PDA

View Full Version : Transporting Weapons On Motorcycle


xLusi0n
03-04-2006, 12:38 PM
OK, so I ride a motorcycle most of the time and I'd like to be able to go to the pistol range (maybe even rifle range) to shoot. Obviously, I don't have a trunk (1000RR's don't have any room under the pass. seat because of the undertail exhaust)...so how would I go about doing this?

Is an unloaded handgun locked in its box put in my backpack OK?

What about ammo? Just buy it at the range?

I probably won't take my rifle on my bike as it would probably scare people seeing a rifle case (soft) strapped to my back...

Thanks.

mrhappym1a
03-04-2006, 1:46 PM
I don't have a clue, but it's in the CA vehicle code somewhere. I'm betting you're SOL though.

Screw the rules. Mount a scabbard on the bike. Or get a sidecar and mount a 1919!

Inkman
03-04-2006, 2:28 PM
Here are a couple threads about transporting on a bike i searched for. I'm sure there are more though.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=21514&highlight=motorcycle

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=20469&highlight=motorcycle

Al

dwtt
03-04-2006, 2:32 PM
Here's what I used to do, and sometimes still do. I rode to the range on my Interceptor with the ammo in a small bag that's strapped to the rear seat of the bike. My pistol was unloaded and locked, carried in a backpack on my back. Never had problems with the police or CHP. I called the police and CHP about this and they said it would be OK, even though I was violating the letter of the law, I was clearly complying with the spirit of the law and it was unlikely a CHP would hassle me about it if I was ever pulled over. Then when I bought a Colt Sporter, I used a soft rifle case made by assault systems and slung the case over my shoulder. A CHP cruiser passed me two lanes over while crossing the bay bridge coming back into San Francisco from Lake Chabot. He didn't even give me a second look. Of course the rifle was locked inside the case.
It was always the cage drivers who gave me funny looks when I rode with the rifle case slung over my shoulder. So, I took an old soft guitar case and attached a sturdy shoulder strap to it, and carried my Colt rifle in that. No more funny looks from the cagers, but I started getting smiles from cute young women who thought I was a musician, especially in the south of market area. :)

Inkman
03-04-2006, 2:43 PM
BTW....get a bike with side bags. I just got back from USI in Concord. Took the Valk with guns in one side bag and ammo in the other.

Al

harley66
03-04-2006, 4:32 PM
impossible to answer the exact way on this issue - however, I believe the most correct answer has been stated above - My only addition would be to be very honest "if ask" and when you are riding this way to be aware and be extra careful.

Also, why were you stopped??? again - this has a lot to do with how the officer will treat you - were you just leaving a bar and doing a wheelie down the street (sarcasm here)

I have a CCW and have ridden for 10 years now - I have been lucky and have only been stopped once - I was carrying at the time - he didn't ask, so I did not offer - in this state that is legal - I also have a CCW for Utah, and NV and with those two, I can carry in about 35+ states - In some of those states - it is the law, we Must tell the officer we are armed.

Honesty and "the spirit" of the law is very important here.

If I were you, I would go one step futher and break the weapon down -ie: auto, slide off, wheel gun, cyl out of the frame - and of course be in an area that can be argued "to and from the range to your home"

xenophobe
03-04-2006, 4:35 PM
A long time ago, I used to ride my AR-15 on my back with a sling and carry my mags in my BDU leg pouches... That wouldn't be very good these days. lol

harley66
03-04-2006, 5:01 PM
AZ allows open carry for Everyone (even non resident) to carry conceled you must have a permit... So, last time I rode in AZ, I rode for three days with my 45 on my hip and Never a comment - as I stated above - I paid extra attention to my "riding skills" and behaved - I really expected to get stopped and questioned but it never happened - I do admit, I may have just been lucky for those three days - but try that for a day on the 405 in LA -

artherd
03-04-2006, 5:03 PM
Um, Handgun unloaded, in a Lockable Container, then stuffed into your backpack is just fine.

You can even load up a mag and stuff it in the same locked case, so long as the mag is not inserted into (or 'attached in any way to') the gun itself.

If anyone disagrees, please explain which California Penal Code I would be charged under, and under what theroey of law it would apply?

xLusi0n
03-04-2006, 9:40 PM
Not that I would...but isn't open carry (unloaded) technically legal (just not smart)?

FreedomIsNotFree
03-04-2006, 10:22 PM
Not that I would...but isn't open carry (unloaded) technically legal (just not smart)?


IN CA, yes, open carry is legal as long as the weapon is not loaded. Do expect to get stopped though. This happened to me once as I returned to civilization from a 5 day hike. We hiked from Carmel Valley to Big Sur through the Ventanna Wilderness. Of course, you dont go in the outback without a rifle and sidearm....

It was me and my father, at the time I was about 12 or 13, and the trail ended at Pfiefer State Park. Being that we follow the gun laws, as soon as we exited the Wilerness area and entered the National Park we unloaded our weapons. They were too long to fit in the backpacks so we just carried our rifles. There we were....walking out of the woods......after 5 days....dirty and stinky walking amongst the many summer vacationers the area brings in. I could just imagine what some of the people were thinking.....

It wasn't too long until someone "alerted" the Park Rangers that there were two madmen walking through the park with GUNS!!! Sure enough, Smokey soon drove up. The poor park Ranger didn't know what to do.....I was walking in front of my father and the Ranger didn't know if he should take cover as he exited his truck....it was really funny.

As soon as my dad saw that the Ranger was worried he quickly told him the rifles were NOT loaded and we were merely exiting the Wilderness area after a 5 day hike. At that point the Ranger knew we were not a threat...he asked us where our ride was picking us up..we told him at the General Store about a mile down the road.....he ASKED us if we wouldn't mind accepting a ride from him to keep the vacationers from panicing....we hopped at the opportunity....we had just covered over 30 miles.....a ride felt like a gift from god.

Point is....carrying an unloaded firearm in plain view is 100% legal...even in CA...but you better expect a run in with the law.

Matt C
03-04-2006, 10:34 PM
A magazine can be considered part of the gun, so a loaded mag can be a loaded gun. Take your chances. I would carry in either in the backpack as stated above or in a visible holster unloaded. Option two would get the cops all over you but it would not be illegal.:)

xLusi0n
03-05-2006, 7:51 PM
Blackwater OPS, do you work for Blackwater?

artherd
03-05-2006, 9:09 PM
Point is....carrying an unloaded firearm in plain view is 100% legal...even in CA...but you better expect a run in with the law.

I belive (actually not sure, gotta go research this again) this is in general true for longguns (rifles,shotguns) only, and does not apply to weapons capable of being concealed on the person (ie handguns.)

artherd
03-05-2006, 9:10 PM
BULL****, show me the case law, show me the Penal Code, and explain under what theroey of law.

A magazine is not 'part of a gun' when it is removed from said gun. When it's INSERTED IN a gun, well sure.

A magazine can be considered part of the gun, so a loaded mag can be a loaded gun. Take your chances. I would carry in either in the backpack as stated above or in a visible holster unloaded. Option two would get the cops all over you but it would not be illegal.:)

Matt C
03-05-2006, 11:29 PM
I belive (actually not sure, gotta go research this again) this is in general true for longguns (rifles,shotguns) only, and does not apply to weapons capable of being concealed on the person (ie handguns.)
Do that.

show me the case law, show me the Penal Code, and explain under what theroey of law.
I believe that was People vs. Hale (1974) 43 Cal.App.3d 353, 356. Why don't you look this stuff up for yourself before you post on the board and look ignorant, or worse, get arrested because you own guns and don't know the law. While carrying ammo in any way which is not "in a position ready for firing" normally means the gun is not loaded, the magazine is considered part of the gun. A speedloader would not be because it is not part of the gun. A garand clip would be.

blkA4alb
03-05-2006, 11:41 PM
Do that.


I believe that was People vs. Hale (1974) 43 Cal.App.3d 353, 356. Why don't you look this stuff up for yourself before you post on the board and look ignorant, or worse, get arrested because you own guns and don't know the law. At least learn how to spell. While carring ammo in any way which is not "in a position ready for firing" normally means the gun is not loaded, the magazine is considered part of the gun. A speedloader would not be because it is not part of the gun. A garand clip would be.
i dont feel like getting involved in this whole mess, but if your going to pointlessly ridicule artherd for spelling, spell correctly yourself. "carring" thats a new one.

Matt C
03-05-2006, 11:55 PM
Yeah, ok, that was out of line. But who likes having what they said called BS? I know its BS, all the CA firearm laws are BS. I do think its important to know them though, and not give out inaccurate info on forums.

artherd
03-06-2006, 12:46 AM
BWO; why don't you do your homework properly before you attack me?

I'm familiar with People v. Hale (http://online.ceb.com/calcases/CA3/43CA3d353.htm), which I belive is not relivant to the current question. Rather it appears to me that this case deals with wether the partially concealed, unloaded handgun UNLOCKED AND ON THE DRIVER'S SEAT 'was a gun' or not, and not that it was loaded or unloaded.

It does cite People v. Ekberg (1949) 94 CA2d 613 (http://online.ceb.com/calcases/CA2/94CA2d613.htm) as follows:

"A firearm disassembled into two or more parts, can nevertheless constitute an operable weapon within the meaning of the Dangerous Weapons Control Law. (People v. Ekberg, 94 Cal.App.2d 613, 616-617 [211 P.2d 316]"

However this case deals with the same thing, argueing unsuccessfully that a firearm tucked in one's pants is "disassembled" and thus not a firearm. The argument made was that the clip, empty or loaded it does not matter, <sic I think they mean 'magazine'> was nearby, thus the gentleman was carrying a concealed weapon illegally (even if unloaded!)

It seems to me you are attempting to broadly construe a magazine to be 'part of a firearm' and thus any ammunition attached to said magazine to be a loaded firearm for the purpose of determing wether a firearm was loaded?

All this from case law to determine "a gun" (presumably unloaded) to be present based on the presence of a completely functional handgun and magazine in immediate proximity?

That is a pretty broad leap in my opinion. That same leap I cannot find in any case or statute law, and untill I do, I am going to have to assert with confidence that loaded mag otherwise not attached in any way to an unloaded gun, is not a loaded gun.

Now of course an unloaded handgun must still be transported in a lockable container per other state law.

All of this said, see my signature. I can be wrong, and I ain't no attorney, so git yer own! ;)


Do that.

I believe that was People vs. Hale (1974) 43 Cal.App.3d 353, 356. Why don't you look this stuff up for yourself before you post on the board and look ignorant, or worse, get arrested because you own guns and don't know the law. While carrying ammo in any way which is not "in a position ready for firing" normally means the gun is not loaded, the magazine is considered part of the gun. A speedloader would not be because it is not part of the gun. A garand clip would be.

Matt C
03-06-2006, 1:29 AM
You are looking at the wrong part. The key sentence is "In our opinion concealment of an essential component[The magazine] of a visible weapon, when done in such a fashion as to make the weapon readily available for use as a firearm, presents a threat to public order comparable to concealment of the entire firearm and falls within the prohibition of section 12025."
Is this case they are talking about and unloaded but visible gun which IS legal to have. The fact that he was carrying a "clip" which was was NOT in plain view made his actions illegal. The reason was the "clip" was considered to be part of the gun. So if you carry a loaded magazine you breaking the "loaded gun law" and if it is concealed you are breaking another. If you will not understand what I am telling you, at least know that this is how CA peace officers are trained and if you run across one carrying that way you will be arrested.

artherd
03-06-2006, 1:58 AM
I actually covered what you're asserting here in paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of my previous post.

Suffice to say; the 'clip' in this case was determined to be part of the gun only for the purpose of determining wether a gun was concealed, and not wether a gun was loaded.

Broadly interpretating the contrary is in my opinion neither correct nor lawful.

The fact that there is also no explicit citeable case law thus far on the issue directly leads me to further question the broad application you make.

PS: Police have been improperly trained for hundreds of years. I run across many who still think "An AR is an AR is an AR"... sadly I don't see that dangerous process ending any time soon.

You are looking at the wrong part. The key sentence is "In our opinion concealment of an essential component[The magazine] of a visible weapon, when done in such a fashion as to make the weapon readily available for use as a firearm, presents a threat to public order comparable to concealment of the entire firearm and falls within the prohibition of section 12025."
Is this case they are talking about and unloaded but visible gun which IS legal to have. The fact that he was carrying a "clip" which was was NOT in plain view made his actions illegal. The reason was the "clip" was considered to be part of the gun. So if you carry a loaded magazine you breaking the "loaded gun law" and if it is concealed you are breaking another. If you will not understand what I am telling you, at least know that this is how CA peace officers are trained and if you run across one carrying that way you will be arrested.

Matt C
03-06-2006, 8:53 AM
You are just reading the opinion and ignoring the parts that do not suit your view. If you want to be a test case for this go right ahead. BTW, do you still think it is illegal to open carry an unloaded handgun?

artherd
03-06-2006, 12:31 PM
You are just reading the opinion and ignoring the parts that do not suit your view. If you want to be a test case for this go right ahead.

I'm sorry, but this just reeks like Barney Fife roadisde court. "Weeel, we're gonna bust ya because this other court here said a mag is part of a gun, so that's how it is boooy, you've got a real purdy mouth!" Who exactly made Barney an appellate court?

Show me someone arreasted and successfully prosecuted (not pleaded out) and I'll be willing to reconsider my position slightly.

Show me some true case law by the appellate or supremes, and I'll eat crow.

Lastly, to all LEOs out there who would threaten me with some oblique threat about being a 'test case' well have at me, I'm more than willing to be said test case. I've got a TON of time to fight this thing, I'm not living paycheck to paycheck, and I have a bad attitude. I've got lawyers, guns, and money. Still want to take me on? It'll be the (last) fight of your career, and I'll be loving every second of it.

BTW, do you still think it is illegal to open carry an unloaded handgun?

If UNLOADED, and openly carried in a belt holster, no. Partially concealed in any other way, ie tucked in the pants, partially under a shirt yet still visible, possibly. Be careful with unloaded open carry, it is generally prohibited EXCEPT for this exemption:


CPC 12025. (a) A person is guilty of carrying a concealed firearm when he or she does any of the following:
(1) Carries concealed within any vehicle which is under his or her control or direction any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.
(2) Carries concealed upon his or her person any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.
(3) Causes to be carried concealed within any vehicle in which he or she is an occupant any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.

(f) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.