Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Gun Owners Violate Law By Driving Past Wyoming School

July 13, 2011 by  

Gun owners in Wyoming may be violating Federal law.A gun rights advocacy group is warning gun owners in Wyoming that they may be unintentionally and unavoidably violating a Federal law by driving down the road with a gun in the vehicle.

The Federal Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995 — which is part of the Crime Control Act — makes it a Federal crime to have a gun on public property, including highways, within 1,000 feet of schools, according to The Casper Star-Tribune. However, the news source points out that Interstate 25 in Cheyenne, Wyo., runs within 1,000 feet of Jessup Elementary School.

This means that those people who drive by the school with a gun in their car and do not have a concealed weapon permit are in violation of the law, which can result in up to five years in prison and the offender losing his right to bear arms.

“Anyone who carries in a populated area without a Wyoming permit is unavoidably committing multiple Federal felonies,” Grant Chapman, who is working with the National Coalition for Amending the Federal Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995, told the newspaper.

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Gun Owners Violate Law By Driving Past Wyoming School”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • tom sherman

    So when I drive within 1000 ft. of a Wyoming School I am in violation but it is O.K. for a criminal to pull right into the parking lot!!!!! So when I drive by or just happen to be at that school as a law abiding citizen I will never be able to stop the carnage like what happened in COLORADO!!! Why don’t you people get your HEAD out of your DUMB ASS????????

    • Vagabond

      Tom because they are too damned STUPID,

    • http://igoogle PEH

      Right on Tom!
      If the administrators in the schools had been known to be ‘armed,’ there is a better then even chance that Colorado would not have experienced the God-awful carnage in both schools. Why is it that schools, universities and churches are reportedly the specific places being hit?
      If any organization chooses to be publicly designated as a so-called ‘gun-free’ zone, it seems only logical to me that they should post another sign right next to it that reads “Criminals Welcome” because it is the flip side of their notice.

      • thinkingoutsidethebox

        Was it in Mississippi or Arkansas that the principle went to his car, retrieved his pistol, and stopped a shooter as he was leaving the high school to go to a grade school to shoot more people.

    • USAF VET

      So what happens to those people who end up having a school built across the street from them. They were there first but I suppose they would have to give up their guns also. I’ve said it many times, gun laws don’t make sense. Of course how could they, 99.999% of them are written by liberals.

    • Eddie G.

      Agreed! I don’t live in Cheyenne anymore neither. Traveled I-25 a lot and never knew I was near a school enough to have a federal violation. Just goes to show what a dumb law this is.

  • David in MA

    Another violation of the Constitution?
    Also, did Wyoming accept the federal law?
    or, is it just assumed states must accept federal law?
    another violation of the Constitution?
    me thinks it is.

  • Cliff Siebert

    from the ATF website:

    The law provides certain exceptions to the general ban on
    possession of firearms in school zones. One exception is
    where 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. . .” See
    18 D.S.C. § 922 (q) (2) (B) (ii).

    get the facts jack!

    • Mounted Shooter

      Cliff, I’m not sure if I understand your comment. Are you are saying we are OK by the law if “we have a license” to posses the gun. Since when is it required to be licensed just to own / posses a gun? And I’m not talking about carrying a concealed pistol. Put this into the context of the thousands of hunters who drive through WY to hunt. They do not have a license issued by WY to carry, they are traveling from state to state to hunt. The hunting license is to hunt (in another state or WY) not to carry.

      In short this law sucks like most other gun laws. The idea that you can pass a law to prevent a school shooting is simple minded nonsense. Name a time in history when passing a law prevented anyone from killing someone else.

      As for possessing a gun, God gave me the right to protect my family and my self. The constitution guaranteed that right. The words printed in any law only matter to someone not willing to kill someone else (gun, knife baseball bat) to protect themselves. A gun is just a tool. A very affective tool.

      Here in WI, there is a sporting goods store in a town nearby that is ~500 feet from a school. Every person that walks out that store is breaking federal law.

      Ridiculous laws are passed everyday by highly educated, shortsighted, stupid people. I’m curious, does anyone have an idea of how many people have been prosecuted under this 1995 law? Just a guess, but I’d bet not to many who weren’t also committing other crimes.

      The big question is…..when they come to your door to collect your guns, to take away that which you protect your family with, have you made up your mind whether to shoot them on your doorstep or hand over your gun?

      • Vagabond

        Mounted I dont think they have bothered to read the Constitution.I have a copy of it here in front of me and I see no where in the constitution where it say’s the citisens shall have the right to keep and bear arms so long as they have a permit or are licennsed to do so.Amendment 2. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, that is the way article 2 reads.

        • Christin


          Too many STUPID laws… everyone is probably breaking some law anytime of the week.

          I believe the Constitution is a GREAT Document for limited government and outlines laws for a Free Market, Free people to follow, …but it appears to me that many States and Federal Politicians have over-ridden the authority of it.

          I think one will go to jail if they break any state or federal law and even if it violates the Constitution…

          The Constitution whom all politicians must swear an oath to, but refuse to acknowledge or follow… they are above the law so they don’t care about where it comes from… so much for the Rule of Law.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          I’ve read that, according to original references, two hundred or so years ago the version of Article Two which you are reading lacked those first and third commas. Hence it read (more sensibly and grammatically–though we know how ignorant of the King’s English our backwoods founders obviously were), that because we have a well-regulated militia in our midst, our civil right to armed self-defense must not be infringed.

          Whatever could they have meant by that?

          The fact that this is only the second proposed Article in a much lengthier list seems not without significance. Sad experience within their living memory may have prompted the founders to ensure this right was placed practically front and center. The British government tried to outlaw guns in the colonies, the citizens responded. After we’d gained our freedom from tyranny (at great cost and nearly failing), it’s clear the authors of the Constitution weren’t about to lose sight of the only thing which ultimately won us our freedoms and protected us from reprisal.

          Historically, this Article was written soon after the States had fought a protracted rebellion triggered primarily by two key things: One was an armed military routinely invading the colonists homes as though they owned them (“No-Knock Laws” are far from new, and redcoated soldiers were British law, and the colonists were British subjects). The other was said military attempting to disarm the citizens at Concord and Lexington, to deprive them of their gun rights.

          We all know what happened next. Keep in mind that the colonists did not have a Second Amendment to back them up at the time, they were English citizens. They just believed in their hearts that outlawing their rights to privacy and self-defense was wrong, not like unfair taxes but so wrong that they were willing to risk death to protect these particular rights. Guys like Jefferson, Adams, Henry, Paine, and Franklin simply articulated these fundamental human rights. Most weren’t in the front lines–colonists with trades, farms and flintlocks are the ones who took it from there.

          What really opened the ball were issues of home and personal security rights, and gun rights. That’s why these are among the first things mentioned in the Articles of the Constitution, gun rights immediately after Article One, a stipulation of personal and citizen rights. This ordering can hardly be random.

          So the today much-argued Article Two really boiled down to: The citizenry have the right to protect themselves from invasive and unwarranted police action from all comers. And that to do so requires citizen-owned arms. Weapons were the only thing which ultimately gained us our freedom against a well-regulated army, arms were obviously the only things which could help us keep it, and to this day they are still our only guarantee of continued liberty, as history has shown time and again from Hitler’s Germany to feudal Japan and back beyond written record. All scholarly argument to the contrary, all speculation as to the “actual meaning and intent” of Article Two’s authors is specious sophistry bordering on treason.

          A disarmed populace is as “free” as the next tyrant allows it to be, no freer. To argue that “that was then, this is now,” or that “times have changed,” is to ignore history and human nature. They’ve never successfully outlawed tyrants, but when someone convinces me they have done so, perhaps I’ll give the Second Amendment a second look. Till then, it still works for me.

          As written. Its meaning is still pretty unequivocal, its intent fairly obvious. And it seems equally obvious that the intent of anyone proposing to disarm America represents exactly and precisely those sorts of interests our founders tried to protect us from by ratifying the Second Amendment (without all the confusing, misplaced commas).

          They never intended to actually protect us (don’t expect George Washington to show up on a great white horse). They intended for Americans to be able to protect themselves, by Constitutional law, and with lead and powder should need arise. They certainly couldn’t have meant we should all submit to a well-regulated government-run military, when we’d just fought our way out of that very situation.

          But…if they secretly did? If they were intentionally abstruse, leaving a back door for tyranny? Well, then we’re back to square one, aren’t we kids? Taxation without actual representation, home and privacy invasions by an unfettered police state, uniformed thugs with guns coming to take away our weapons.

          But, we’re used to that.

          • iam

            Average Joe, the people “educated” in public schools are so stupid that they don’t understand grammar. They throw in commas indiscriminately. Nearly every subject is separated from the verb by a misplaced comma. Example: “The car, sped along the street.” When I try to read copies of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, I give up in disgust because of that failing. I wish I could get an original copy of both. In spite of your assertion that the founders were “ignorant of the King’s English,” which may be sarcasm on your part, they were in fact more educated than our contemporaries.

          • pegasis

            Average Joe,
            Beautifully reasoned, eloquently stated! Amen sir!

      • wandamurline

        The Constitution says I “have the right to bear arms”…it doesn’t say a damn thing about permits or anything else…so as far as I am concerned, the feds and states can kiss it. And yes, I have made up my mind…they will get my gun from my dead hand and I will take out as many of them as I can before they get it. When America is disarmed, we will be at the mercy of a tyranical government, tyranical foreign countries and the homeboys who get their guns off the black market…you know the ATF who gives the guns to them. What a crock.

        • iam

          “…we will be at the mercy…” That is precisely why BO, Clinton, Holder, et. al. are working furiously with the U.N. to subvert our Constitution and ban firearms. Have you seen anything about this in the lame-stream media? Of course not.

      • hunter

        is good to hear someone who thinks as i do.i am just an old hillbilly,but i have the sence to see what they are doing to us all.when they come to my door.i may have to let them have my guns.only after i run outa amo.

        • 45caliber

          I’ve bought enough that it is going to take me a long time to run out of ammo!

          • Think about it

            You to ;-)

        • Think about it

          Amen to that my HillBilly brother.

    • TEX

      OK Cliff answer this. I live in Texas and don’t have a WY carry permit. Am I supposed to plan a route around the school ? Or just never come to WY to hunt and spend my money ?

      • Gary in Oh

        Any school in any state its a federal law. Same with prescription drugs, cigarettes a pocket knife etc. But if the law says firearm you can beat by going to the original 1934 National Firearms Act and find the definition of a firearm, then you have the facts to get your own tit out of a wringer on anything with firearm as the key word describing the thing you had a violation with. I could type for an hour and you’d still have to check it yourself, so you may as well google 1934 National Firearms act yourself. Now you can have a great day.

        • jibbs

          Gary in Oh says:
          July 13, 2011 at 10:02 am
          Any school in any state its a federal law. Same with prescription drugs, cigarettes a pocket knife etc. But if the law says firearm you can beat by going to the original 1934 National Firearms Act and find the definition of a firearm, then you have the facts to get your own tit out of a wringer on anything with firearm as the key word describing the thing you had a violation with. I could type for an hour and you’d still have to check it yourself, so you may as well google 1934 National Firearms act yourself. Now you can have a great day.

          You need to read “The Dick Act of 1902″

          • Think about it

            Or you can just read the We The People Act of 2011, It states, You can kiss my azz Uncle Scam :-(

        • Gary in Oh

          Also the term (word) you use in court is more important than we think. The 2nd Amendment says the word is arms, the officer will probably use weapon, gun, side arm,etc. Anything but arm is wrong, no don,t argue with barney he has a taser and backup on the way. ( besides its not right to shoot an ignorant person over a word they do not understand) Do not put up a fight, go peaceably and have your day in court. Then have your stuff together and sue them for false imprisonment after you win the case. They have to learn some how and what better way to reach than mess with their $ just like they were going to mess with yours and your rights.

          • jibbs

            Good luck in court, hope you have lots of cash to waste. By the time court is over, your weapons will have already been melted down or in some LEO’s collection.

      • C130 Gunship

        TEX…I live in Texas as well and this article is BULL$HIT! Just look at all the states WY recognizes CCL’s from….

        Permits/Licenses Wyoming State Honors:

        Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas Colorado Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Iowa Kentucky Louisiana Maine Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Montana Missouri Nebraska New Hampshire New Mexico North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia West Virginia.

        The 1st, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs of this article are incorrect. Poorly researched gun article.

      • Cliffystones


        A couple of months ago I drove from my home in Denver to Missoula to visit an old friend. I have a Colorado CC license, and Wyoming and Montana have reciprocity with Colorado. I had with me my S&W revolver, an AR-15 and a Glock 19. But I don’t have (nor do I really need) a Wyoming permit.

        When you visit me in the joint, please don’t forget the cake with the baked in hacksaw blade!

    • jibbs

      The FACT is, the “Dick Act of 1902″ was ruled on by the Supreme Court. It ruled that all gun laws are null and void. The 2nd Amendment is the law of the land.

  • tom sherman

    I will carry my gun anywhere I want & OBAMA or the U.N. will not stop me!!! That is my RIGHT because of the 2nd Amendment!! If there is to be a GUN FREE ZONE then let it be in WASH. D.C.

    • jibbs

      HIGH FIVE!!

    • Think about it

      You got that right bro.

  • Don

    I’m not an attorney but it is my understanding the situation is same in Texas. I do not believe a “concealed carry permit or license” changes anything. If stopped for a legal reason and found to have a firearm on you or in the vehicle, you have broken a law. Solution was discussed by a policeman who teaches such concealed permit classes. He highly suggested taking another route than risking this legal situation. Seems to me (we the people) need to apply pressure on members of congress (State and Federal) to modify the wording to correct the unintentional violation when vehicals are passing (not entering) school grounds. Keep in mind even politicians “carry” often and I doubt they are legalized since they are not law enforcement officers. Be it as it is, that many think they are somehow special and above the law. This 1000 ft makes many city and rural areas a legal problem. I suggest every school (anywhere) should have a security fence and rules/laws changed to forbid entry into that security area with a firearm except for law enforcement.

    • mickey

      I have a question for you. How can a fence provide safety from a gun unless it is steel reinforced? That would be like sending our kids to prision everyday.

      I can take a 22 and kill within a range of 1/2 to 1 mile. So I guess anyone with any “intent” just needs to make sure they are just outside the 1000 feet.

      As far as I know in my state, an open weapon is allowable as long as it is not concealed.

      And I thought (one of the southern states?) one could openly carry (on a hip) a six shooter now.

      • 45caliber

        AZ – at least – allows open carry. So does VT to my surprise. And several other states have it on the books. But that doesn’t necessarily mean to try it!

      • C130 Gunship

        Mickey……You can open carry in Virginia if you are legally able to own/possess guns. CCL is required to carry one concealed.

    • C130 Gunship

      Don…I’m not a lawyer either, but according to TX CCL law:

      Can a license holder have a handgun in their vehicle in a school parking lot?

      A license holder IS NOT prohibited from having a handgun in his or her vehicle in a school parking lot if the parking lot is not posted with the 30.06 signage. (School employees should know and comply with their employer’s policy on this point.) It is, however, a criminal offense for any person who is on school property to exhibit, use, or threaten to exhibit or use a firearm. See Texas Education Code § 37.125(a).

  • http://Livinston Ms Nike Newton

    Put it this way, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Whoever kills by the sword dies by the sword.Wherever the spirit of God is there is liberty. Killing a person by whatsoever means is an infringement of the sixth commandment in Exodus chapter 20 verse 13. At the same time there will always be perpetrators and those who are up to no good. For this reason one has to be ready for eventualities, hence the gun law.

    • http://aol Grandpa Red

      Ms Nike,
      The original wording of the Old Testament is “thou shall not murder” self defense and defense of the innocent is commanded in the Old and New Testament.
      Bad law & bad logic.

      • hicusdicus

        Unless God is the prosecuting attorney your arse is grass.

      • independant thinker

        The reason “kill” is used is because at the time the King James translation of the Bible was originaly done “kill” meant what “murder” means now. The term used to convey what we commonly mean when we use “kill” was “slay”.

    • TML

      An eye for and eye, only ends up making the whole world blind

      • 45caliber

        Are you advocating never, ever having a response when we are attacked?

    • Cecilio Mendez

      David killed Goliath. Every Christian king have killed many enemies, and us Christians must keep killing enemies, if our religion is to survive. “Thow shall not kill” is a late-19th century novel interpretation of the Gospel. Peter carried a sword, and Jesus knew it. Swords are designed for battle – specifically. They were the equivalent of the modern M16. Jesus asks his followers to bring swords (Lucas 22:36)before they leave and visit another village. I do respect non-violent and peaceful people, but Jesus was not one of those. He is God’s son and, while on earth, He acted as a rightful, intelligent and smart person. He turned the tables at the temple and challenged the priests – that does not sound like peaceful. Not to anyone who trusts and believes in Him anyway. “Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition”.

      • 45caliber

        You are correct.

  • lonetrader

    Hoe about getting rid of the Socialist Marxist law. How about, if you actually commit a crime on campus you actually get prosecuted. Does anyone thing that this very stupid law is going to stop a crack pot that wants to do harm to other people? All it does is make the citizen a sheep ready to be killed and unable to defend oneself. What about someone that lives next door to a school? Their rights are definately violated. How about we treat the real problem. You do know this law has nothing to do with crime. It has to do with power and control. When are you all going to wake up. Just like aAustralia, when it is too late and the VIOLENT CRIME really goes up.

    • GHOP

      I agree. These “gun free zones” are nothing more than killing fields where a twisted minded individual can be sure he will meet no resistance. Most gun control laws are idiotic and only help to protect the criminal. I believe that all law-abiding citizens should be allowed to carry their guns anywhere. That way, if a deranged person tries to commit a crime, someone with a gun could maybe stop the carnage before too many people are killed or wounded.

      • 45caliber

        If you really want to stop violent crime make it manditory that all adults carry a gun at all times. It works.

        • Average Joe Patriot

          And take training and pass a test, .45. Just like with driving an automobile or a semi, so they don’t shoot off someone’s foot (like mine or some kid’s…I don’t really care if they shoot off their own).

          But yeah, everything we’ve read says the statistics show less crime in areas with a statistically high percentage of armed citizenry. In the next county (in NM, where I live) a sheriff has ruled that anyone who doesn’t possess a firearm is not entitled to expect his protection. Don’t believe I’ve ever heard of a crime over there. I’m sure there are some, just nothing worth putting in the papers on a slow news day.

          And there’s Switzerland, of course. A few years back some demento over there finally used his military-issue rifle to shoot someone and the anti-gun US press went wild with it. One guy, like, the first since William Tell, they had a field day on how an armed citizenry is clearly no guarantee of personal safety. The Swiss must be mad to allow all these armed crazies to roam loose. Sure, and where would the average American anti-gunner feel safer: Bedford Stuyvesant, NYC or…anywhere in Switzerland?

          Then there’s the reverse, Chicago, for example, and DC, great places to walk your kids of an evening. But the places with even stricter laws, draconian even, there are almost no gun crimes at all. Those are the ones where the fine for owning an illegal firearm is payable in your own body parts. The result is maniacs go berserk in schools and chop up little kids with Ginsu knives while the school officials run off shrieking in helpless horror. Maybe the brave ones throw erasers. Or the places where the crazy ones walk into crowded pizzerias wired with C4 and no one immediately shoots them in the head because it’s illegal for citizens to own a gun. Terrorists might actually get their hands on one, you know. Not to mention C4, sold to them OTC in drugstores everywhere, no doubt. But, hey, you gotta admit, very low gun crime stats in those places, quoted by anti-gunners everywhere.

          No, America has high crime statistics because there are so many guns around. Like that wild and woolly place Arizona, where everyone can carry legally, but apparently you can get off 30 rounds in a crowded city parking lot before some retiree whacks you with a lawn chair while you’re reloading.

          You’re right .45, but you’ve probably been saying this for decades and haven’t made a dent. I know, because I’ve been saying it for four of them. How many punks would try and slash an old lady’s throat for her purse if they knew she might have a Glock in her corset or in one of her galoshes? And they didn’t know how fast she was?

          Most of the ones I’ve met would take their chances with Youth Services rather than risk a nine in the brain pan for a purse with a welfare check in it. So much for rampant juvie crime.

          As for the crazies who apparently aren’t afraid to die, fine. Just shoot them before they do serious damage to others, let the shrinks or God sort it out, whichever gets there first. Our going unarmed won’t make much of dent on them, either, but our going heeled just might.

          • 45caliber

            Talk about a granny defending her welfare check …

            Several years ago in Houston, a man was going to various apartment houses two days after the first of the month. He’d sit on the steps. All the retired people were to have cashed their checks and were to bring the cash to him … or else. One old guy cashed his check, bought a gun, and walked out to give him part of it.

            The police were upset at first since the guy had taken six. Then the various apartment dwellers gathered round. The old guy walked and the residents made him a hero!

      • iam

        Analyze most laws and you will find that the attitude is “we can’t control the criminals, so we’ll punish honest citizens.”

  • mahaska

    The feds can pass all the laws they want, unless the individual state legislature passes a state law the parallel the federal one, it
    is not enforceable by any state law enforcement. Does anybody think the feds have enough LEO’s to police the entire country to enforce these foolish laws ? They pressure the local states to pass a state law to enforce federal statue and have the state taxpayers pay for it, does that sound familiar. Let the feds pass all the laws they want since passing them does not mean enforcement.

    • Mounted Shooter

      WI posts it in their DNR regulations reminding hunters of the 1000 ft. rule….

    • pegasis

      hense Obama’s promised 500,000 person federal police force. Sounds like enforcment could get a whole lot easier.

  • http://na Dale Putnam

    There are two elementary schools within 1000 ft, Jessup and Pioneer Park, both are within easy visual distance, both are located where stopping on the highway is not likely. Yes, the law needs to be re-written, to correct the misrepresentation of what is intended. Or, was it intended to create another “crisis” for another “oppurtunity, to not be wasted”…. again?

    • mickey

      Yeah, sounds more like another crisis situation to me.

      But then, the military was just ordered they cannot speak at a religious event. How’s that for dictatorship?

      • hicusdicus

        Sounds like a good idea to me. God and the military are a lethal mix.

        • 45caliber

          God and the military are a lethal mix ONLY when there are people who insist that the military must fight against someone else because “God says so”.

          We don’t do that in the US although it is done in other countries (like the Mid-East). It is fine for individuals in the US military to go to church, etc. What the atheists want is to make it illegal for anyone in the military to go to church.

  • Al Sieber

    The only signs I see in Arizona around schools is drug free zone, we don’t need no stinking permits here.

    • hicusdicus

      Does this mean the drugs are free?

      • 45caliber

        No, it means that the drug dealers can go free if caught by the school officials.

        • Al Sieber

          Well yeah 45, but only if they don’t speak English.

  • mickey

    I don’t know if this law applies in my state since (I think) college students are now allowed to carry.

    Anyway, hasn’t it been mostly kids going to schools to blow kids away? Did I miss something?

    Oh, how I long for the days that kids “carried” water pistols and cap guns.

    This makes about as much sense as taking cigarettes out of the hands of minors and replacing them with drugs. Sounds like another CA initiative.

  • Cawmun Cents

    The nation has too many laws and lawyers.We know this to be true by a brief visit to the phone book under Attorneys.People are very paranoid in todays society because they do not seek to prepare themselves for situational happenstance,but choose instead to legislate awareness by creating worthless laws.They let the attorneys iron out the difficulties instead of preparing for violence.This is not only wrong but idiotic as well.Safety cannot be legislated.A simpleton understands this principal,yet our legislators cannot.Who is running the show?It would seem as if those who make the laws have jelly beans inside their craniums.1000 feet,500 feet.What idiocy is this clap-trap nonsense?What happens when the felon goes postal?The police come and cordon the area off and in come the crime scene investigators.You cannot stop the insane from happening.Pepole who decide to have a fit of killing are not interestd in the laws or they wouldnt do that sort of thing to begin with.That takes us back to the attorney.The law is there so that another charge can be added,after the fact.There is no other reasoning behind it,other than to charge you with a violation of the law post crime.It never occurs to the lunatic to look up federal statutes before he goes on a rampage does it?Oh…(he thinks to himself)there is a law against this,so I had better not freak out and kill people…..does that sound plausible to anyone?How you know when you have too many laws is when you are living in the United States of America.That is a sad statement for freedom loving people everywhere.-CC.

    • jibbs

      You don’t have to be a felon to gp “postal”

      • Cawmun Cents

        OH but you are a felon if you go on a shooting rampage.Werent you aware of that fact Mr.Jibbs?In fact if you contemplate it you can be charged as a felon if your contemplation is discovered.Were you aware of that fact,Mr. Jibbs?-CC.

    • 45caliber


      The absolute worst crime you can commit is to attack a lawyer. The rest of the lawyers will immediately want you found, arrested, and punished to the full extent of the law.

      A mugger shot and killed a lawyer in a county near me. He was caught and tried. The lawyers, including his own, wanted the death penalty and wanted immediate execution. Their argument was that since lawyers were associated with the court system by their profession, anyone who attacked one should be in worse trouble than if they attacked a policeman. It was necessary to insure that the lawyers could prosecute and defend criminals without fear of attack.

      • Cawmun Cents

        Nearly all judges and most politicians are or were lawyers.If you choose to go postal,they would rather that you did not choose them,as a target for your frustration…haw!Why did you shoot all those lawyers Bubba?”They was there at work.””I figured if they was there working and I was there going postal…..well,you put the sum together.”Bubba is in real trouble now.He done kilt all them lahyers down at the courthouse.Priceless.Is he in trouble because thay was lahyers,or because he kilt them?Hilarious.Even though popular opinion dictates otherwise,lawyers are people too.At least to a degree.I will accept argument from the floor,but you cant argue it in court where they seem to be important.-CC.

  • TML

    There is a much more complete article here…

    Most of the law enforcement think it’s a bullsh*t federal law as well, so much so, that no one has even been charged for more than 15 years. Even the U.S. Supreme
    ruled the law unconstitutional, but was passed by Congress anyway… so, it’s largely ignored pertaining to making conviction.

    However, the law does need to be dealt with, since citizens don’t want to be breaking a law. What needs to happen is Wyoming legislature needs to stand on the 10th Amendment and formally reject the federal law (publically refusing to enforce it), and that will bet the attention it needs.

  • Gun Owner

    This is simply a great, easy way to make gun owners look bad. Where I live in a VERY rural area with very few highways and paved roads, it’s impossible for me to go anywhere, in any direction, without going past a school. The only direction I can go without passing a school within 1000 feet is deeper into the woods. So if I don’t plan on going there, I can’t carry a gun in my truck, so no going to hunt on the other side of the nearest town (5 miles away). Fortunately, I have a CCW lisence, but have never tested it, nor intend to.

    Just simply another way for the fruitcakes to take guns away from law abiding comrades.

    • jibbs

      I chose to live by the Constituion given to us by God and our Founding Fathers. If everyone did, we could dismantel a lot of the bullsh&t created by Washington and the thiefs elected to office. Some do, but most won’t. In the last 235 years, there have been over 50,000 laws enacted. Why do we need so many? when in fact, citizens that care for their community can prevent almost all violence if they cared to.
      Crooks are many, cops are few….crooks carry guns, why can’t you!

      • 45caliber


        Just to put things into prospective -

        Washington does NOT have laws against murder, robbery, etc. Those are state laws. Washington laws that tend to infringe on those areas are for federal offices. For instance, it is a federal law that you cannot rob a federal bank. But it is a state law that you cannot rob any bank.

        So all those 50,000 + laws have nothing to do with the normal crimes of violence EXCEPT as related to civil rights. When they talk about someone violating someone else’s civil rights they are simply trying to get a violent crime out of state law and into federal court … usually so they can find someone guilty when the state jury courts found them innocent. And those are generally due to the jury finding that someone actually was defending themselves when they shot a burglar and the feds don’t want the person to go free of shooting the burglar.

    • Christin

      Gun Owner,

      See how they keep you from driving around with your gun to protect yourself or your family…

      The Police State is setting it up so when they pull you over for anything… a broken blinker… they can arrest you for even ‘higher crimes’ against the state and throw you in jail and take away your gun, money, freedom, and privacy… they turn your whole world upside down, get your SS#, fingerprints, your address and those of your family, income, and phone numbers. They don’t care if they cause you to lose your job or drag you to court for a year or take you away from your children or family… they are not in the business of helping or keeping you safe, but bringing in the $$$ to keep the city budget financed and their job security (paychecks and pensions.)

      Freedoms are dwindling…

      • hicusdicus

        So are paychecks.

  • Gary in Oh

    The 2nd amendment only says ARMS it doesn’t say guns, pistols, rifles, shotguns,sidearms concealed or not. The word (term) you use is important in court. It will be on the dashcam at your arrest and can be used in court. If you are pulled over and an arm is found you have a high % chance of going to jail. That is not the end of the world, you can educate yourselves and win in court and then sue them for false imprisonment. They are after $ and so can you pay them back for being ignorant of the law. look up the 1934 National Firearms Act and see that it says the definition of a firearm is and has not been changed. No I will not type it out here you can spend some time googling it up and know what it says instead of believing what I tell you it says.

    • 45caliber

      Back during Clinton’s term, the Justice Department came up with a new definition of “assault rifle” that they like to use.

      It is: “any weapon that has ever been used in combat anywhere in the world at any time.”

      That includes knives, swords, spears, arrows, and rocks.

      • jibbs

        Doe’s that include have a mace?

      • Average Joe Patriot

        G. Gordon Liddy wrote in his book “Will” how he received training in alternative weapons to use against enemy agents in the Cold War. Freshly sharpened pencils, a tightly rolled magazine, blow darts tipped with nicotine tinctured from a cigar, that sort of thing.

        Many a bad cop will lie in court (I’ve been the victim of it, so I’m sure have some of you), some will even plant a cold weapon at an arrest scene. Under the Clinton definition, and assuming a sharpened No. 2 pencil can be shown to be a weapon used in a war, may we expect bad cops to begin planting cigars and pencils on innocent arrest victims?

        Let us not forget, Cigar Bill was the president who disremembered so many things that he got us all wondering what the definition of the word “the” is. Of course, by third grade we all thought we knew what a Number 2 pencil was, and by junior high what sex was (till we learned that he never had “sex” with that woman and we wondered what it was we thought we were having all those years). Small wonder we found ourselves confused by the three-letter word “the.”

        So what I’m wondering, did Clinton attack “that woman” with an assault cigar? Because, had that been brought up in the hearings, now, that would’ve been a impeachment to remember.

  • Publius2012

    What a crock of shiit!

  • hicusdicus

    When will the government make it illegal to defend yourself under any circumstances.

    • 45caliber

      They are certainly trying. Austrailia and England have basically stated that self-defense is not an argument you can use in court to justify harming someone else. Not all that long ago, in England, a 110 lb. woman sprayed a 295 lb man with pepper spray after he broke into her apartment and tried to rape her. He was sentenced to six months in jail for attempted rape; she was sentenced to a year in jail for “using undue force to subdue an unarmed man.”

      A man in Austrailia was attacked by five men who broke into his apartment and started beating him with pipes and baseball bats. He used a sword his father had captured from the Japanese in WWII to kill one attacker and wound a second. He then spent over a month in the hospital due to injuries before he had been able to run them off. The police were charging him with murder.

  • Publius2012

    Time to follow some old advice – “When in the course of human events…” and take up arms against an oppressive government! That was the primary reason the founding fathers placed the right to keep and bear arms as they knew a democratic republic had the distinct ability to self destruct and the elected powers become too engrossed in maintaining and exacerbating those powers over the representation they were supposed to provide! This has become a nation not of, by and for the people but of, by and for the government. It is time to reset that concept and robustly remove those that would establish an oppressive progressive socialist dictatorship.

  • Marvin Chapman

    What about people who live within 1000 feet of a school – are they forbidden to even own firearms?

    • ValDM

      I was completely unaware of this law. Apparently, I’ve been a law-breaker for the last 8 yrs. I live within 1000 ft. of a school & I own guns. I would lay odds that those of us that are in this situation will be the first ones they come for…….we’re such an easy target.

  • 45caliber

    Many schools are within city limits so any HOME that is within 1000 feet of a school is also in violation if they have a gun in the house. Every time that gun is moved or taken to a car, it is also in violation.

    Here in Texas several years ago, the Feds tried to say that they had the right to make that law and enforce it under the Commerce Clause. Their argument was that someone in that school, sooner or later, would do business with another state. But the SCOTUS ruled that was wrong. I suspect that if someone decided to push it in Wyoming, they would find the same thing.

  • Bob from Calif.

    You are not breaking a law if that law is unconstitutional. These laws need to be challenged.

  • Mac

    If a federal law is in disagreement with the Constitution the law is void. When will congress get the guts to nullify the laws that violate the Second and Fourth Amendments? Citizens are almost daily arrested for violating these “null and void” laws, and have to hire lawyers to defend them – often failing because the government has louder lawyers. What good is the Constitution if we don’t correct the laws that violate it?

  • http://N/A William L. Deupree

    It is time for Obama and his liberal buddies to ship off to Venezuela.


    Being a federal law , it’s not just Wyoming , it is all of us . lets continue to get the feds out of all the sstates and get back to states rights and a VERY limited federal government . That alone would almost eliminate all federal taxes and return the freedoms our constitutional republic gauranteed to protect . The most dangerous things in America today are progressives , communists , socialists , marxists , and Islamists . Yet none of them would be a threat if the federal government were limited to its constitutional basics .

  • VirginKiller

    One does not need permission to carry a weapon, only the balls to do so. Either you are against us or you are with us,death to all who oppose our cause. Form your own militia now!

    • Al Sieber

      I like that Virgin., that gives a whole new meaning to “Come And Take It”.

  • Doug Rodrigues

    Since when do Government Bureaucrats demonstrate Common Sense?

  • Ranchman

    The “Gun-Free School Zone” law was overturned by the Rehnquist Supreme Court in the 1995 case of U.S. v. Lopez.

  • RKZ777


  • grayfox255

    Has anyone ever noticed these two things about a politician?
    1. You never get a straight answer.
    2. They address everything but the problem at hand.


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.