PDA

View Full Version : Transporting firearms, what about ammo?


caoboy
04-28-2010, 11:59 AM
I haven't been able to find a clear answer about transporting ammunition alongside firearms. I always keep my mags loaded. As far as I know I am to keep them out of the compartment that is considered the "locked container". I've always done this because it is a guarantee safe way to transport the ammo/ guns. I would like to keep my handgun mags in the same locked container in my car, and have heard it is il/legal from different parties. So what is the fud?

Is it il/legal to transport loaded mags in the same container as the firearm?

Does this only apply to handguns or are long guns included?

GrizzlyGuy
04-28-2010, 12:09 PM
Is it il/legal to transport loaded mags in the same container as the firearm?

Does this only apply to handguns or are long guns included?

Legal for handguns and long guns.

Background info is here (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Transporting).

Army
04-28-2010, 4:42 PM
You can't find anything....because there isn't anything.

Ammo can be strewn all about the vehicle and stuck up your nose, legally, while driving. Full magazines in the same container as the firearm is legal, same with loose ammo.

The main situation you MUST adhere to, is NO ammunition in a position to be fired: NO full magazine inserted into the magwell on a semi-auto. NO cartridges in the cylinder of a revolver. NO full magazines inserted into any rifle. NO ammunition in the feed tube of a pump/bolt repeater.

You can transport ammo almost any way you want otherwise.

mj1
04-28-2010, 5:03 PM
I use a seperat locked box. Do you want to stand on the side of the road and argue with an LEO? If yes then go ahead. Why play a game when it's so easy to be double safe.

I have seen people hassled over this point and you can bet that if you get stoped with a loaded magazine in the same box as the hand gun it's going to be a loaded gun to the LEO and ADA. An LEO on the street is not going to split hairs over it in todays world dummy. Even worse because there is little written about he is going be free free to ask why do you need a loaded magzine driving to the range? Next thought he has is your up to something and IF he feels threatened by it your gone and so is your gear. It takes about five min to make a locking .50 cal ammo box and it will take you about five months and $5k to get you gear back if ever.

My .02 you play it anyway you want.

Cheers

Catechol
04-28-2010, 5:20 PM
I use a seperat locked box. Do you want to stand on the side of the road and argue with an LEO? If yes then go ahead. Why play a game when it's so easy to be double safe.

Why would anyone argue with a LEO? The first, last, and only thing out of your mouth to a cop who is investigating you -- for any reason -- should be, "I refuse to answer any questions without my attorney present"

I have seen people hassled over this point and you can bet that if you get stoped with a loaded magazine in the same box as the hand gun it's going to be a loaded gun to the LEO and ADA.

Regardless of what a LEO or ADA says, PC 12031 and case law define what a loaded firearm is for this instance, and they are very clear.

It takes about five min to make a locking .50 cal ammo box and it will take you about five months and $5k to get you gear back if ever.

Paranoid much?

mj1
04-28-2010, 5:32 PM
Catechol
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1
iTrader: 0 / 0%

LOL

Doe's it hurt to be safe?

Is it not better get home with your gear?

Is it a bad thing to lock up your stuff to prevent it from being used against the general public or yourself?

"Paranoid much?" Well that would be U. Needing a loaded magazine while leagaly transporting your arms to a leagal place to use them speaks volumes about you and PARANOIA. Stick to the subject and not personnel attacks and we might answer the question.


Have a nice day.
...MJ...

Glock22Fan
04-28-2010, 5:36 PM
Welcome, Catechol.

In an ideal world you are correct. That isn't the world most of us live in.

The first truth is that LEO has the upper hand. The second is that sometimes their knowledge is incomplete, or downright wrong. I know gun instructors who believe that a loaded magazine - no gun present - is illegal.

I always advise carrying loaded mags separately. Not because it is illegal to have them in the same case, but because I don't want to spend an hour or three or four at the side of the road while my lawyer turns up (I don't want the legal bills either.)

Eventually you should win. Why not avoid the possibility and cost of needing to?

And, I'm not recommending running your mouth off to the cop, that's a bad idea too. I'm recommending avoiding the situation in the first place. Doesn't cost anything and everyone wins

mj1
04-28-2010, 6:09 PM
Thumbs up Glockfan.

:iagree:

I was told by a very wise peson long ago that if you look for trouble you will find it.

Another replied to the effect that you will find it sooner and be rid of it much much later than you dreamed it would take.

Of course the man has a Ruger 10/22 and no concept of what it would be like being sopped Saturday morning in Salinas or Oakland with a real rifle and pistole in the car with loaded magazines.

advocatusdiaboli
04-28-2010, 7:25 PM
The main situation you MUST adhere to, is NO ammunition in a position to be fired: NO full magazine inserted into the magwell on a semi-auto. NO cartridges in the cylinder of a revolver. NO full magazines inserted into any rifle. NO ammunition in the feed tube of a pump/bolt repeater..

As I understand it, you've missed one more thing: the ammunition cannot be touching the firearm--for instance in a bandolier attached to a shotgun. So if you have loaded mags but there is some divider between them and the firearm, you're golden. If not, you might be cited.

paul0660
04-28-2010, 7:29 PM
Needing a loaded magazine while leagaly transporting your arms to a leagal place to use them speaks volumes about you and PARANOIA.

Why do you think you have to have a legal destination to transport arms? Are you a citizen?

Sheepdog1968
04-28-2010, 7:39 PM
I personally take the same approach. Empty gun locked in a container in the trunk. All magazines unloaded. Ammo in a separate locked container in the trunk. All other gun related items in the trunk. If I do get pulled over, there is no gun stuff in the cab of the car which reduces any chance of having any discussion about guns. If for some reason, he does need to check them, its locked and in the most conservative manner as possible. Is this more than I need to do? Yes. However, I don't want to have any issues and it takes all of one extra minute to do this.

I use a seperat locked box. Do you want to stand on the side of the road and argue with an LEO? If yes then go ahead. Why play a game when it's so easy to be double safe.

I have seen people hassled over this point and you can bet that if you get stoped with a loaded magazine in the same box as the hand gun it's going to be a loaded gun to the LEO and ADA. An LEO on the street is not going to split hairs over it in todays world dummy. Even worse because there is little written about he is going be free free to ask why do you need a loaded magzine driving to the range? Next thought he has is your up to something and IF he feels threatened by it your gone and so is your gear. It takes about five min to make a locking .50 cal ammo box and it will take you about five months and $5k to get you gear back if ever.

My .02 you play it anyway you want.

Cheers

Wildhawk66
04-28-2010, 7:41 PM
As I understand it, you've missed one more thing: the ammunition cannot be touching the firearm--for instance in a bandolier attached to a shotgun. So if you have loaded mags but there is some divider between them and the firearm, you're golden. If not, you might be cited.

Incorrect. The ammo must be in a position from which it can be fired for the gun to be loaded. This is based on caselaw from People V. Clark.

See the calguns wiki on this here: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California

Librarian
04-28-2010, 8:43 PM
I personally take the same approach. Empty gun locked in a container in the trunk. All magazines unloaded. Ammo in a separate locked container in the trunk. All other gun related items in the trunk. If I do get pulled over, there is no gun stuff in the cab of the car which reduces any chance of having any discussion about guns. If for some reason, he does need to check them, its locked and in the most conservative manner as possible. Is this more than I need to do? Yes. However, I don't want to have any issues and it takes all of one extra minute to do this.

You should do what makes you comfortable; the amount of risk you care to assume is certainly an individual decision.

I'm glad you recognize "Is this more than I need to do? Yes." Several people, anecodotally not least some police officers, have the mistaken impression that what you prefer is required.

But for the most part, this really isn't an issue. What do people plan to do that will bring them to the attention of LEOs? Maintain your vehicles, obey traffic laws, and your likelihood of an interaction drops to 'very low' (but not zero).

Of course, if you're 'doing it wrong' and you do encounter an inquisitive LEO -- or if you're doing it right, and you encounter a poorly trained LEO -- then things could get ugly.

For myself, I generally carry all gun things in my trunk, safely locked out of sight. I use separate locked containers for my handguns, and generally there isn't room for ammo in the cases; I leave at least some magazines loaded.

caoboy
04-29-2010, 12:01 AM
I keep all my magazines loaded, because that is how they are, in the safe. I feel it is bad mojo to have mags strewn about the interior of the car, when I could keep it all in one place. I don't like transporting my handguns in the trunk of the car, where they slide around the back of the trunk.

When I spend the night at my GF's house, I take a handgun over there. Again, it'd be silly to unload the mags, transport the firearm, then reload the mags when I get there.

Come on guys, it's not like I'm preparing for the ultimate shootout and drive around with 50 mags filled and ready to go in case I have to destroy the zombies.... :shuriken: Well maybe I can put one of those biometric handgun safes in the center console of my car, and have it ready to go with a touch of a hand lol!

WhiteSands
04-29-2010, 12:02 AM
How can I carry a gun in an F-150 Pick up?

If I lock it in the plastic Glock Case using a gun lock empty and lock the loaded mags in another Glock case, is this legal?

Do they cases have to visible? or is under the seats OK?

caoboy
04-29-2010, 12:21 AM
According to the gun wiki (and here) you can keep the loaded mags in the same case as the gun, just make sure they are not 'touching' the gun.

The way you say, is also legal.

They do not have to be seen, they are concealed in a locked container which is ok.

GrizzlyGuy
04-29-2010, 6:00 AM
According to the gun wiki (and here) you can keep the loaded mags in the same case as the gun, just make sure they are not 'touching' the gun.

FYI, the ammo could have been touching the gun or even attached to the gun. See Army's post above - the key requirement is that the ammo not be in a position from which it could be fired. Background is in the wiki here: Defining loaded in California (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California#People_v._Clark)

Catechol
04-29-2010, 12:53 PM
The first truth is that LEO has the upper hand. The second is that sometimes their knowledge is incomplete, or downright wrong.

That's what civil claims and lawsuits are for.

Eventually you should win. Why not avoid the possibility and cost of needing to?

What cost? A person arrested under these circumstances has an excellent cause for a civil action, a judgment under which would obviously include legal fees incurred in any criminal defense.

I have no problem with people wanting to avoid trouble, but I do have a problem with people fretting over engaging activities that are completely legal, and which have long been held as such.

Glock22Fan
04-29-2010, 1:29 PM
That's what civil claims and lawsuits are for.

What cost? A person arrested under these circumstances has an excellent cause for a civil action, a judgment under which would obviously include legal fees incurred in any criminal defense.

I have no problem with people wanting to avoid trouble, but I do have a problem with people fretting over engaging activities that are completely legal, and which have long been held as such.

Personally, I have better things to do than waste time being wrongfully arrested and (however temporarily) funding lawsuits to recover my property. I even have better things to do with my time than waste ten minutes of it arguing what is, and what isn't, legal.

If you have nothing better to do and enjoy confrontation and eating dirt, carry on. That's fine with me.

What does it cost extra to do it my way?

Cost: nothing
Gain: no hassle, no eating dirt, no wrongful arrest, no court appearances, no lawsuits etc. etc.

mj1
04-29-2010, 4:05 PM
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2
iTrader: 0 / 0%

LOL

Don't post a request for bail here.

Cheers

Catechol
04-29-2010, 4:07 PM
Personally, I have better things to do than waste time being wrongfully arrested and (however temporarily) funding lawsuits to recover my property. I even have better things to do with my time than waste ten minutes of it arguing what is, and what isn't, legal.

You're right, having $100,000 extra dollars in the bank would really be terrible.

What does it cost extra to do it my way?

Your dignity, in knowing that you're bowing down to an unlawful authority because you're afraid of what might happen if you don't.

Catechol
04-29-2010, 4:15 PM
LOL

Don't post a request for bail here.

Cheers

You don't need bail for a simple misdemeanor (such as 12031) arrest -- after booking you're released with a notice to appear, per PC 853.6(a)(1)

Glock22Fan
04-29-2010, 4:57 PM
You're right, having $100,000 extra dollars in the bank would really be terrible.

I've heard of a lot of people getting harrassed by the law, including other calgunners. Not many of them make money out of it (indeed, I can't remember any). Unless the cops, or the D.A. can be proven to be deliberately behaving in a way they know is wrong, they are protected by immunity. I don't even want to front the lawyers fees, but most important, I don't want to waste the time and experience the hassle.

Indeed, it probably will be over inside half an hour, when the sergeant tells the rookie he's wrong. How are you going to make $100K out of that? In the meantime, you are half an hour late for the match you were going to, your arms have been wrenched behind your back so they can handcuff you, you were probably face down in the dirt, all the passing cars are saying "Look at that scumbag" and so forth.

Your dignity, in knowing that you're bowing down to an unlawful authority because you're afraid of what might happen if you don't.

There's nothing wrong with my dignity. I'm not bowing down to anyone, but neither am I standing up saying "Why don't you take a pot shot at me? I double dare you!"

My dignity would be hurt much more by lying face down in the dirt in handcuffs while they sort it out.

It is called "picking your fight."

As I say, if you thrive on confrontation, and are hoping to make that much money out of it, go right ahead. Don't ask me to support your legal bills.

JAGACIDA
04-29-2010, 5:13 PM
Guns and ammo locked in separate cases is known as extreme compliance. Sort of like when you're being followed by a cop and everything in the DMV handbook is miraculously recalled.

Hoologan
04-29-2010, 5:33 PM
What does it cost extra to do it my way?

Cost: nothing
Gain: no hassle, no eating dirt, no wrongful arrest, no court appearances, no lawsuits etc. etc.

Depends on the situation.

When driving to the range for a day of shooting when several weapons and tons of ammo are transported, probably no cost whatsoever.

When traveling and keeping the firearm close by for the preservation of life (since it is legal) the cost of doing it your way can be quite high if a "situation" were to ever arise. My life is worth more than the cost of a lawyer.

Sometimes it sounds like even members of this forum, who know the laws, are still paranoid and choose to relinquish their rights for the sake of "playing it safe". It's pretty obvious that the lawmakers are winning. :rolleyes:

Catechol
04-29-2010, 5:38 PM
There's nothing wrong with my dignity. I'm not bowing down to anyone, but neither am I standing up saying "Why don't you take a pot shot at me? I double dare you!"

I cannot believe you would equate the lawful carrying of loaded magazines with a direct verbal challenge to law enforcement. Are the people of this once-great state so cowardly that the mere possibility of being unlawfully arrested or detained is enough to assure compliance with a law that does not exist?

My dignity would be hurt much more by lying face down in the dirt in handcuffs while they sort it out.

...and then you'd file a claim.

As I say, if you thrive on confrontation, and are hoping to make that much money out of it, go right ahead. Don't ask me to support your legal bills.

Qualified immunity wouldn't count in this instance, and a 12031 arrest under these circumstances would clearly make the officer liable for a 4th amendment 1983 violation. (see: Sorrell v. McGuigan 4th Cir. 2002, where the court held that a police officer in Maryland was not entitled to qualified immunity because it was clearly established at the time of the defendants arrest that his knife fit within the penknife exception to Maryland's concealed weapons law.)

It's my understanding, based on my *YEARS* of lurking in this forum, that the majority of the legal troubles that CalGunners face are due to perceived (or actual) violations of assault weapons laws, already an obvious legal gray area. Whereas, the elements necessary for a violation of 12031 have been clearly spelled out in both statute and case law, and possession of a loaded magazine within the circumstances we've been discussing is clearly not a crime.

Catechol
04-29-2010, 5:40 PM
Sometimes it sounds like even members of this forum, who know the laws, are still paranoid and choose to relinquish their rights for the sake of "playing it safe". It's pretty obvious that the lawmakers are winning. :rolleyes:

I am in absolute agreement.

Catechol
04-29-2010, 6:32 PM
Attorney fees, driving from SoCal to Bay Area numerous times, and court fees exceed $20,000. Judge rules a conviction of carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle and not declaring it to LE upon field contact.

Due to the fact that there are several obvious inconsistencies present in this account (an apparent conviction by a judge instead of a jury, and conviction for the non-existent crime of "not declaring a firearm to LE"), I have to assume it to either be a work of fiction, omitting crucial elements (such as firearm stolen or not lawfully possessed, etc), and/or having occurred prior to People v. Clark.

However, if you provide a county of arrest, and defendant name or case number, I will verify whether or not this event actually happened (even though I strongly suspect that some or all of this story was fabricated)

GrizzlyGuy
04-29-2010, 7:15 PM
Looks like everybody covered all the issues of personal decision-making, risk aversion / acceptance, case law,...

Friend of mine, driving through the Bay Area, pulled over at a DUI roadblock. Had not been drinking at all, he's a tee-totaler coming back from a camping/off-road trip in NorCal. Usual questions come up from LE, then 'Do you have any firearms in the vehicle?' Answer: 'Yes, in a locked container'. LE: 'Please step outside the car. Do you consent to a search of the vehicle?' Answer: 'No' . So the LE makes a call to a supervisor then proceeds to reach into the pickup truck bed, retrieves a locked container that is in a day-pack. 'Asks' driver to produce key to unlock the container. Container contains a gun with no magazine installed but a loaded magazine and one empty in the same container. LE: Sir, I am placing you under arrest... A: Begins to 'explain' and is slammed to the ground, face first.

Attorney fees, driving from SoCal to Bay Area numerous times, and court fees exceed $20,000. Judge rules a conviction of carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle and not declaring it to LE upon field contact.

True story.

WoW! That's why my standard operating plan is to do this (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=3551753&posted=1#post3551753).

Imagine if he had made the ill-advised (IMHO) 'I have nothing illegal in the car' statement prior to the LEO finding the "illegal" materials. Now the LEO would think he was lied to, and things could have gone even worse. :rolleyes:

paul0660
04-29-2010, 7:25 PM
True story.

Names, places, dates, and the name of his attorney so we can avoid him.

taperxz
04-29-2010, 7:42 PM
Sorry this whole thread is nuts!! Whenever a LEO asks you if you have anything in your car and you tell him you have a firearm he does have the right to inspect the firearm to only see if it is loaded or not.

If an LEO asks you whats in your car i would suggest silence! None of his business whats in the car!! If you have given consent to search you have done nothing but waive your rights. LE must have probable cause to go into your car or consent. I would like to see if the story above was true to the letter! More than likely this LEO had probable cause or as stated above, consent.

Remember also it is legal to open carry also as long as the projectile is not in a position to be fired, or mag in the well.

If you do conceal, and there is nothing illegal in your car that the LEO can see and you are not drunk or on drugs the LEO can not search. It really is a moot point.

fleegman
04-29-2010, 9:21 PM
Personally, I have better things to do than waste time being wrongfully arrested and (however temporarily) funding lawsuits to recover my property. I even have better things to do with my time than waste ten minutes of it arguing what is, and what isn't, legal.

If you have nothing better to do and enjoy confrontation and eating dirt, carry on. That's fine with me.

What does it cost extra to do it my way?

Cost: nothing
Gain: no hassle, no eating dirt, no wrongful arrest, no court appearances, no lawsuits etc. etc.

Personally, I have better things to do than voluntarily waiving my Constitutional rights because it may annoy an ignorant or malicious LEO.
We have precious few rights in CA, I'm going to damn well exercise every single one of them. But then again, I'm not a timid sheep.

Glock22Fan
04-29-2010, 11:04 PM
I really don't know why all the venom.

I usually carry loaded mags. I don't lock them in a case, except when they are in the locked case with my unloaded gun (yes, I do carry them that way sometimes.)

I di tend to keep everything out of sight. Why not? I keep ALL my valuables out of sight.

If asked, I suggest to people that they are less likely to have problems if they are aware that some cops aren't as up on the law as they should be.

Like I said, you are welcome to carry your mags how you like. I will carry mine how I like, and recommend generally that people should err on the safe side.

If you think that this is the mark of a timid sheep with no dignity, you just don't know me.

It is a bit like when I advise newbies not to open carry until they know what they are doing. I've been attacked for that before "It is our right. Everyone should goddam do it, whether they know what they are doing or not. We must show our guns so they know we are not sheep."

There's prudence, and there's hotheadedness. Some of you come over as very young and lacking discretion.

Hoologan
04-30-2010, 5:39 AM
There's prudence, and there's hotheadedness. Some of you come over as very young and lacking discretion.

Prudence is the key.

fleegman
04-30-2010, 6:28 AM
So....... lawfully transporting a pistol AND mags in a locked container is now HOTHEADED? Sounds like a statement an anti would use to demonize law-abiding gun owners. Any day now blood will flow in the streets.

Glock22Fan
04-30-2010, 7:32 AM
So....... lawfully transporting a pistol AND mags in a locked container is now HOTHEADED? Sounds like a statement an anti would use to demonize law-abiding gun owners. Any day now blood will flow in the streets.

No, transporting the magazines that way isn't hotheaded. As I said in my post, I do that myself sometimes. Going out flaunting it, apparently hoping that you will be arrested so you can get $100,000 out of it is hotheaded, IMHO.

motorhead
04-30-2010, 9:12 AM
i recommend you not transport ammo near sources of heat >200 deg. or in body cavities.

Strpd_Up_Brotha
04-30-2010, 9:32 AM
If something happens....are you going to load magazines .....Why do that if its legal keep them together...if a leo who doesnt know the law you going to jail anyway magazine away from the gun or not......I'll stick to keeping mine in the same case....cant load magazines if SHTF....2 seconds I'm locked and loaded. Hey its Legal.

Socom16Fan
05-28-2010, 1:38 PM
From the CHP FAQ advising transportation of firearms through the state of California:

http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html#05


Seems very very clear to me....

Ammunition may be kept in the same container or trunk, but the handgun must remain unloaded with no rounds in the cylinder and no loaded magazines in the magazine well.
If you have additional questions, contact the California Department of Justice at 916-227-3703.