PDA

View Full Version : Open Carry with Loaded Mags Not Legal?


alissaknight
02-18-2009, 8:41 PM
-deleted by user-

JeffM
02-18-2009, 8:44 PM
Don't open carry.

Doheny
02-18-2009, 8:49 PM
OC would be a real bad idea in SF. Expect to get arrested.

nobody_special
02-18-2009, 8:49 PM
I'll second JeffM's post: don't open carry. If you open carry in SF, you should expect to be arrested at gunpoint. It isn't specifically illegal AFAIK (not that the police will care), but it's virtually impossible to open carry in SF without violating the 1000' school zone prohibition.

Don't call the SF police for legal advice. And for God's sake, don't listen to anything you hear in a gun store.

JeffM
02-18-2009, 9:01 PM
My advice was to everyone in CA, but especially for the OP in SF.

domokun
02-18-2009, 9:10 PM
Can someone please help me answer this question as I have received multiple "assumptions" regarding the correct answer.

When open carrying in California, of course the gun itself should not be loaded (nothing in the chamber and nothing in the mag)

However, in the case that you need to load it quickly in a hostile situation, the quickest way to do this would be to grab a magazine thats loaded from your pocket and pop that into your gun.

Someone told me today at a gun store that its considered loaded if there is a magazine ANYWHERE on your person (pocket, belt, etc) that is loaded. So if you have a mag in your pocket or on your gun belt thats loaded, the pistol is considered loaded.

Can anyone confirm this? In 10 days I expect to begin open carrying. I will have my gun holstered on my belt with no rounds in the chamber and the magazine out. I expect to carry loaded magazines in my pocket or attached to my gun belt. Can someone PLEASE tell me if this is going to be interpreted as the gun being loaded?

Finally, one more question. When calling the SFPD today (I live and work in San Francisco), an officer who picked up the phone told me that open carry was not legal in the city of San Francisco AT ALL (loaded or not). Can anyone confirm this as well? That doesn't seem right.

Please advise.

VR,
Alissa V Knight

Unloaded open carry is legal but with lots of restrictions as to where you can carry. Don't open carry if you don't have at least $10,000 in the bank to fight your own legal defense should you be charged with illegally carrying a firearm within 1000 feet of any K-12 school. San Francisco is as anti-gun as it gets. Don't be surprised if you get a "Lady with a gun" response from the SFPD if you do decide to unloaded open carry in SF.

Please be sure you understand the legal requirements to properly open carry in California to avoid trouble. Please see the following site for the details on this: http://www.californiaopencarry.org/

My advice was to everyone in CA, but especially for the OP in SF.
+1 on this. The climate still isn't right for open carry at this time. Any open carry cases that make their way through court at this time may actually end up hurting our advancement and restoration of 2nd Amendment rights in California.

Doheny
02-18-2009, 9:14 PM
But if I do, its at my own risk of having to be hassled by every cop I pass who is going to inspect my gun to ensure its not loaded?

Yes, in a very unfriendly manner.

domokun
02-18-2009, 9:20 PM
Thanks everyone. So basically, legally, I can OC in San Francisco staying clear of course of the school zones. But if I do, its at my own risk of having to be hassled by every cop I pass who is going to inspect my gun to ensure its not loaded?

Please see my revised post above. If you should happen to end up within a fraction of an inch shy inside 1000 ft from a school zone, it could result in a very costly court battle in which you could possible loose your right to own a firearm the remainder of your life in the worst possible end scenario/ruling.

Yes, in a very unfriendly manner.
I think that's putting it very lightly. :(

pullnshoot25
02-18-2009, 9:31 PM
OOOOOOOK, let's reign in this thread here.

First off, you need to read and digest the California Open Carry FAQ, in its entirety. See the 4th from the last line after reading all other lines.

Second, San Francisco is considered (at least by accounts imparted to me) a very hostile place for gun owners, even more so for those patriots that decide to open carry.

Third, getting information from a gun shop is like getting information from a geriatric "stitch and *****" convention (save for those run by Calgunners... :) ) and should be taken lightly with the intent to research further, which is exactly what you are doing now. A good phase to follow in such hostile areas (nay, your entire life path) is "Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear". Follow that little rule and you shall be fine.

Fourth, in reference to the first post, KEEP YOUR MAGAZINES EXPOSED! While the case law concerning this is itortured (read the FAQ), it is better to keep your magazines exposed or, better yet, go old school and carry a wheel gun and just not worry about it. Case law states that concealed mag=concealed gun and therefore you should keep your magazines exposed. Of course, there is an exception to this rule (generally) but for now, just following the aforementioned rule shall suffice.

Point E (switching it up ;) ), never, ever, EVER ask a cop, ESPECIALLY a San Franciscan cop or one that is not gun friendly for advice, especially over the phone.

Point F, IF you have or grow the proverbial juevos to open carry in the PRSF (People's Republik of SF), you had better have a voice recorder on you, a pamphlet in your pocket, knowledge of all the illegal county ordinances concerning gun carriage (not time to challenge them yet) and, best yet, a friendly witness with a video camera recording the entire event from start to finish.

Phew! I hope this didn't come off harsh or anything as I am truly and genuinely interested and concerned about your safety and taking the necessary precautions, knowing the laws and being armed with a voice recorder/good friend/video camera is the only way to truly be successful.

If you have any questions about anything, I have resources listed in my blog (in the sig line) as well as my contact information.

Keep it real.

CARRY ON!

-N8

Librarian
02-18-2009, 9:38 PM
However, in the case that you need to load it quickly in a hostile situation, the quickest way to do this would be to grab a magazine thats loaded from your pocket and pop that into your gun.

Someone told me today at a gun store that its considered loaded if there is a magazine ANYWHERE on your person (pocket, belt, etc) that is loaded. So if you have a mag in your pocket or on your gun belt thats loaded, the pistol is considered loaded.

You've already heard the collected wisdom - SF is a pretty hostile place for guns, I'm afraid, so I agree with the thrust of the advice. SF has about 600 places Google marks as "schools", and its list is incomplete. All the little private places that offer K-12 may not come to Google's attention. The law reads that's only a problem if you 'should have known' it was a school zone, but it would be expensive to fight that out in court.

But to answer your specific question, you were told incorrectly. Unless you are engaged in gang activity, or going onto the grounds of the Governor's mansion or the State Capitol, possession of ammunition/loaded magazine(s) with the gun, not actually IN the gun, does NOT make the gun loaded. See
http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California

There IS, however, some likelihood that there might be problems with a magazine in your pocket making the handgun on your belt 'concealed'. That's a remarkably counter-intuitive result, but possible under current case law. So, also carry the magazines openly.

DDT
02-18-2009, 9:41 PM
Thanks everyone. So basically, legally, I can OC in San Francisco staying clear of course of the school zones. But if I do, its at my own risk of having to be hassled by every cop I pass who is going to inspect my gun to ensure its not loaded?

And don't forget that EVERY K-12 school is included, not just public schools. I suspect if they can prove there is a home schooler within 1000 ft. they'd try to prosecute for that too.

JeffM
02-18-2009, 9:44 PM
OOOOOOOK, let's reign in this thread here.


While P&S seems to have accurate information regarding open-carry, there is no reason to "reign in" the thread.

Simply put, don't open carry.

I'm not telling you that you can't, just that it is a VERY BAD IDEA for the reason domokun cited above (and quoted below).

The climate still isn't right for open carry at this time. Any open carry cases that make their way through court at this time may actually end up hurting our advancement and restoration of 2nd Amendment rights in California.

There are some that think it is their patriotic duty to open-carry, but the OC pushers just don't understand the strategic reasoning behind restraint.

Don't open carry until it will actually help in the overall fight to further the cause of our Second Amendment rights here in CA.

There is no need to open-carry just to feel like you are "doing something".

Sometimes that "something" takes us backward in the fight.

LOW2000
02-18-2009, 9:44 PM
A transgender lesbian who wants to open carry. I don't know if that makes you accepted by, or hated by everyone. :confused:

Either way, everyone who is pro-rights is welcome here. Best of luck to you if you decide to OC in SF. Too bad you aren't in SoCal to get your feet wet with the San Diego open carry outing first.

LOW2000
02-18-2009, 9:52 PM
There is no need to open-carry just to feel like you are "doing something".


Its not just about the activism, some of us just want to have the means to protect ourselves. You can see from my first OC outing, it came about because I was heading into the forest alone to go hiking.

LOW2000
02-18-2009, 9:57 PM
If you are denied by the Chief of Police, you may then apply for a CCW to the county Sheriff. Odds are not really any better, but it is the fall back method allowed by law.

JeffM
02-18-2009, 9:57 PM
Frankly, I have no idea what to do now..

Does anyone have any idea what I can do?

Wow.

Maybe protect somewhere else from terrorists?

IIRC in San Francisco they are "misguided community activists for the underdeveloped nations and marginalized peoples of the world" and are likely protected.

gunsmith
02-18-2009, 10:04 PM
but being that your biz is in cyberspace are you free to re-locate?
Reno is very friendly to both firearms and "alternate" lifestyles.
Maybe you and Pink Pistols can bring a lawsuit to force ccw for you. (in SF)
btw good work!
http://blog.afcyber.us/

JeffM
02-18-2009, 10:09 PM
Its not just about the activism, some of us just want to have the means to protect ourselves. You can see from my first OC outing, it came about because I was heading into the forest alone to go hiking.

Point taken.

I have in fact open-carried myself.

I had to cross a county road between private properties, so I had to unload and set the pistol on the passenger seat until I got though the gate on the other side.

Steve O
02-18-2009, 10:10 PM
Can someone please help me answer this question as I have received multiple "assumptions" regarding the correct answer.

When open carrying in California, of course the gun itself should not be loaded (nothing in the chamber and nothing in the mag)

However, in the case that you need to load it quickly in a hostile situation, the quickest way to do this would be to grab a magazine thats loaded from your pocket and pop that into your gun.

Someone told me today at a gun store that its considered loaded if there is a magazine ANYWHERE on your person (pocket, belt, etc) that is loaded. So if you have a mag in your pocket or on your gun belt thats loaded, the pistol is considered loaded.

Can anyone confirm this?

Bull****.

Loaded firearm in CA is defined as one that is loaded form a position that it can be fired. meaning one in the chamber.

Mags are not considered loaded.
And yes you can have them with you.

OC in SF!

Then sue them when you get falsely arrested.

Have your attorney there to film it for court evidence, then you can back that with 1 million dollars to take it to supreme court!

Go for it!

pullnshoot25
02-18-2009, 10:11 PM
Unfortunately no... Our headquarters is here in San Francisco, well, and.. My life is here. I've got to figure out a way to make this work in the city... The next step will be to see if I can get a letter from one of our client agencies requesting LE privileges for our agency.

It was shocking to me that not even the Bureau of Firearms at the DOJ knew where to direct me. They seemed just as lost as me on navigating this issue.

They are always like that, unfortunately. This time is a little different because they don't know whom to pass the buck to.

gunsmith
02-18-2009, 10:20 PM
Bull****.

Loaded firearm in CA is defined as one that is loaded form a position that it can be fired. meaning one in the chamber.

Mags are not considered loaded.
And yes you can have them with you.

OC in SF!

Then sue them when you get falsely arrested.

Have your attorney their to film it for court evidence, then you can back that with 1 million dollars to take it to supreme court!

Go for it!

never take legal advice from someone who can't spell their and mixes it up with there in the 1st place.
;-)

alissaknight
02-18-2009, 10:20 PM
Removed for security reasons by Alissa Knight

Doheny
02-18-2009, 10:22 PM
Bull****.

Loaded firearm in CA is defined as one that is loaded form a position that it can be fired. meaning one in the chamber.

Mags are not considered loaded.
And yes you can have them with you.

OC in SF!

Then sue them when you get falsely arrested.

Have your attorney their to film it for court evidence, then you can back that with 1 million dollars to take it to supreme court!

Go for it!

You must be new.

jrsportssupply
02-18-2009, 10:23 PM
And for God's sake, don't listen to anything you hear in a gun store.

Can we PLEASE stop bashing gun stores? Some of us really try hard to stay on top of the law and do our best to inform our customers.

Dr Rockso
02-18-2009, 10:23 PM
Really I have to ask, I understand the whole 'Think Tank' thing, getting paid to write papers, do consulting, undertake projects, all that jazz. I work for someone who does that kind of stuff for NASA, DARPA, USAF, etc.... But that kind of think tank/ consulting gig is very different than any of this "SpecOps" stuff. When you first posted that I thought you were messing with us, still not convinced you aren't (the fact that you have a webpage makes me think that you're either legit or this is a very elaborate ruse). Honestly is there a shortage of that sort of thing out there? It's hard to imagine that there a company that can't get CCWs is going to be breaking down doors anytime soon.

alissaknight
02-18-2009, 10:25 PM
Removed for security reasons by Alissa Knight

LOW2000
02-18-2009, 10:28 PM
I'm the only SpecOps agent who can't have a mag fed AR-15..


Oh but you can... :thumbsup:




It is also sad and amusing at the same time how many people who live in this state have no idea the level of restrictions that have been forced on the gun owners of this state until they try to become a gun owner themselves. Until then, all they have heard from the media and politicians is that they are "going to be tough on crime" and pass "common sense firearms laws".

alissaknight
02-18-2009, 10:31 PM
Removed for security reasons by Alissa Knight

LOW2000
02-18-2009, 10:33 PM
As you can see open carry will do nothing but all the wrong kind of attention to people who really NEED to be discreet.

My first inclination after getting a great deal more of the story is to have Jack Bauer go and convince Mayor Gavin that it would be a good idea to cooperate if he REALLY wants to be governor, or have breakfast tomorrow morning. :D

Since that is not really acceptable I'm at nearly as great a loss as you.

I would definitely pursue the Chief of Police and Sheriff first. I would also suggest talking to some of the firearms attorneys locally. The sheriff/police chief utilizes his/her "discretion" when it comes to issuing Concealed Carry Permits. It is the duty of the applicant to show that they have "good cause" to be issued a concealed carry permit. Frankly it would seem like you have "good cause" down pat.

You might also consider talking with the San Mateo county sheriff. He might be more willing to issue but you'd need to have some presence in San Mateo county.

The only "odd ball" work around I can come up with is to find a friendly judge to issue Temporary Restraining Orders for each of the members of your SpecOps team. (Against whom I do not know.)

CPC 12025 is the law against carrying a concealed weapon.

There is an exception that says you are justified to carry concealed if you have a restraining order and feel you are in grave danger.

CPC 12025.5. (a) A violation of Section 12025 is justifiable when a person who possesses a firearm reasonably believes that he or she is in grave danger because of circumstances forming the basis of a current restraining order issued by a court against another person or persons who has or have been found to pose a threat to his or her life or safety.

If you could get a judge to issue a restraining order against (insert terrorist organization here) for your team they would have justification to carry concealed. This at least gives you a much larger selection of people to shop around rather than being stuck with local LE.

I'm sorry you got stuck with an assignment to protect when you are handcuffed.

Good luck in your endeavors and please know that our deepest gratitude goes out to those who serve to protect us.

Do we have any activist judges in our ranks who would be willing to approve restraining orders to calgunners against Osama Bin Laden or something of the sort?

USN CHIEF
02-18-2009, 10:37 PM
I just wanted to say, welcome to Cal Guns and I like the picture in your avatar. LOL.

Listen to Pullnshoot, Libertarian and Liberty1 along with a few other folks, they are the ones that really know this whole OC laws here in CA.

I personally would rather take the chance of getting stopped by the Police at Gunpoint than not having a gun to defend myself from the BG.

gunsmith
02-18-2009, 10:38 PM
Or from/form (his post, not yours.)

I know, I hate that too.
No one is perfect though.

tombinghamthegreat
02-18-2009, 10:52 PM
And don't forget that EVERY K-12 school is included, not just public schools. I suspect if they can prove there is a home schooler within 1000 ft. they'd try to prosecute for that too.

Also have to remember that you have to be knowly violate the school zones, so she should know where all the public schools in here immediate area. The home schooler would not apply because there is no way she can know about that. But it is best to find all the zones to avoid being charged...

[QUOTE=USN CHIEF;2057903]
Listen to Pullnshoot, Libertarian and Liberty1 along with a few other folks, they are the ones that really know this whole OC laws here in CA.
.[ /QUOTE]

These people are very well educated on the laws and do a very good job combating FUD that is spread by the gun stores, DOJ, PD, media...........

DDT
02-18-2009, 10:58 PM
Oh crap just did a little googling. I think I remember you from fidonet. I used to spend a little bit of my time boxing conference lines when I was a wee lad.

pullnshoot25
02-18-2009, 10:58 PM
Also have to remember that you have to be knowly violate the school zones, so she should know where all the public schools in here immediate area. The home schooler would not apply because there is no way she can know about that. But it is best to find all the zones to avoid being charged...

[QUOTE=USN CHIEF;2057903]
Listen to Pullnshoot, Libertarian and Liberty1 along with a few other folks, they are the ones that really know this whole OC laws here in CA.
.[ /QUOTE]

These people are very well educated on the laws and do a very good job combating FUD that is spread by the gun stores, DOJ, PD, media...........

Glad to know that I am somewhat loved, it keeps me going. :)

Ms. Knight, welcome aboard! Sorry for my abrupt introduction there 3 pages back. I truly hope that all the firearm issues you are having can be resolved quickly, even I am frustrated at it and I am not even in the LE support community!

MudCamper
02-18-2009, 11:17 PM
PnS: No apologies necessary. Like I said, you all rock and appreciate the support and assistance in me trying to figure this issue out. I'm going to make more calls in to the DOJ tomorrow and try the SFPD back to see if I can get a response from the Chief. I'm also going to try the Sheriff as recommended and see where that gets me.

Thanks again everyone...

You might want to take a copy of the Sacramento Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center OC Bulletin (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/carry/OC-LE-Bulletin-2008-07-24.pdf) and the California Peace Officers Association OC Memo (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/carry/CPOA-Client-Alert-12042008.pdf) with you when talking to the SFPD chief and Sheriff. Both of these documents and more are available at http://californiaopencarry.org/

doctor_vals
02-19-2009, 12:51 AM
[QUOTE=tombinghamthegreat;2058020]Also have to remember that you have to be knowly violate the school zones, so she should know where all the public schools in here immediate area. The home schooler would not apply because there is no way she can know about that. But it is best to find all the zones to avoid being charged...


http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=17563&stc=1&d=1235033126

or 2000f resolution
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=17564&stc=1&d=1235033151

It is only GG park is a good place for OC :confused:

Liberty1
02-19-2009, 1:00 AM
1) You should consult with a CA gun attorney


2) open carry carbines w/loaded mags separate - as the CA school zone law doesn't apply to long arms carried in accordance with state law (unloaded required in cities). This could be a "feature-less" "monster man" griped AR-15 (others here can explain that weapon configuration to you :D) or something like an M1 .30 cal. carbine (mags in stock pouch).


3) You should consult with a CA gun attorney


4) Even if this is thread a huge joke on us it's OK as this is fun ;) Gene can you verify please?:TFH:

dodgeit101
02-19-2009, 1:18 AM
I don't know if this is actually serious but I'll put my two cents in since I live in SF.

There seems to be a lot of schools in the downtown area, do schools like University of Phoenix and learning centers count? If they do she wouldn't be able to walk a step without violating the law. OC would be a bad idea in general just because this is San Francisco we're talking about, the liberals here aren't open minded. The minute they see a gun they'll start screaming and calling the police as someone already mentioned.

Sheriff Hennessey has give out 10 permits since 1987. Chances of you getting one is about .001%.

Liberty1
02-19-2009, 1:23 AM
There seems to be a lot of schools in the downtown area, do schools like University of Phoenix and learning centers count?

K-12 inclusive only (626.9 PC)

Philthy
02-19-2009, 1:34 AM
I can't imagine any other state in the US being more restrictive than California.

I would say that New York City is way stricter.

http://www.nysrpa.org/nygunlaws.htm

BobB35
02-19-2009, 7:33 AM
CA is number one one the Brady Victim identification list. So yes we have the worst gun laws in the country.

As far as what you do, can't really tell, but it looks like you are trying to set up a PMC a la XE (Formerly Blackwater) but with more of a consulting bent. Putting aside for a moment the whole, should this be a private activity or Government only, Why would you try to set this up in SF? Move to a more friendly state. I doubt you will get an exception in CA, because that would open the whole door to people set up clubs and calling them PMC and demanding equal protection. The reality is that LEOs and the legislature is more concerned with keeping people unarmed then allowing them to defend themselves and they really don't feel your pain.

I know you may like your life in SF, but maybe you need to rethink the line of work you are trying to enter.....and where you are. Not trying to be harsh, just realistic. I would give the same advice to someone living in Kansas who wanted to be a professional surfer. Sometimes in order to achieve you goals you just have to relocate.

With all that said, best of luck with you search, just think you would be better off locating your Place of residence somewhere else than trying to do something in SF.

While you are at it you may consider contributing to the people who are trying to make a difference and get the law changed...

Flintlock Tom
02-19-2009, 8:12 AM
While P&S seems to have accurate information regarding open-carry, there is no reason to "reign in" the thread.

Simply put, don't open carry.

I'm not telling you that you can't, just that it is a VERY BAD IDEA for the reason domokun cited above (and quoted below).



There are some that think it is their patriotic duty to open-carry, but the OC pushers just don't understand the strategic reasoning behind restraint.

Don't open carry until it will actually help in the overall fight to further the cause of our Second Amendment rights here in CA.

There is no need to open-carry just to feel like you are "doing something".

Sometimes that "something" takes us backward in the fight.

This is an interesting "opinion". Unfortunately, it is not based upon reality.
Please read the accounts on OpenCarry.org. Of the few encounters which have lead to the arrest or detention of open carriers, in California, the charges have been dropped and the hands of the DA have been slapped. The result of this is that police departments across the state are distributing "Training Bulletins" which explain the law, to their officers, and lay out procedures for encounters.
The bottom line is the clarification of our liberties and the acceptance that guns are present in our society, in the hands of law-abiding citizens, without the sky falling.

Doheny
02-19-2009, 8:27 AM
never take legal advice from someone who can't spell their and mixes it up with there in the 1st place.
;-)

or from/form

Bull****.

Loaded firearm in CA is defined as one that is loaded form a position that it can be fired. meaning one in the chamber.

domokun
02-19-2009, 11:10 AM
This is an interesting "opinion". Unfortunately, it is not based upon reality.
Please read the accounts on OpenCarry.org. Of the few encounters which have lead to the arrest or detention of open carriers, in California, the charges have been dropped and the hands of the DA have been slapped. The result of this is that police departments across the state are distributing "Training Bulletins" which explain the law, to their officers, and lay out procedures for encounters.
The bottom line is the clarification of our liberties and the acceptance that guns are present in our society, in the hands of law-abiding citizens, without the sky falling.

The charges may have been dropped after spending a significant undisclosed sum of money to hire a lawyer specializing in CA Firearm laws. I just want to reiterate the point that if you're going to go forward with the Unloaded Open Carry position, please be sure to have lots of money ($10K+) stashed away to retain a competent lawyer specializing in California Firearms laws on the day you do get detained and are hauled away for the DA to figure out if they want to prosecute you or not for Unloaded Open Carrying in a carry prohibited area.

While P&S seems to have accurate information regarding open-carry, there is no reason to "reign in" the thread.

Simply put, don't open carry.

I'm not telling you that you can't, just that it is a VERY BAD IDEA for the reason domokun cited above (and quoted below).



There are some that think it is their patriotic duty to open-carry, but the OC pushers just don't understand the strategic reasoning behind restraint.

Don't open carry until it will actually help in the overall fight to further the cause of our Second Amendment rights here in CA.

There is no need to open-carry just to feel like you are "doing something".

Sometimes that "something" takes us backward in the fight.

I couldn't agree with JeffM more. We need really need the second amendment incorporated before Unloaded Open Carry should be carried out in a wide-spread manner and be actually effective, especially in SF. A bad case precedent resulting from an Unloaded Open Carry case gone wrong would set back the progress already made in unknown and damaging ways.

Please consider the legal ramifications and impact of your actions to all gun owners in California before unloaded open carrying. I respect your right to open carry but I really feel now isn't the time for it. It's taken us 5+ years of hard work to get to this point legally and probably a year or two more before we can be in the position to really sink our teeth into the work of returning California into a state where our gun rights are the same if not almost the as the rest of the "free states" in the US.

tube_ee
02-19-2009, 12:05 PM
But I just wanted to say that, if the descriptions of the OP's orientation/gender status are correct, then this is exactly the kind of person we need more of.

The conservative/evangelical side of the pro-gun-rights cohort is as large as it's ever likely to get. We need more liberals on our side. As a liberal pro-gunner (I post on DailyKos as "Leftie Gunner"), I've been beating this drum as hard as I can.

Groups like the Pink Pistols, and the grassroots growth of (small "l") libertarian liberalism, are where the fight really is, now.

People like the OP, who are (a) a member of a group likely to get sympathy from liberals and (b) very likely to be assaulted because of who and what they are, are the bleeding edge of gun rights advocacy.

The best framing of this argument that I've ever read is "if Matt Sheppard had had a gun, he'd be alive today."

Gun rights are civil rights, and it is particularly those who are most likely to be victims who should be out in front, defending their right to protect themselves.

Our GLBT brothers and sisters need to be leading this charge, and the rest of us should back them up 110%.

--Shannon

tombinghamthegreat
02-19-2009, 12:05 PM
Also as a side note if the UOC does not work out or unable to take a risk until "the right people" say its good there is still concealing long gun choice(since that would be legal, would not need to be locked except school zones) which is more of a choice i am currently taking. A shotgun with a side saddle or a few loaded mags for my saiga rifle will work for me at this time.


It is only GG park is a good place for OC :confused:

Holy crap.... I am not used to the big city areas.

dodgeit101
02-19-2009, 12:13 PM
GG stands for Golden Gate. Doctor_vals talking about Golden Gate Park and if you were to be walking there at night you would probably need a gun anyways.

WokMaster1
02-19-2009, 12:26 PM
OP, start a Security/protective division within your company. Primary duty is to protect your key employees & have you as dept head. Basically a security detail that is licensed to carry in all 50 states.

You can start off by getting some folks on your Board of directors. Folks who can make things happen by making a few phone calls. Heather Fong is retiring........nah!!!! Well, you get the picture.:D

Oh & welcome to Calguns.

Meplat
02-19-2009, 5:22 PM
Yes, plus having to spend $20,000 minimum to stay out of jail. They Will arrest and prosecute you in SF. If you have good representation you will win, but it will cost you dearly. Good luck. If you got the bucks, go for it!:43:


Thanks everyone. So basically, legally, I can OC in San Francisco staying clear of course of the school zones. But if I do, its at my own risk of having to be hassled by every cop I pass who is going to inspect my gun to ensure its not loaded?

alissaknight
02-19-2009, 5:30 PM
But I just wanted to say that, if the descriptions of the OP's orientation/gender status are correct, then this is exactly the kind of person we need more of.

The conservative/evangelical side of the pro-gun-rights cohort is as large as it's ever likely to get. We need more liberals on our side. As a liberal pro-gunner (I post on DailyKos as "Leftie Gunner"), I've been beating this drum as hard as I can.

Groups like the Pink Pistols, and the grassroots growth of (small "l") libertarian liberalism, are where the fight really is, now.

People like the OP, who are (a) a member of a group likely to get sympathy from liberals and (b) very likely to be assaulted because of who and what they are, are the bleeding edge of gun rights advocacy.

The best framing of this argument that I've ever read is "if Matt Sheppard had had a gun, he'd be alive today."

Gun rights are civil rights, and it is particularly those who are most likely to be victims who should be out in front, defending their right to protect themselves.

Our GLBT brothers and sisters need to be leading this charge, and the rest of us should back them up 110%.

--Shannon

Shannon, Thank you for such a fantastic reply. I agree with you 100%. Just the other week a transgendered woman was killed a block away from me in the Tenderloin.

If only she had a gun to protect herself..

Criminals can get their hands on fully automatic guns, non-California legal rifles, carry concealed... But civilians needing to protect themselves can't do any of the above within the letter of the law.

Things are so wrong..

Meplat
02-19-2009, 5:52 PM
If you are a legit organization there may be a chance you could establish residency for your people in a Gun friendly county, with the co-operation of the local sheriff. A CA CCW is a CA CCW. Not a damn thing SF or any other city/county can do about it. Also, absent extenuating circumstances, a first offence CCW charge is usually a misdemeanor. I carried in CA for forty years without having to burn my one "freebie". Just something to be aware of.

Would not packing a pistol on your hip draw more attention than acceptable for clandestine operations anyway?



[QUOTE=alissaknight;2057577]I want to thank all of you for your help. Allow me to explain my situation so as to illicit further advice.

I run a Counter Terrorism unit here in San Francisco. We work directly for the US intelligence community and unified commands doing both Counter Intelligence and Special Operations. However, here's the catch everyone. We are not a federal agency nor are we LE, so guess what, that means I Have to figure out a way for my SpecOps division to lawfully carry on and off work. How do I do this?

1) BSIS at Consumer Affairs: register ourselves as a Counter Terrorism unit which doesnt exist btw so would have to register us as a Private Investigator or Security Guard company. Are any of these the right categories? Of course not :) So this idea is out. BTW, I've called every state government office including the Bureau of Firearms DOJ in California and no one, including the BoF knows what I can do.

2) Have each individual agent apply for a CCW. Well, I sent a letter to the chief of police at the SFPD requesting a special circumstance approval for a CCW, yet to receive a reply on.

3) Have each agent open carry.

Meplat
02-19-2009, 6:03 PM
Try NY


OH BTW, I'm learning quickly just how much the gun law restrictions suck here in California. I'm the only SpecOps agent who can't have a mag fed AR-15..

Lovely isn't it?

I can't imagine any other state in the US being more restrictive than California.

Cypren
02-19-2009, 6:03 PM
Therefore I've decided to begin looking at what the BSIS can do for us in the kind of company we can register with them as (armed security company) hoping they will allow me to do that.

Preface: None of this should be construed to be legal advice.

You can register your company as a Private Patrol Operator with BSIS. You will need a Qualified Manager to file the paperwork -- this must be a person with at least 2000 hours of documented experience at a California-registered private security company or law enforcement agency as a security guard or law enforcement officer. (See the BSIS website for more details on what qualifies.)

Once that's done, have your personnel register as Security Guards with BSIS and apply for a Firearm Permit. That allows them to carry loaded and exposed when in uniform and at home, while at a job site, at a shooting range, or in transit between any of those places. Once they have accumulated a total of 6000 hours (three years of full-time work) as registered guards or law enforcement, you can register them as private investigators. This gives them considerably more leeway in what constitutes "on job" activity -- they no longer need to be on client-owned property or directly escorting client personnel on a protective duty, nor do they need to be in a uniform to carry.

Given the nature of the business you've described, my assumption would be that many candidates for your operations group would be former law enforcement personnel, which means that satisfying the private investigator requirements would be simple. In the case of the others, they would need "probation time" during which their activities would be somewhat restricted before they could carry.

Getting CCWs for your employees would still be a good idea. It's not terribly hard to formulate "good cause" if you present a good package of statistics on the injury/hazard rates for people in private security and investigative work. Do a little bit of research on the web and you'll have a nice package of material you can hand a county sheriff that will cover his back for the issuance. From there, it's all politics -- it sounds like you already have reasonable government contacts, so leverage them for all they're worth.

Meplat
02-19-2009, 6:14 PM
Watch out for Chief: Sailors are stereotyped for a reason!



I just wanted to say, welcome to Cal Guns and I like the picture in your avatar. LOL.

Listen to Pullnshoot, Libertarian and Liberty1 along with a few other folks, they are the ones that really know this whole OC laws here in CA.

I personally would rather take the chance of getting stopped by the Police at Gunpoint than not having a gun to defend myself from the BG.

pullnshoot25
02-19-2009, 6:17 PM
Also as a side note if the UOC does not work out or unable to take a risk until "the right people" say its good there is still concealing long gun choice(since that would be legal, would not need to be locked except school zones) which is more of a choice i am currently taking. A shotgun with a side saddle or a few loaded mags for my saiga rifle will work for me at this time.



Holy crap.... I am not used to the big city areas.

Doesn't need to be locked in a school zone. You can parade past a school with it over your shoulder and nothing can be done about it.

Decoligny
02-19-2009, 6:30 PM
Doesn't need to be locked in a school zone. You can parade past a school with it over your shoulder and nothing can be done about it.

That covers the California "Gun Free School Zone Act", but it doesn't cover the Federal law.

Under the Federal law IIRC, there is no distiction between handguns and long guns.

Cypren
02-19-2009, 7:02 PM
Under the Federal law IIRC, there is no distiction between handguns and long guns.

This is correct. The only meaningful exemption to the federal law for the typical private citizen is for CCW holders. And it only covers them when they are carrying in compliance with state law -- which in California means that you must be carrying the particular firearm specified on your CCW permit and no other.

Decoligny
02-19-2009, 7:06 PM
This is correct. The only meaningful exemption to the federal law for the typical private citizen is for CCW holders. And it only covers them when they are carrying in compliance with state law -- which in California means that you must be carrying the particular firearm specified on your CCW permit and no other.

Not only that, the Fed law only applies to CCW holders if they hold a CCW from the state that the school is located in.

So even if you are from Florida and have a FL CCW, and you are legally carrying in let's say Oklahoma legally under OK law, (assuming reciprocity, didn't look it up), and you carry within 1,000 feet of a school, you have broken the Federal law.

Almost no state officer is going to bust you on this, but don't bump into a Federal Agent.

Cypren
02-19-2009, 7:13 PM
Not only that, the Fed law only applies to CCW holders if they hold a CCW from the state that the school is located in.

I could be mistaken, but while the law can be read that way, I believe there is not any legal precedent for this one way or the other. The recognizance of a reciprocal license by a state could be argued to be licensure by the state. If you're aware of a precedent to the contrary I'd love a citation or link so I can go review it!

Decoligny
02-19-2009, 8:06 PM
I could be mistaken, but while the law can be read that way, I believe there is not any legal precedent for this one way or the other. The recognizance of a reciprocal license by a state could be argued to be licensure by the state. If you're aware of a precedent to the contrary I'd love a citation or link so I can go review it!

I know of no precedent either way, I was just going by the straight reading of the statute.

Steve O
02-19-2009, 11:54 PM
never take legal advice from someone who can't spell their and mixes it up with there in the 1st place.
;-)

yea sorry. I suffered a brain injury in a rollover car accident. Just about died in a coma.
Never fully recovered, but I can wipe my a55 now...

...was my advice wrong?

Cypren
02-20-2009, 1:14 AM
...was my advice wrong?

It was in the sense that your advice left the impression that you could have a loaded magazine in the weapon as long as a round wasn't chambered. PC 12031(g) defines a loaded weapon as one with a round "attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm." This definition was modified in People v. Clark; the gist is that "attached" means that it is in a position from which it can be fired without being manually removed from its attaching device. So a loaded magazine in the mag well is a loaded weapon (it can be fired without you manually removing the bullet -- you just cycle the slide to push it into the chamber), but shells clipped to the stock of a shotgun are not, for example.

When UOC'ing you are permitted to have loaded magazines in your possession, but they must be separate from the weapon (and not concealed, or you are carrying a concealed weapon as per People v. Hale!) unless you are in a situation in which you are permitted to fire the weapon in defense of yourself or another. This quite literally means that you cannot load a magazine into the weapon until you have reasonable fear (and remember, this is your jury's definition of "reasonable") of imminent grievous injury or death to yourself or another individual.

Steve O
02-20-2009, 2:28 AM
Ahh. true.

Thanks for being more spefic.
Something I can't quite seem to do sometimes.

Paladin
02-20-2009, 5:34 AM
After I was told today by the SFPD that they will approach me with their guns drawn and possibly even worse before they inspect my gun to make sure its not loaded, I've decided to completely throw the open-carry idea in San Francisco out. Several of you also made a great point about how many schools there are within this city that I may not know how close I'm walking to. Therefore I've decided to expand our portfolio of services by our SpecOps team to include maritime and close protection security services, which will allow me to register it with the BSIS.

Thank you everyone for your guidance on this issue..Before completely giving up on the idea of CCW, ck out http://www.californiaconcealedcarry.com/ Be sure to read their Getting Started and FAQs pages:
http://www.californiaconcealedcarry.com/gettingstarted.html
http://www.californiaconcealedcarry.com/faq.html

You may have a stronger Good Cause than some who have CCW's either from the Chief Fong or Sheriff Hennessey (who, despite what his dept will tell you on the phone, DOES issue CCWs). If so, you may want to proceed and earn some money on the side (cash settlement from SF to make you go away :D), even if you begin on the alternate route you mentioned.

If, after reading both of those linked articles you decide to proceed, be sure to tell them "Paladin" from CGN sent you.

BTW last I heard, Fong is on her way out and I don't know if they have/know who the new Chief will be, so that maybe why they're delaying getting back to new -- they're just waiting for the new Chief and possibly new policy before telling you one way or the other.

swhatb
02-20-2009, 12:52 PM
tagged... interesting thread. whoe's hiring:D

Kid Stanislaus
02-20-2009, 8:14 PM
Our GLBT brothers and sisters need to be leading this charge, and the rest of us should back them up 110%.--Shannon


Politics does INDEED make strange bedfellows!!

Kid Stanislaus
02-20-2009, 8:16 PM
GG stands for Golden Gate. Doctor_vals talking about Golden Gate Park and if you were to be walking there at night you would probably need a gun anyways.

You'd also need to keep your pants tightly zipped and the belt cinched up real good!

Kid Stanislaus
02-20-2009, 8:27 PM
yea sorry. I suffered a brain injury in a rollover car accident. Just about died in a coma.
Never fully recovered, but I can wipe my a55 now...



Wow, sorry to hear about that. Are you back to normal now?!:D

Alaric
02-20-2009, 11:03 PM
But I just wanted to say that, if the descriptions of the OP's orientation/gender status are correct, then this is exactly the kind of person we need more of.

The conservative/evangelical side of the pro-gun-rights cohort is as large as it's ever likely to get. We need more liberals on our side. As a liberal pro-gunner (I post on DailyKos as "Leftie Gunner"), I've been beating this drum as hard as I can.

Groups like the Pink Pistols, and the grassroots growth of (small "l") libertarian liberalism, are where the fight really is, now.

People like the OP, who are (a) a member of a group likely to get sympathy from liberals and (b) very likely to be assaulted because of who and what they are, are the bleeding edge of gun rights advocacy.

The best framing of this argument that I've ever read is "if Matt Sheppard had had a gun, he'd be alive today."

Gun rights are civil rights, and it is particularly those who are most likely to be victims who should be out in front, defending their right to protect themselves.

Our GLBT brothers and sisters need to be leading this charge, and the rest of us should back them up 110%.

--Shannon

+1000. Living in San Francisco for the years I did introduced me to a wide variety of folks of all different creeds I never would've met back in the 'burbs. Many a Calgunner would be surprised at the variety of "alternative lifestyle" people who are pro-gun. I recall a study from 15-20 years ago that pegged SF as the highest rate of gun ownership in the nation, while at the same time being the most openly politically anti-gun urban area in the country. Talk about hypocrisy...

Some of my gay friends are afraid to openly endorse a pro-2nd position due to a fear of ostracizing their Democrat allies. Apparently there's been (long ago) some back room deals made in this area that still exist to this day. From what I've seen since prop 8 passed, this position is coming under increasing pressure in the lgbt community. There is a significant faction that advocates a more radical approach to demanding their rights. That approach goes hand in hand with a pro-2nd philosophy.

If you are a legit organization there may be a chance you could establish residency for your people in a Gun friendly county, with the co-operation of the local sheriff. A CA CCW is a CA CCW. Not a damn thing SF or any other city/county can do about it. Also, absent extenuating circumstances, a first offence CCW charge is usually a misdemeanor. I carried in CA for forty years without having to burn my one "freebie". Just something to be aware of.

Move to San Diego, like I did. It is a conservative county with a large lgbt population and a huge military/intelligence component. There is a significant amount of crossover between the two. Furthermore, we have a real chance to elect a pro-ccw sheriff in 2010. Despite the uncalled for roadblocks offered by a few misguided leaders in the calguns/nra community, there are a lot of calgunners committed to getting Jay LaSuer elected here.

The schools in San Diego are much more spread out, allowing for effective open carry in large portions of the county, as opposed to SF.

That covers the California "Gun Free School Zone Act", but it doesn't cover the Federal law.


Be especially careful of the federal property in SF, of which there is a surprisingly large amount. The entire Presidio, Fort Mason, GGNRA, and many buildings in downtown have federal offices. Even areas that are quintessentially San Francisco are federal land. Baker Beach, birth of Burning Man for example, is located within the Presidio, a National Park.

Familiarize yourself with the federal laws. You can find ways to work within the system. For example, I was able to live in a National Park in San Francisco for 3+ years at below market rents, on a beach, and legally own guns the entire time. It can be done. All you have to do is find the opportunities, read and apply the applicable laws carefully.

On the subject of the San Francisco PD. Be overly cautious. I've known some sfpd officers that were great, upstanding people, very respectful of people's rights and very professional. I also knew of a few that were completely corrupt, allegedly in the pockets of the local mafia, and prone to outrageous contempt of the law. I think that goes without saying really - that happens in every big city.

That said, I urge you to push the boundaries within the law. As has been said here before, we need more people who are far outside the stereotypical gun owner profile to get involved here. I urge you to take your time, learn the laws inside and out to the point you can recite them by heart, and then carefully choose the battles you wish to fight. Open carry is a good place to start. Golden Gate Park, deep in the avenues, sounds like a good place to start - once you do your homework.

DDT
02-20-2009, 11:50 PM
It was in the sense that your advice left the impression that you could have a loaded magazine in the weapon as long as a round wasn't chambered. PC 12031(g) defines a loaded weapon as one with a round "attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm." This definition was modified in People v. Clark; the gist is that "attached" means that it is in a position from which it can be fired without being manually removed from its attaching device. So a loaded magazine in the mag well is a loaded weapon (it can be fired without you manually removing the bullet -- you just cycle the slide to push it into the chamber), but shells clipped to the stock of a shotgun are not, for example.



While it is true that having the mag out of the firearm is the recommended method of carry it is not completely clear if it is necessary. I understand that "the right people" believe that a magazine in the firearm but no round in the chamber MAY be defendable based on Clark.

Here is what the Clark decision has to say about the status of a gun as being "loaded." There is no way in hell I would be willing to be the test case here.

The term "loaded" HAS A COMMONLY UNDERSTOOD MEANING: "to put a load or charge in (a device or piece of equipment) a gun" or "to put a load on or in a carrier, device, or container; esp: to insert the charge or cartridge into the chamber of a firearm." (Webster's New Collegiate Dict. (1976) p. 674.) Under the commonly understood meaning of the term "loaded," a firearm is "loaded" when a shell or cartridge has been placed into a position from which it can be fired; the shotgun is not "loaded" if the shell or cartridge is stored elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position. The shells here were placed in a separate storage compartment of the shotgun and were not yet "loaded" as the term is commonly understood.

Does a filled and installed magazine make a loaded gun legally? It is not completely clear but the bits I chose to bold suggest that maybe not.

To me, when I insert a filled magazine into my guns I consider them loaded.

Librarian
02-21-2009, 1:11 AM
... a magazine in the firearm but no round in the chamber MAY be defendable based on Clark.


Not sure how that would work under Clark - I'll leave that one to actual lawyers - but that is the Fish & Game definition that is 'not loaded'. I think, on that basis, a court might reason it is possible the Legislature knows the difference already, and not importing the F&G definition to the Penal Code might be deliberate. Hard to be sure what a court opinion might be.

Philthy
02-21-2009, 1:46 AM
Yes, plus having to spend $20,000 minimum to stay out of jail. They Will arrest and prosecute you in SF. If you have good representation you will win, but it will cost you dearly. Good luck. If you got the bucks, go for it!:43:

The DA drops everything. I mean everything. If the DA has a case, they plea bargain it because the courts are clogged.

gunsmith
02-21-2009, 9:55 AM
after Nordyke ( provided we win ) it is time for open carry trash details and info walks in pre-selected areas with recorders and lawyers.
Don't worry, you'll make $ on the lawsuits.

Decoligny
02-21-2009, 11:06 AM
after Nordyke ( provided we win ) it is time for open carry trash details and info walks in pre-selected areas with recorders and lawyers.
Don't worry, you'll make $ on the lawsuits.

We are having an Open Carry get together next Saturday in San Diego at Pacific Beach. We are expecting somewhere between 50 and 75 people last I heard.

Timberline
02-21-2009, 12:21 PM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=17563&stc=1&d=1235033126

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=17564&stc=1&d=1235033151


Thanks for posting the maps, I was wondering if such visual aids had been prepared. Have these been posted here at CG before? How can I generate a similar map for any locale in the State? The better map would show those regions which were outside a 1000 foot radius of any school.

Librarian
02-21-2009, 12:39 PM
Thanks for posting the maps, I was wondering if such visual aids had been prepared. Have these been posted here at CG before? How can I generate a similar map for any locale in the State? The better map would show those regions which were outside a 1000 foot radius of any school.

Hmm, thought I posted this - apologies if this is a double-tap...

Those two are easy - go to maps/google.com, enter a city, and when the city map appears, enter "school" for businesses to search for.

Google uses the street address as the location for the dot. I've recently been looking into modifying the default dot to be 2000' wide on some scale of the map (1000' radius), but I really don't understand the API,so I don't know if that's possible. That would give an indication, but certainly is nowhere near to-the-inch guidance of places to avoid

It can be done manually, but it's tedious. Worse, using the street address sometimes gives misleading results; a school in my neighborhood has an address on one street; 1000' doesn't even get off school property going east from that address!

anony mouse
02-21-2009, 1:24 PM
Not sure how that would work under Clark - I'll leave that one to actual lawyers - but that is the Fish & Game definition that is 'not loaded'. I think, on that basis, a court might reason it is possible the Legislature knows the difference already, and not importing the F&G definition to the Penal Code might be deliberate. Hard to be sure what a court opinion might be.

There are some SCOTUS rulings on this (generically). Generally they assume that congress knows the difference. Additionally early SCOTUS cases defined how to interpret statutes, and this comes in to play here when it deals with definitions of terms and words.

The well settled doctrine in interpreting statutes includes that terms have to have a specific meaning that is non-superfluous. "a legislature is presumed to have used no superfluous words," Platt v. Union Pacific R. Co., 99 U.S. 48, 58 (1879). In laymans terms this means if they say "A and/or B" then A cannot be equal to B.

In addition the courts have said that when defining terms, which is much more relevant to this issue. Basically you look for a definition in the statute itself, these are called words/terms of art. Failing that you look to the ordinary use of the word. In Nix v. Hedden 149 U.S. 304, 307, 13 S.Ct. 881, 882, 37 L.Ed. 745 (1893) the court decided that even if the technical definition of something goes one way but common perception goes another you use the common perception (in Nix, tomatoes are fruits but common understanding is that they are vegetables, so the veggie tariff applied).

Terms that are defined in one part of the statute do not apply to other acts, as that term of art is only valid in the context it is defined. So it would be risky to use the F&G definition if it were not a statute that was part of the act that defined that term.

DDT
02-21-2009, 1:32 PM
Hmm, thought I posted this - apologies if this is a double-tap...

Those two are easy - go to maps/google.com, enter a city, and when the city map appears, enter "school" for businesses to search for.

Google uses the street address as the location for the dot. I've recently been looking into modifying the default dot to be 2000' wide on some scale of the map (1000' radius), but I really don't understand the API,so I don't know if that's possible. That would give an indication, but certainly is nowhere near to-the-inch guidance of places to avoid

It can be done manually, but it's tedious. Worse, using the street address sometimes gives misleading results; a school in my neighborhood has an address on one street; 1000' doesn't even get off school property going east from that address!

Since the statute is written "knows, or reasonably should know" I think the DA would have a VERY difficult time prosecuting someone who went through all the trouble to print out a map and avoid the indicated areas. Even if the map isn't EXACTLY accurate. Now, if you have the map and you ARE in an indicated area I think you'd have a REALLY tough time arguing that you didn't know.

Cypren
02-21-2009, 3:40 PM
While it is true that having the mag out of the firearm is the recommended method of carry it is not completely clear if it is necessary. I understand that "the right people" believe that a magazine in the firearm but no round in the chamber MAY be defendable based on Clark.

Clark quoted the common-usage definition of "loaded" to exempt shells stored in a non-feeding chamber from the "not limited to" provision of "attached" in 12031(g). Cartridges stored in a magazine "attached to" the firearm are explicitly specified in the code as a violation; they are not part of a definition of "loaded".

Firearms law isn't my area of expertise and so I will happily defer to a specialist in the area if they feel this is really a winnable case. But it's not a defense I would mount personally unless I had no other choice. The chances just don't look good from my view.

Librarian
02-21-2009, 4:05 PM
Since the statute is written "knows, or reasonably should know" I think the DA would have a VERY difficult time prosecuting someone who went through all the trouble to print out a map and avoid the indicated areas. Even if the map isn't EXACTLY accurate. Now, if you have the map and you ARE in an indicated area I think you'd have a REALLY tough time arguing that you didn't know.

Yes, I agree. If anyone in the world really meant this, there would already be such maps, maintained by some level of government and published, and signs posted at all the boundaries.

These laws are no more than harassment.

Timberline
02-21-2009, 4:15 PM
Yes, I agree. If anyone in the world really meant this, there would already be such maps, maintained by some level of government and published, and signs posted at all the boundaries.
Please, no more signs! But, yes, the maps could be distributed freely at gun and ammoe shops, any place where firearms and firearms supplies/accessories were sold, as well as published online.
These laws are no more than harassment.Agree.

anony mouse
02-21-2009, 4:23 PM
A friend is making a google map in response to this thread. For initial seeding they are going to geocode the addresses with google's api, which means that the position of the address may be slightly off in some situations. They are also going to be somewhat simple with it and just make a simple circle with a radius of 1000 feet, as opposed to creating proper polygons that would match the school perfectly.

Because the data source will be a google spreadsheet it can become a community project to maintain the data (initial data will be gathered from the state of california). Eventually, if time and desire permits proper bounding boxes can be done with a list of points for each and every school that is in the list (really boring time consuming work but if enough people helped it may be doable).

I will post the url once he lets me know that its ok to do so, that should be in a day or two.

gunsmith
02-21-2009, 6:48 PM
wow, that's truly crappy ( all those schools )
Its like you are breaking the law just to load your guns into the trunk to drive to the range.
How about CCW, if you manage to score a permit, can you still walk around town without violating?
How is this crummy law still in place?

Timberline
02-21-2009, 6:52 PM
wow, that's truly crappy ( all those schools )
Its like you are breaking the law just to load your guns into the trunk to drive to the range.


But that's the point - properly carrying firearms in a vehicle is not illegal, even when driving within 1000 feet of a school. The issue here is openly carrying.

anony mouse
02-21-2009, 6:56 PM
wow, that's truly crappy ( all those schools )
Its like you are breaking the law just to load your guns into the trunk to drive to the range.
How about CCW, if you manage to score a permit, can you still walk around town without violating?
How is this crummy law still in place?

I think that there is a provision for CCW people, however those are highly variable based on where you live. San Francisco for example, good luck. More rural counties however generally tend to allow them more. Then there are some oddities, Culver City when police chief Cook was there (I dont know if he still is its been years since I lived down there) would hand them out basically to anyone that could properly fill out the app, but LA which surrounds it was highly against them.

18 USC 922(q)(2)(B)(ii) seems to be somewhat relevant to CCWs

(q)
(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(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 of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains 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;
(iii) that is—
(I) not loaded; and
(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.


So basically it appears that if its on private property you can have it, loaded even. If you go onto public property (streets, etc) then you have to have a CCW or have it locked and unloaded in a motor vehicle, or if you have the school permission you may pass through the school for hunting purposes if the weapon is unloaded first.

anony mouse
02-22-2009, 3:26 AM
I you go over to http://www.0xdecafbad.com/gfsz there is a map using the google map api that creates circles for the GFSZs.

There are only private schools now, but they are trying to get charter and public ones too (if anyone has any links to csv or xls data of this they would appreciate it, charter would require screen scraping and public did not seem to be readily listed).

The page currently has some bugs, it can take a while to load all the points into the google map api subsystem, and you may get a warning that the script is running slow (its not, it just takes a while) so click continue if that pops up and eventually it should all load.

Timberline
02-22-2009, 7:48 AM
I you go over to http://www.0xdecafbad.com/gfsz there is a map using the google map api that creates circles for the GFSZs.

There are only private schools now, but they are trying to get charter and public ones too (if anyone has any links to csv or xls data of this they would appreciate it, charter would require screen scraping and public did not seem to be readily listed).

The page currently has some bugs, it can take a while to load all the points into the google map api subsystem, and you may get a warning that the script is running slow (its not, it just takes a while) so click continue if that pops up and eventually it should all load.

Thanks, that's exactly the sort of useful tool I was envisioning. It could employ a "safety factor" of 10 or 20%, to extend the radius to 1100 or 1200 feet, which would help address the issue of actual school property boundaries. If the Google API allows it, a useful enhancement would be giving a solid point at the location of the school, and then including also the name of the school.

anony mouse
02-23-2009, 7:14 AM
Thanks, that's exactly the sort of useful tool I was envisioning. It could employ a "safety factor" of 10 or 20%, to extend the radius to 1100 or 1200 feet, which would help address the issue of actual school property boundaries. If the Google API allows it, a useful enhancement would be giving a solid point at the location of the school, and then including also the name of the school.

I talked to him about this, he has no problem making the radius a bit larger, but adding the tags for all the school names and such will become problematic. Currently some systems already display a script warning saying its taking too long to load the points in, and he only has the private schools right now. Once he gets the public and charter schools its likely to cause more problems. The additional data required for the school name will add a bit more to that time.

This is his first googlemaps thing too, so there may be other ways that would optimize things a bit and make it more reasonable.

DDT
02-23-2009, 8:08 AM
Please don't make the radius bigger. It is best to have exact measurements. If you are carrying this with you it is prima facie evidence that you have knowledge of the GFSZ. You are only in violation if you "know or should reasonably know" about the school zone. With an exact map you should be completely safe from prosecution if you stay out of the "red zone" on the map that you have reason to believe is accurate. If you know the red zone contains a buffer what happens if you are stopped in the edge of the red zone?

GREAT TOOL BTW.

anony mouse
02-23-2009, 11:22 AM
Please don't make the radius bigger. It is best to have exact measurements. If you are carrying this with you it is prima facie evidence that you have knowledge of the GFSZ. You are only in violation if you "know or should reasonably know" about the school zone. With an exact map you should be completely safe from prosecution if you stay out of the "red zone" on the map that you have reason to believe is accurate. If you know the red zone contains a buffer what happens if you are stopped in the edge of the red zone?

GREAT TOOL BTW.

I will pass that along, however this is starting to threadjack so I created a new thread and all of the conversations about the tool should be posted there.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=2076718

aemergin
02-23-2009, 4:20 PM
Hi, this is my first post here but thought I could share some data for the map (great idea btw!) ..

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/ds/pubschls.asp

There you can download the full database of all California schools - type, address, even has latitude and longitude if it helps. Also, those files are maintained and updated daily (supposedly) so if you could find a way to map it as your data for your google map .. it would be some extra code but worth it in the end.

Aemergin / Erik

aemergin
02-23-2009, 4:21 PM
oops .. reposting it in the new thread

gunsmith
02-26-2009, 7:05 PM
We are having an Open Carry get together next Saturday in San Diego at Pacific Beach. We are expecting somewhere between 50 and 75 people last I heard.

we need to do this in SF too