
 
I'm conflicted on a response to seeing someone printing while in a gun free zone such as a school. I don't agree with gun free zones, but saw another parent printing hard the other day. (I know for a fact they are not law enforcement).

So if I said something, the guy is not hurting anyone and just another parent that loves and wants to keep their kids safe. Then I have created an unnecessary problem for nothing.

Or......what if I'm wrong. I dont know the guy. If I had known he was carrying and if he did trigger a horrible event, what would my responsibility have been to prevent this from happening?

Hard one for me as again I hate gun free zones, and believe teachers need to be armed, but life is as it is, they exist and are the law. What do you do in this situation?

Not sure what state you are in, but some states do allow permit holders to carry inside a school (UT for one example). So more info is needed. However.....you say, "...for a fact I KNOW they are not law enforcement."
However, two paras down you say, "I don't know the guy."
So how do you know he is not in law enforcement?

For many years, my neighbors thought I was a long distance truck driver (used to explain my long absences from the home) when I was really a federal agent.
 
I would only add two things to this, the first would be if you're uncertain of what to do don't do anything.

The second thing would be, I wouldn't say a word to the other person. Not my circus. Not my monkeys.

I wholly agree on your first point. Too many people have no clue what they’re doing when they act - in a variety of life activities.

Actually, I agree with your second point, for myself anyway. I’m mostly aware of my surroundings, but also 99% disengaged from other humans in public and see little upside to any interaction - me saying anything in the OPs scenario would be a rare act of benevolence to a guy I might know or not.

I certainly wouldn’t be friends or even well acquainted with someone so stupid they obviously print in a gun free zone with severe misdemeanor or felony consequences. That part makes me wonder...
 
Actually, I agree with your second point, for myself anyway. I’m mostly aware of my surroundings, but also 99% disengaged from other humans in public and see little upside to any interaction - me saying anything in the OPs scenario would be a rare act of benevolence to a guy I might know or not.

I have a rule that I don't start conversations with people I don't know (I rarely start conversations with people I do know) and certainly don't correct people I don't know.

It's been my experience that it almost never ends well.
 
After considering this situation on my morning walk, and also reflecting on the Secret Service report on mass school shootings over the last 10 years, I have some observations.

If you see an adult in a gun free zone printing, be discreet and respectful, but do say something. You will then get a quick assessment of his state of mind and situation.

The school shooting report came up with no profile for a school shooter (student, peer shooter, not adult or outsider). But they came up with a constellation of attributes. Grievance from being bullied, delusion of grandeur, or catatonic state of being checked-out emotionally and on auto pilot for achieving task would be behavior tells.

So if I did a discrete check-in with a parent who was printing, I would quickly be able to assess the threat. If he responds with embarrassment or gratitude for my concern and discretion, I’ll know things are cool. If his response is inappropriate for the situation, I should note that and take additional action if he is in distress.
 
Last edited:
I have a rule that I don't start conversations with people I don't know (I rarely start conversations with people I do know) and certainly don't correct people I don't know.

It's been my experience that it almost never ends well.

That’s a definite similarity between us. Mine comes from the acceptance I have zero authority to enforce any correction I might offer and/or my feelings might be very hurt if they tell me eff off. :)

The only thing better than deescalation is not escalating in the first place.

I physically cringe when I’m approached in public, knowing whoever it is is going to attempt to get some sort of attention they’re lacking from me.
 
After considering this situation on my morning walk, and also reflecting on the Secret Service report on mass school shootings over the last 10 years, I have some observations.

If you see an adult in a gun free zone printing, be discreet and respectful, but do say something. You will then get a quick assessment of his state of mind and situation.

The school shooting report came up with no profile for a school shooter (student, peer shooter, not adult or outsider). But they came up with a constellation of attributes. Grievance from being bullied, delusion of grandeur, or catatonic state of being checked-out emotionally and on auto pilot for achieving task would be behavior tells.

So if I did a discrete check-in with a parent who was printing, I would quickly be able to assess the threat. If he responds with embarrassment or gratitude for my concern and discretion, I’ll know things are cool. If his response is inappropriate for the situation, I should note of that and take additional action if he is in distress.

What if he tells you FO MYOB? Because that's a very likely possibility?
 
If I am communicating with confidence, warmth, and discretion as a fellow gunny in the know, he should be able to pick up on those social cues.

I don’t usually respond to genuine, friendly concern with FO, MYOB
 
If I am communicating with confidence, warmth, and discretion as a fellow gunny in the know, he should be able to pick up on those social cues.
You are making a lot of assumptions about someone whom you do not know.

I don’t usually respond to genuine, friendly concern with FO, MYOB
What does that have to do with it?
 
He's no friend of mine, but seen him around school enough to know he's a parent. License plate says he's a gunsmith. Even asked him before and he gave me his card. That's as much as I know about him, which is still little to nothing. Not hypothetical, it did occur.

Well you keep adding more information. So this is not a observation of a unknown person. You not only know his occupation but you have had previous conversation(s) with him so based on that you should have some feeling about his character and mental state.

Is the fact you know he is a gunsmith influencing your belief that he was packing iron? I personally expect a gunsmith to be carrying and have seen some gunsmiths packing interesting choices when it comes to handguns.

If anything based on your knowledge of his occupation and previous conversation(s) with him I would have very little concern about him committing a violent crime. Rather due to how slow the Police response times usually are he may be first on the scene and the primary responder.
 
After considering this situation on my morning walk, and also reflecting on the Secret Service report on mass school shootings over the last 10 years, I have some observations.

The school shooting report came up with no profile for a school shooter (student, peer shooter, not adult or outsider). But they came up with a constellation of attributes. Grievance from being bullied, delusion of grandeur, or catatonic state of being checked-out emotionally and on auto pilot for achieving task would be behavior tells.

That was a pretty useless report, wasn't it? Nothing in it was actionable. About all that they determined is that there is no profile what-so-ever that can be used in predictive manner and their suggestions for dealing with such shootings in order to head them off was that each school should have a team of highly trained personnel to basically assess the student body on a regular basis to spot troubled individuals and get them help. Most of the attributes they came up with would apply to huge segments of the student body. All of the traits mentioned, even combinations of them, are in no way diagnostic of a shooter. I think like 9/11, this was one of those deals where it is much easier to back trap a single person to figure out what went wrong than it is the front track a whole population of people in order to stop a shooting from occurring. https://www.secretservice.gov/data/protection/ntac/usss-analysis-of-targeted-school-violence.pdf

So if I did a discrete check-in with a parent who was printing, I would quickly be able to assess the threat. If he responds with embarrassment or gratitude for my concern and discretion, I’ll know things are cool. If his response is inappropriate for the situation, I should note that and take additional action if he is in distress.

What if upon being discovered, he just shoots and kills you?
 
I'm conflicted on a response to seeing someone printing while in a gun free zone such as a school. I don't agree with gun free zones, but saw another parent printing hard the other day. (I know for a fact they are not law enforcement).

So if I said something, the guy is not hurting anyone and just another parent that loves and wants to keep their kids safe. Then I have created an unnecessary problem for nothing.

Or......what if I'm wrong. I dont know the guy. If I had known he was carrying and if he did trigger a horrible event, what would my responsibility have been to prevent this from happening?

Hard one for me as again I hate gun free zones, and believe teachers need to be armed, but life is as it is, they exist and are the law. What do you do in this situation?

"Printing" is not "seeing a firearm". It's seeing an outline of something under clothing.

I carry everywhere I can. In places where I cannot carry, I STILL have my magazine pouch on my belt, sans magazine. Absolutely nothing wrong with this in accordance with any laws that I've ever run across...but print it will.

In fact, the only reason why I don't carry an empty holster in the same fashion is because of basic firearms safety: I firmly believe the safest place for a holstered firearm is to remain IN the holster in the first place. So...if I'm going to be entering a gun free zone, the entire holster comes out and gets locked away per the applicable jurisdictional laws. If I didn't believe this way, the firearm would come out and the holster would stay. And printing as a result may happen.

On top of this, there are some people who are exempt from the gun free zone laws. Are you sure this person is or is not one of those people?

To answer the question of "what to do", every person here would have to evaluate the specific circumstances in any given encounter through the filters of their own training, their own biases, their own moral outlook, and their own "gut feeling" about the situation.

You can go all the way in either direction: report ANY such suspicious encounters or ignore ALL such encounters.

The path to wisdom, however, usually lies between those extremes.

Personally...if all I saw was "printing" with no other warning signs, I'd be more likely to tag the person in my mind as someone to be more aware of and move on with my business.
 
Not sure what state you are in,
Believe the OP had previously noted his state as Washington.

Personally...if all I saw was "printing" with no other warning signs, I'd be more likely to tag the person in my mind as someone to be more aware of and move on with my business
Even if your children attended that school, and you didn't know the person?

RCW 9.41.280
Possessing dangerous weapons on school facilities—Penalty—Exceptions. (Effective until January 1, 2020.)

(1) It is unlawful for a person to carry onto, or to possess on, public or private elementary or secondary school premises, school-provided transportation, or areas of facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools:
(a) Any firearm;
...
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
...
(e) Any person in possession of a pistol who has been issued a license under RCW 9.41.070, or is exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060, while picking up or dropping off a student;

...
(7) "GUN-FREE ZONE" signs shall be posted around school facilities giving warning of the prohibition of the possession of firearms on school grounds.
 
Believe the OP had previously noted his state as Washington.

Even if your children attended that school, and you didn't know the person?

RCW 9.41.280
Possessing dangerous weapons on school facilities—Penalty—Exceptions. (Effective until January 1, 2020.)

(1) It is unlawful for a person to carry onto, or to possess on, public or private elementary or secondary school premises, school-provided transportation, or areas of facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools:
(a) Any firearm;
...
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
...
(e) Any person in possession of a pistol who has been issued a license under RCW 9.41.070, or is exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060, while picking up or dropping off a student;

...
(7) "GUN-FREE ZONE" signs shall be posted around school facilities giving warning of the prohibition of the possession of firearms on school grounds.
"or areas of facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools"

This is interesting. Say the school decides to hold an outing at a reserved section of a public park. You stroll through while armed not knowing about this. Pretty vague, you could easily be in violation and arrested.
 
Even if your children attended that school, and you didn't know the person?

Aaaaaand here we go with the supplementary qualifiers.

The answer to your question lies within that one portion of my posting that you quoted for your question. I'll repost that quote here, unchanged except for the emphasis on the important part...and then I'll directly answer your question:

"Personally...if all I saw was "printing" with no other warning signs, I'd be more likely to tag the person in my mind as someone to be more aware of and move on with my business"

So, my direct answer to your question is "Yes, even if my children attended that school and I didn't know that person".

My actions are predicated upon my interpretation of the holistic circumstances present at the time I observe them. On hypothetical postings online, they are predicated upon my interpretation of the specific circumstances prescribed in the posting itself. (Usually with my own qualifiers.)

If people come along after answering the posting and say "well, what about (fill in the blank)", then they're changing the specific set of circumstances. (Usually in a way that tends to invalidate a previously given answer.)

I don't play that game, unless it's for something like instructional purposes.

LOTS of things can be interpreted as "printing", and in reality MANY of those things may be the result of non-weapon items.

And even the fact that an individual MAY be carrying a weapon does not, in fact, automatically mean they are a danger to children, mine or anybody else's.

LET'S PUT THIS IN ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE:

The ONLY thing that makes any given person carrying a firearm into a designated gun free zone, such as a school, "bad" is the law which SAYS it's bad. Carrying a firearm is not, in and of itself, "bad". Or, in legal latin terms "malum in se", which means "evil in itself". It's an example of a law that makes something "bad" ONLY because the law SAYS it's bad. The legal latin for this is "malum prohibitum", or "wrong because it's prohibited".

There is no difference in the inherent danger of carrying a firearm in many gun free zones than in any other area where such an activity is not deemed "illegal".

My children had/have more contact with the world than just gun free zone schools. The inherent danger of any given person carrying a concealed weapon in any of them was not, and is not, any different.

Why should my answer, therefore, be any different than the answer I would give in any other circumstance outside of a gun free zone?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top