> Jails fall squarely within the statutory definition of "public places":
>
> 624.7181 (c) "Public place" means property owned, leased, or > controlled by a governmental unit and private property that is > regularly and frequently open to or made available for use by
> the public in sufficient numbers to give clear notice of the > property's current dedication to public use
While there is no way to argue with a statutory definition, and I have clearly missed the context of why this is being discussed, I do not think that a jail falls within the definition shown above. I recollect that the Federal statute prohibiting the carrying of weapons avoids the use of hard to define terms such as "public place" and, instead, uses the term "Federal facility" to describe Federally owned or leased premises. "Public use" and "use by the public" are subject to an assortment of arguments with respect to who in the world is actually using the premises in question and, just as importantly, who has free access to the premises and who does not. So, notwithstanding the definition given above, jails are not places for general use by the general public because access therein is restricted.
But that's just my two cents thrown in at the end of an argument I wasn't in from the get go...
;-)
***GRJ***
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
