PDA

View Full Version : Rubbermaid Action Packer with Padlock = 'locked case'?


1surfguy
06-20-2010, 3:32 PM
Could I get your opinion?

I would like to transport my firearms in an SUV type vehicle (i.e. no lockable trunk).

Would a padlocked Rubbermaid Action Packer (48 or 35 gallon version) in the rear of my SUV be acceptable as a 'locked case'?

http://www.rubbermaid.com/Category/Pages/ProductDetail.aspx?Prod_ID=RP091427&CatName=Storage

Background:

I have an SUV type vehicle (i.e. no lockable trunk). I want to find a legal (i.e. low hassel potential by LEOs), functional and relatively inexpensive way to transport my firearms (ARs, handguns, shotguns, 10/22s, etc.) to and from places I plan to shoot (i.e. ranges, BLM, training and competition events, etc.)

I want to be on the conservative side (who knows if there is a school close by on my travel routes), therefore, I want to transport all my firearms in a 'locked case'.

I was thinking if the Rubbermaid Action Packer with a padlock will meet Legal and LEO requirements for a 'locked case', then I can just put my standard soft cases with my firearms, etc. into the Rubbermaid, padlock it and go enjoy the day.

I posted a prior question about padlocking a soft case's zippers directly, but I think this solution would be a little more conservative way to go as well as more flexible and functional.

I appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

Doheny
06-20-2010, 4:20 PM
That would work. As was probably noted when you asked about a gun rug, (soft case), the law doesn't specify what a locked case is.

762cavalier
06-20-2010, 6:05 PM
That is exactly what I use. And I am totally comfortable that it meets the locked case requirement.

1surfguy
06-20-2010, 7:22 PM
That's great news! I was hoping this would be an acceptable solution. I understand that the law doesn't specify exactly what a 'locked case' is but I appreciate hearing the opinion of some veteran members. :notworthy:

Any other members with comments, I would really appreciate your input. I am just trying to cross all my 't's and dot all my 'i's before :driving:

762cavalier
06-20-2010, 7:27 PM
That's great news! I was hoping this would be an acceptable solution. I understand that the law doesn't specify exactly what a 'locked case' is but I appreciate hearing the opinion of some veteran members. :notworthy:

Any other members with comments, I would really appreciate your input. I am just trying to cross all my 't's and dot all my 'i's before :driving:

Veteran member is just proof that I waste too much time on Calguns.:D

Just don't cross your I's and dot your T's:p

elrcastor
06-21-2010, 5:52 AM
Could I get your opinion?

I would like to transport my firearms in an SUV type vehicle (i.e. no lockable trunk).

Would a padlocked Rubbermaid Action Packer (48 or 35 gallon version) in the rear of my SUV be acceptable as a 'locked case'?

http://www.rubbermaid.com/Category/Pages/ProductDetail.aspx?Prod_ID=RP091427&CatName=Storage

Background:

I have an SUV type vehicle (i.e. no lockable trunk). I want to find a legal (i.e. low hassel potential by LEOs), functional and relatively inexpensive way to transport my firearms (ARs, handguns, shotguns, 10/22s, etc.) to and from places I plan to shoot (i.e. ranges, BLM, training and competition events, etc.)

I want to be on the conservative side (who knows if there is a school close by on my travel routes), therefore, I want to transport all my firearms in a 'locked case'.

I was thinking if the Rubbermaid Action Packer with a padlock will meet Legal and LEO requirements for a 'locked case', then I can just put my standard soft cases with my firearms, etc. into the Rubbermaid, padlock it and go enjoy the day.

I posted a prior question about padlocking a soft case's zippers directly, but I think this solution would be a little more conservative way to go as well as more flexible and functional.

I appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

That would work, you'd need 2 padlocks on it, one on each latch. You can open those with out opening both latches.

bruss01
06-21-2010, 5:59 AM
That's great news! I was hoping this would be an acceptable solution. I understand that the law doesn't specify exactly what a 'locked case' is but I appreciate hearing the opinion of some veteran members. :notworthy:

Any other members with comments, I would really appreciate your input. I am just trying to cross all my 't's and dot all my 'i's before :driving:

Just be sure that a reasonably strong person cannot twist, bend or pry the plastic case enough that the gun can slip out a crack between the lid and tub. If they can demonstrate that, then they can reasonably say it was NOT LOCKED even if you had some kind of lock present. Put it on the ground and put a knee into it and see how much "give" there is.

Cobrafreak
06-21-2010, 7:07 AM
A locked case is anything you would need to either unlock or break to gain access to gun. A zip lock bag with a padlock however would NOT be a "gun case" as you could fire it while still in bag. :p

1JimMarch
06-21-2010, 9:03 AM
You could probably use that as checked luggage on a flight with a gun in it.

Ron-Solo
06-21-2010, 10:29 PM
As a 32 year LEO, I'd say you're good to go with an Action Packer as long as BOTH latches had padlocks. Those things are actually pretty secure when locked. The intent of the law (legally speaking, not practically speaking) is to make sure that it can't be easily accessed from inside the vehicle.

postal
06-21-2010, 11:04 PM
As a 32 year LEO, I'd say you're good to go with an Action Packer as long as BOTH latches had padlocks. Those things are actually pretty secure when locked. The intent of the law (legally speaking, not practically speaking) is to make sure that it can't be easily accessed from inside the vehicle.

I'm am glad that you posted your opinion on this matter as a member of the LEO community. Sincerely, Thank you!:cheers2:

But I must point out however, that "intent" of law doesnt mean squat. It's "the letter of the law" that really matters.

politicos and doj tried to outlaw any and all evil black rifles, and has been proven over and over again that there are ways *around* the "intent of the law".

As good advice, being prepared for the "intent of the law" is a safe route. Meeting the "letter of the law" will eventually see a person clear.

Not to pick a fight or anything- just pointing out a significant difference in points of view.

1surfguy
06-22-2010, 7:51 PM
As a 32 year LEO, I'd say you're good to go with an Action Packer as long as BOTH latches had padlocks. Those things are actually pretty secure when locked. The intent of the law (legally speaking, not practically speaking) is to make sure that it can't be easily accessed from inside the vehicle.

I really appreciate the LEO input Ron-Solo. I've got one of the 48 gallon versions on order. It should arrive in a week or two. I will definitely be sure to lock BOTH latches with padlocks (although I think the 48 gallon version has a single latch by the picture on the Rubbermaid site.) I'll post some pictures of it when it arrives for those who are interested.

Thank you everyone for your input.

FreedomIsNotFree
06-22-2010, 8:16 PM
I'm am glad that you posted your opinion on this matter as a member of the LEO community. Sincerely, Thank you!:cheers2:

But I must point out however, that "intent" of law doesnt mean squat. It's "the letter of the law" that really matters.

politicos and doj tried to outlaw any and all evil black rifles, and has been proven over and over again that there are ways *around* the "intent of the law".

As good advice, being prepared for the "intent of the law" is a safe route. Meeting the "letter of the law" will eventually see a person clear.

Not to pick a fight or anything- just pointing out a significant difference in points of view.

Actually, the intent of the law, the intentions of the legislature that passed the law, means an awful lot. Legislative intent is regularly taken into consideration by the judiciary when rendering a decision.

The intent of the CA legislature when they passed Penal Code Section 12026.1 was to make it difficult for a person driving a vehicle to get his/her hands on a handgun. If considerable time was needed to breech the "locked container", I believe the law has been met.

With that said, one can alleviate virtually all potential issues by utilizing a locked container within a locked trunk(when available).

advocatusdiaboli
06-22-2010, 9:12 PM
I have one in the back of my SUV and lock my firearms in it also--unless they are in bags with locked zippers. I have every confidence it passes.

Southpaw45
06-22-2010, 9:53 PM
I found this thread very helpful with my problem. I was having to lock my handguns in individual gun cases when they are in my range bag. I usually have 3 to 6 handguns in my bag. Now I can just lower the whole range bag in a Action Packer container and only need two locks. Thanks for the tip.:thumbsup:

Connor P Price
06-22-2010, 10:15 PM
Actually, the intent of the law, the intentions of the legislature that passed the law, means an awful lot. Legislative intent is regularly taken into consideration by the judiciary when rendering a decision.

True, they will often take into consideration the intent of the law in a trial. However, the general goal is to avoid the arrest that leads to the trial. If the law is followed to the very letter, then one would hope they wouldn't have to end up in front of a judge and jury who would then after much time and money invested by the gun owner find them innocent because they were the ones taking the intent of the law into consideration.

I imagine most LEO's out there would be looking at the intent of the law before making an arrest, however we have to tread lightly with these things in California so its best to play it on the safe side. Nobody wants to be the one that ends up finding one of those few LEO's that will try to make an arrest and follow the law to the letter rather than acknowledging its original intent.

FreedomIsNotFree
06-23-2010, 12:27 AM
True, they will often take into consideration the intent of the law in a trial. However, the general goal is to avoid the arrest that leads to the trial. If the law is followed to the very letter, then one would hope they wouldn't have to end up in front of a judge and jury who would then after much time and money invested by the gun owner find them innocent because they were the ones taking the intent of the law into consideration.

I imagine most LEO's out there would be looking at the intent of the law before making an arrest, however we have to tread lightly with these things in California so its best to play it on the safe side. Nobody wants to be the one that ends up finding one of those few LEO's that will try to make an arrest and follow the law to the letter rather than acknowledging its original intent.

There in lies the rub with Penal Code Section 12026.1. The language is ambiguous. Define "utility". And I support the Police, but I highly doubt an officer on the street is equipped with the time or resources to intelligently delve in to the intent of the law. It's the job of the judiciary to interpret the law.

advocatusdiaboli
06-23-2010, 2:23 PM
There in lies the rub with Penal Code Section 12026.1. The language is ambiguous. Define "utility". And I support the Police, but I highly doubt an officer on the street is equipped with the time or resources to intelligently delve in to the intent of the law. It's the job of the judiciary to interpret the law.

Makes me want to paraphrase the policy of some CA LE with a t-short slogan some of us wore at Bragg:"Arrest 'em all and let the judge sort it out."

Roadrunner
06-23-2010, 2:54 PM
I would also add, that it should be a case that doesn't appear on anyone's radar. In other words, a case that LEO's wouldn't pay any attention to.

postal
06-23-2010, 3:15 PM
Actually, the intent of the law, the intentions of the legislature that passed the law, means an awful lot. Legislative intent is regularly taken into consideration by the judiciary when rendering a decision.

The intent of the CA legislature when they passed Penal Code Section 12026.1 was to make it difficult for a person driving a vehicle to get his/her hands on a handgun. If considerable time was needed to breech the "locked container", I believe the law has been met.

With that said, one can alleviate virtually all potential issues by utilizing a locked container within a locked trunk(when available).

Then you sir,

If you own an "AR" or other EBR rifle, are now duly obligated to turn it in for self destruction as you have not complied with the "intent" of the law.

You are also not allowed to purchace or build an EBR until such time as these laws have been removed.

N6ATF
06-23-2010, 3:47 PM
Then you sir,

If you own an "AR" or other EBR rifle firearm of any kind, whatsoever, are now duly obligated to turn it in for self destruction as you have not complied with the "intent" of the law.

Fixed.

FreedomIsNotFree
06-23-2010, 5:35 PM
Then you sir,

If you own an "AR" or other EBR rifle, are now duly obligated to turn it in for self destruction as you have not complied with the "intent" of the law.

You are also not allowed to purchace or build an EBR until such time as these laws have been removed.

Says who?

retired
06-23-2010, 6:09 PM
OP, I didn't see any price for that container. How much are both of them. Thanks.

Falstaff
06-23-2010, 8:17 PM
As a 32 year LEO, I'd say you're good to go with an Action Packer as long as BOTH latches had padlocks. Those things are actually pretty secure when locked. The intent of the law (legally speaking, not practically speaking) is to make sure that it can't be easily accessed from inside the vehicle.

I carry pistols occasionally in my truck contained in a Gunvault brand pistol safe. This safe has a keyed lock and a finger combination pad that can be opened quite quickly. Although I've met the letter of the law, I'm wondering how LE would view this method given your position on intent of the law?

advocatusdiaboli
06-23-2010, 9:36 PM
I carry pistols occasionally in my truck contained in a Gunvault brand pistol safe. This safe has a keyed lock and a finger combination pad that can be opened quite quickly. Although I've met the letter of the law, I'm wondering how LE would view this method given your position on intent of the law?
I have a few of those in my home in strategic places and loaded appropriately. I've thought about one in the vehicle but never followed through...yet. I would think it meets the requirements of the vague law with no court testing to date so who really knows.

Ron-Solo
06-23-2010, 11:20 PM
I carry pistols occasionally in my truck contained in a Gunvault brand pistol safe. This safe has a keyed lock and a finger combination pad that can be opened quite quickly. Although I've met the letter of the law, I'm wondering how LE would view this method given your position on intent of the law?

You might have trouble with that one, since it can be opened quickly. I wouldn't let my son do it that way.

The action packer doesn't scream GUN CASE and would require more PC to legally open it.

Anti-Hero
06-23-2010, 11:41 PM
I've also wondered if the micro gunvault, would pass muster as a locked case... It appears to meet the requirements of the law.

GuyW
06-24-2010, 12:52 PM
Even if the Rubbermaid or similar product complies with legal standards (and it does I think), it is not very secure in the off-chance that I have car trouble or other changes in plans that might cause me to have to leave my guns unattended for a time.

.

longhairchris
06-24-2010, 3:44 PM
I love the Action Packer. I use a modified one for transporting stuff bungied to the back seat of my motorcycle.

If I put two locks on it, would it qualify as legal for transporting handguns on a motorcycle? Furthermore, could I transport ammo in the same container?

N6ATF
06-24-2010, 5:26 PM
I love the Action Packer. I use a modified one for transporting stuff bungied to the back seat of my motorcycle.

If I put two locks on it, would it qualify as legal for transporting handguns on a motorcycle? Furthermore, could I transport ammo in the same container?

The only times it can* be illegal to have ammo in the same container are when
1) You're flying commercial
2) It's in the gun

*If you don't meet one of few exemptions.

postal
06-24-2010, 7:34 PM
Says who?

Says the CA DOJ...

The "assault rifle ban" is still in effect here in kali.

The current "Intent of the law" is quite clear.... any centerfire, semi auto, with removable magazine, and prominent pistol grip- is *ILLEGAL*.

People here on this very site looked at the law long enough, and figured out that a "bullet button" would change the removable magazine into a fixed magazine. They also figured out that a "monsterman" or "U-whatever* would take away the "prominent pistol grip" portion.

These actions abide by the *STRICT "LETTER OF THE LAW"* while thumbing our noses at the *"INTENT OF THE LAW"*.

These cali legal AR's, AK's, FN's and others all comply with the *LETTER OF THE LAW* and shove the *intent of the law* right up DOJ's backside.

--------------------
In summary, if you disagree with following the "letter of the law", and stand by following the "intent", then no evil guns for you. Those EBR's *ABSOLUTELY DO NOT FOLLOW THE "INTENT" OF THE AW BAN*. And you should turn in your evil EBR for destruction as to comply with the intent.

-and you'd be the only person that turns one in for following "intent"... Everyone else here with an EBR would NOT and as much as DOJ hates it, they are legal, because they follow the "letter of the law".

Make sense now?

Connor P Price
06-24-2010, 7:51 PM
Registered AW, or handgun, ammo must be in separate lockable container.

Other than putting ammo in a separate lockable container, you should be GTG.

^ huh?

"So long as the handgun is itself unloaded, ammunition in the same container does not make the handgun loaded.

Some gun owners may be more comfortable transporting ammunition in a separate container, or a separate compartment of the locked container, but this is not required by current law."

That's straight from the Calguns Wiki. It is not illegal to have ammunition in the same locked container as your handgun. As far as the AW comment, I doubt that as well but I'm not 100% sure so I'll leave that to somebody else.

1surfguy
07-04-2010, 7:10 AM
OP, I didn't see any price for that container. How much are both of them. Thanks.

'Retired', the least expensive I could find the 48 Gallon version was at Wally World for $49. If you have it delivered to a local store for pickup, the shipping is free.:)

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Rubbermaid-48-Gallon-Action-Packer/10569596?sourceid=1500000000000003260370&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=10569596