PDA

View Full Version : What exactly is "concealed"


DDT
12-15-2008, 1:04 PM
I was looking through 12025 and thinking about CalCop's briefcase thread and have a question for the fine folks here with much more experience than me interpreting the rats nest that is CA gun law.

What exactly is "concealed?" Is it a weapon that cannot not be clearly seen? One that cannot be clearly identified as a weapon?

If it is any weapon that cannot be clearly seen then a drop holster with a flap completely covering the grip would be a completely legitimate means of carrying concealed, this seems counter to how people would normally interpret concealed.

If we use the definition that the weapon cannot be clearly identified as a weapon then carrying your weapon with you at all times in a handgun bag with an outline of the weapon and a big label saying "Glock 19" or whatever would mean that the weapon isn't concealed for purposes of 12025 and then are subject to the same restrictions as OC. Now if the gun bag was clearly a gun case but not labeled as such what happens? What about carrying under a shirt but with a great big "imprint?"

The whole idea of "concealed" seems a bit murky, especially when there are restrictions on people with CCWs that state the weapon *must* be concealed.

hawk1
12-15-2008, 1:13 PM
I believe you need to see some part of the handgun.

A flap covering it would be no different than in your pocket or under your shirt.

CalCop
12-15-2008, 1:13 PM
That's a good question.

As far as prosecution of 12025 goes...to be guilty the weapon must be "substantially" concealed.

Decoligny
12-15-2008, 1:20 PM
I believe you need to see some part of the handgun.

A flap covering it would be no different than in your pocket or under your shirt.

If the flap is part of the holster, and the holster is a belt holster, then you should be able to apply 12025(f) - "Firearms carried openly in belt holster are not concealed within the meaning of this section."

DDT
12-15-2008, 1:25 PM
That's a good question.

As far as prosecution of 12025 goes...to be guilty the weapon must be "substantially" concealed.

Substantially physically covered or substantially difficult to identify as a weapon?

CalCop
12-15-2008, 1:31 PM
Substantially physically covered or substantially difficult to identify as a weapon?In this liberal gun-hating state, I would venture to say that they will stick it to you any time they can. Even if it is totally obvious that the cowboy drop holster on your leg could only be a gun carrier, and let's say it says "gun in here" in bold letters on it...if there is no metal showing...I bet this state would try to burn you.

Captain Evilstomper
12-15-2008, 2:05 PM
In this liberal gun-hating state, I would venture to say that they will stick it to you any time they can. Even if it is totally obvious that the cowboy drop holster on your leg could only be a gun carrier, and let's say it says "gun in here" in bold letters on it...if there is no metal showing...I bet this state would try to burn you.

depending on where you did it, i bet that even a UOC with a leg drop holster with the idea that the gun would be nowhere near concealed, i.e. much less chance of a coat or a t-shirt accidentally concealing your weapon, they would try to pin you as a 'weekend commando' or something saying that you were looking for a fight. sometimes the weather and landscape in theis state doesn't ake up for the assh*les that live here and are in charge...

JDay
12-15-2008, 8:01 PM
I believe you need to see some part of the handgun.

A flap covering it would be no different than in your pocket or under your shirt.

The law says that if its openly carried in a holster the weapon is not concealed. I would take that to mean that if you can see the holster its not concealed.

CalCop
12-15-2008, 8:05 PM
The law says that if its openly carried in a holster the weapon is not concealed. I would take that to mean that if you can see the holster its not concealed.That would make too much sense for CA politicians and prosecutors.

DDT
12-15-2008, 8:32 PM
So a gun bag with "holster" embroidered on it would get same legal treatment as UOC? Or does it have to "look" like a holster with no "evil features" like loop handles?

edit: Wow the grammar was so bad it was almost unintelligible. I think I need sleep.

Librarian
12-15-2008, 9:09 PM
So a gun bag with "holster" embroidered on it would be same legal treatment and UOC? Or does it have to "look" like a holster with no "evil features" like loop handles?
Too weird - no PC or case law to support any guesses.