PDA

View Full Version : CRPA says locked unloaded handgun carryin car is illegal


Saym14
08-09-2010, 4:43 PM
CRPA says locked unloaded handgun carryin car is illegal unless you are going to and from a shooting range. this horse aint dead yet :)

. they (CRPA) claim PC 12026.1 and 12026.2 only applies while going to or from specific places (shooting range, hunting etc). this is in their guide to Claifornia laws. Is this just FUD or is there a change in the law or law case that settled this?

12026.1. (a) Section 12025 shall not be construed to prohibit any
citizen of the United States over the age of 18 years who resides or
is temporarily within this state, and who is not prohibited by state
or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a
firearm, from transporting or carrying any pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, provided that
the following applies to the firearm:
(1) The firearm is within a motor vehicle and it is locked in the
vehicle's trunk or in a locked container in the vehicle other than
the utility or glove compartment.
(2) The firearm is carried by the person directly to or from any
motor vehicle for any lawful purpose and, while carrying the firearm,
the firearm is contained within a locked container.
(b) The provisions of this section do not prohibit or limit the
otherwise lawful carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in
accordance with this chapter.
(c) As used in this section, "locked container" means a secure
container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, key lock,
combination lock, or similar locking device.



12026.2. (a) Section 12025 does not apply to, or affect, any of the
following:
(1) The possession of a firearm by an authorized participant in a
motion picture, television, or video production or entertainment
event when the participant lawfully uses the firearm as part of that
production or event or while going directly to, or coming directly
from, that production or event.
(2) The possession of a firearm in a locked container by a member
of any club or organization, organized for the purpose of lawfully
collecting and lawfully displaying pistols, revolvers, or other
firearms, while the member is at meetings of the clubs or
organizations or while going directly to, and coming directly from,
those meetings.
(3) The transportation of a firearm by a participant when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a recognized safety or hunter
safety class, or a recognized sporting event involving that firearm.
(4) The transportation of a firearm by a person listed in Section
12026 directly between any of the places mentioned in Section 12026.
(5) The transportation of a firearm by a person when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a fixed place of business or
private residential property for the purpose of the lawful repair or
the lawful transfer, sale, or loan of that firearm.
(6) The transportation of a firearm by a person listed in Section
12026 when going directly from the place where that person lawfully
received that firearm to that person's place of residence or place of
business or to private property owned or lawfully possessed by that
person.
(7) The transportation of a firearm by a person when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a gun show, swap meet, or
similar event to which the public is invited, for the purpose of
displaying that firearm in a lawful manner.
(8) The transportation of a firearm by an authorized employee or
agent of a supplier of firearms when going directly to, or coming
directly from, a motion picture, television, or video production or
entertainment event for the purpose of providing that firearm to an
authorized participant to lawfully use as a part of that production
or event.
(9) The transportation of a firearm by a person when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a target range, which holds a
regulatory or business license, for the purposes of practicing
shooting at targets with that firearm at that target range.
(10) The transportation of a firearm by a person when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a place designated by a person
authorized to issue licenses pursuant to Section 12050 when done at
the request of the issuing agency so that the issuing agency can
determine whether or not a license should be issued to that person to
carry that firearm.
(11) The transportation of a firearm by a person when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a lawful camping activity for
the purpose of having that firearm available for lawful personal
protection while at the lawful campsite. This paragraph shall not be
construed to override the statutory authority granted to the
Department of Parks and Recreation or any other state or local
governmental agencies to promulgate rules and regulations governing
the administration of parks and campgrounds.
(12) The transportation of a firearm by a person in order to
comply with subdivision (c) or (i) of Section 12078 as it pertains to
that firearm.
(13) The transportation of a firearm by a person in order to
utilize subdivision (l) of Section 12078 as it pertains to that
firearm.
(14) The transportation of a firearm by a person when going
directly to, or coming directly from, a gun show or event, as defined
in Section 478.100 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
for the purpose of lawfully transferring, selling, or loaning that
firearm in accordance with subdivision (d) of Section 12072.
(15) The transportation of a firearm by a person in order to
utilize paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 12078 as it
pertains to that firearm.
(16) The transportation of a firearm by a person who finds the
firearm in order to comply with Article 1 (commencing with Section
2080) of Chapter 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code as it pertains to
that firearm and if that firearm is being transported to a law
enforcement agency, the person gives prior notice to the law
enforcement agency that he or she is transporting the firearm to the
law enforcement agency.
(17) The transportation of a firearm by a person in order to
comply with paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 12072 as it
pertains to that firearm.
(18) The transportation of a firearm by a person who finds the
firearm and is transporting it to a law enforcement agency for
disposition according to law, if he or she gives prior notice to the
law enforcement agency that he or she is transporting the firearm to
the law enforcement agency for disposition according to law.
(19) The transportation of a firearm by a person in order to
comply with paragraph (3) of subdivision (f) of Section 12072 as it
pertains to that firearm.
(20) The transportation of a firearm by a person for the purpose
of obtaining an identification number or mark assigned for that
firearm from the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 12092.
(b) In order for a firearm to be exempted under subdivision (a),
while being transported to or from a place, the firearm shall be
unloaded, kept in a locked container, as defined in subdivision (d),
and the course of travel shall include only those deviations between
authorized locations as are reasonably necessary under the
circumstances.
(c) This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person in accordance with this
chapter.
(d) As used in this section, "locked container" means a secure
container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, keylock,
combination lock, or similar locking device. The term "locked
container" does not include the utility or glove compartment of a
motor vehicle.

Flopper
08-09-2010, 4:46 PM
This is incorrect.

I think there was either a clarification letter or case law which says this is incorrect, which I'm sure someone will post shortly.

Either way, if you'll read 12026.1(1) closely, you'll notice there is NO specific destination requirement.

If it's not illegal, it's legal.

AyatollahGondola
08-09-2010, 5:19 PM
You know, I was in the state law library today looking for some indication of the intent of Secure container definition of this section, and I did see something in there that was relative to the original posters question. There was a specific reference to having the law applicable to taking a gun to a gun buy-back program. Because I was looking for something else, I did not follow that lead, but remembering it, there was one thing the assemblyman stated in the file as that a specific mention of transporting for a gun buy-back was unnecessary because it was covered in another part of the code. Now there is some case law as I remember that says you have to be transporting it for a lawful purpose, but that didn't apply to just driving around with it with no specific lawful destination. Now keep in mind that this all revolves around concealed weapons, and not one carried in open view.

Mstrty
08-09-2010, 5:36 PM
Im sure CRPA also tells you to seperate the gun and the ammo like my grandaddy used to say. Some organizations are slow to learn.

CRPA Life member

Flopper
08-09-2010, 5:40 PM
Now there is some case law as I remember that says you have to be transporting it for a lawful purpose, but that didn't apply to just driving around with it with no specific lawful destination. Now keep in mind that this all revolves around concealed weapons, and not one carried in open view.

The "lawful purpose" language is not case law, that's in the PC.

Lawful purpose means "otherwise not illegal."

You can transport it wherever you like in your car as long as you're not transporting it to an otherwise prohibited location, eg military base, police station property, airport, federal "sensitive area," etc.

I think the reason why there is confusion is because there is other language elsewhere in the PC which states you need a specific destination for transportation if you are not a US citizen, ie when legal immigrants transport firearms.

diginit
08-09-2010, 5:47 PM
The PC they are referring to is for AW's. Not handguns. They need to do some more research and should be corrected on this FUD.

Glock22Fan
08-09-2010, 5:51 PM
You can transport it wherever you like in your car as long as you're not transporting it to an otherwise prohibited location, eg military base, police station property, airport, federal "sensitive area," etc.


And, once you park, you can take it from your car, carry it around (still in the locked case) and return it to your car, provided you do nothing and go nowhere otherwise unlawful. Is that how it should be read?

raycm2
08-09-2010, 5:57 PM
The way that I read it is 12026.1 and 12026.2 both list exceptions to 12025. If you fall under any provisions of either you are good to go.

nn3453
08-09-2010, 5:57 PM
Oh CRPA, in touch with the times as always. The horse is dead, the CRPA is too old and dumb to realize that they need to stop beating it :)

yelohamr
08-09-2010, 6:44 PM
They can't even spell CRAP correctly.

Vox
08-09-2010, 6:50 PM
my understanding of the "lawful purpose" language is that it makes it a crime to move a firearm with intent to commit a crime. It creates for the justice department another weapon to use against criminals should they need more ammo. Which I'm honestly fine with. My lawful purpose could be sitting at the coffee shop playing cards with my buddies as I do every saturday night.

Librarian
08-09-2010, 7:26 PM
The 12026.1 language applies to transport in a vehicle; there are no destination requirements.

The 12026.2 language applies to transport OUT of a vehicle. The list is pretty close to a complete list of 'places it is legal to have a gun'. The only significant places left out is your home or your business, both explicitly mentioned in 12026.

This part:(c) This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person in accordance with this
chapter.is the acknowledgment that the list is incomplete.

The .1 and .2 sections have separate legislative histories.

In short, while it's possible to get the impression that those two pieces of PC must both apply to all transport, a position I held for a couple of years, more research suggests that is not the case.

Glock22Fan
08-09-2010, 7:30 PM
This is all well and good, but what scares me is that without case law, one could find oneself in a similar position to Theseus, where the D.A. interpreted it all his way, at complete odds with the law, and the judge went along for the ride.

Vox
08-09-2010, 7:32 PM
This is all well and good, but what scares me is that without case law, one could find oneself in a similar position to Theseus, where the D.A. interpreted it all his way, at complete odds with the law, and the judge went along for the ride.

That's why he'd need to contact CGF and have his lawyer really familiar with the appropriate law.

CitaDeL
08-09-2010, 7:33 PM
The 12026.1 language applies to transport in a vehicle; there are no destination requirements.

The 12026.2 language applies to transport OUT of a vehicle. The list is pretty close to a complete list of 'places it is legal to have a gun'. The only significant places left out is your home or your business, both explicitly mentioned in 12026.

This part:is the acknowledgment that the list is incomplete.

The .1 and .2 sections have separate legislative histories.

In short, while it's possible to get the impression that those two pieces of PC must both apply to all transport, a position I held for a couple of years, more research suggests that is not the case.


Thank you for taking the time to clarify.

I wish those who wish to deseminate information would check with sources that know, rather than to base their information on a single reading of the code.

RolinCode3
08-09-2010, 8:23 PM
They can't even spell CRAP correctly.

lolz

Cokebottle
08-09-2010, 8:56 PM
12026.1. (a) Section 12025 shall not be construed to prohibit any
citizen of the United States over the age of 18 years who resides or
is temporarily within this state, and who is not prohibited by state
or federal law from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a
firearm, from transporting or carrying any pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, provided that
the following applies to the firearm:
(1) The firearm is within a motor vehicle and it is locked in the
vehicle's trunk or in a locked container in the vehicle other than
the utility or glove compartment.
(2) The firearm is carried by the person directly to or from any
motor vehicle for any lawful purpose and, while carrying the firearm,
the firearm is contained within a locked container.
(b) The provisions of this section do not prohibit or limit the
otherwise lawful carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in
accordance with this chapter.
(c) As used in this section, "locked container" means a secure
container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, key lock,
combination lock, or similar locking device.

End of needed PC cites.

12026.2 is not needed as 12026.1 clarifies the exemption to 12025.
(2) The firearm is carried by the person directly to or from any
motor vehicle for any lawful purpose and, while carrying the firearm,
the firearm is contained within a locked container.
Is simply clarifying that it is okay to carry to or from a vehicle in a locked container.
This "directly to or from" seems to be mistakenly applied to a destination when in a vehicle.

Cokebottle
08-09-2010, 8:58 PM
The way that I read it is 12026.1 and 12026.2 both list exceptions to 12025. If you fall under any provisions of either you are good to go.
All provisions of 12026.1, or ANY provision of 12026.2

Librarian
08-09-2010, 8:58 PM
Just looked up the thread where I finally swung around to '.1 and .2 are different' - http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=142861&highlight=12026.1

hoffmang
08-09-2010, 9:02 PM
CRPA says locked unloaded handgun carryin car is illegal unless you are going to and from a shooting range. this horse aint dead yet :)

. they (CRPA) claim PC 12026.1 and 12026.2 only applies while going to or from specific places (shooting range, hunting etc). this is in their guide to Claifornia laws. Is this just FUD or is there a change in the law or law case that settled this?

Can you tell me where you're seeing this? Is it in the yearly legal summary? Please be specific so I can find the source and get it fixed.

-Gene

jaymz
08-09-2010, 9:20 PM
I say that the op is spreading FUD unless he can post an official CRPA source. "The Right People" will take care of it if true. No worries.

Saym14
08-09-2010, 9:27 PM
Can you tell me where you're seeing this? Is it in the yearly legal summary? Please be specific so I can find the source and get it fixed.

-Gene

its in the 2009 paper back guide to Cal gun laws. they mail a new one out every year or so.

Sick Boy
08-09-2010, 9:38 PM
So would it be ok to take my pistol to work each day if it's inside a locked container with a full magazine, as long as the magazine is not inserted into the pistol?

dantodd
08-09-2010, 9:42 PM
So would it be ok to take my pistol to work each day if it's inside a locked container with a full magazine, as long as the magazine is not inserted into the pistol?

If your employer is OK with it, you are good to go.

hoffmang
08-09-2010, 10:02 PM
its in the 2009 paper back guide to Cal gun laws. they mail a new one out every year or so.

That was my suspicion but I recall reading that pamphlet and for some reason thought it hadn't made the error fully. I'm traveling for another day or two but will flip through my copy and then see about getting an errata thrown in (I think there are a large pile of them left) and getting it fixed for the next print.

-Gene

Saym14
08-10-2010, 8:18 AM
That was my suspicion but I recall reading that pamphlet and for some reason thought it hadn't made the error fully. I'm traveling for another day or two but will flip through my copy and then see about getting an errata thrown in (I think there are a large pile of them left) and getting it fixed for the next print.

-Gene

thanks - I kept this in the bathroom for reading materiel. maybe I should just start ripping out the pages for .... :)

lavgrunt
08-10-2010, 4:31 PM
It appears that the pamphlet the CRPA produces annually "Summary on California Gun Laws and Safety Procedures . . . " contains one statement of the law for a convoluted section of the Penal Code that some consider inaccurate. That statement was drafted by attorneys some years ago and all of the content in the pamphlet was recently confirmed by attorneys to be accurate. This is a question that has been raised before, but for which there really appears to be no clear cut answer. I will raise this question to our attorneys again so it can be thoroughly analyzed, and we will make the findings available in a memorandum.

So, I apologize if this oversight caused anyone any harm or concern, but I hope people realize this is one tiny section of the CRPA pamphlet, addressing a provision in the Penal Code that is unclear at best, and definitely not settled. The rest of the pamphlet's pages provide good, accurate information. And, I would like to refer those who have suggested with their commentary on this thread that CRPA is somehow ineffective or obsolete to the following thread, which shows some of CRPA's recent litigation and lobbying accomplishments, as well as some of its activities currently in progress:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=319323

I will let everyone know when our attorneys have their findings available on this matter. Thanks very much!

Tony Montanarella
Vice President, CRPA

wildhawker
08-10-2010, 4:54 PM
Sometimes a simple "we're looking into it" is the best answer. The community here is more than sophisticated enough to understand these issues and the information offered by all organizations who do.

By the way, when is my and my wife's August edition of Firing Line going to arrive?

raycm2
08-10-2010, 5:34 PM
All provisions of 12026.1, or ANY provision of 12026.2

Either:
(1) The firearm is within a motor vehicle and it is locked in the
vehicle's trunk or in a locked container in the vehicle other than
the utility or glove compartment.
Or:
(2) The firearm is carried by the person directly to or from any
motor vehicle for any lawful purpose and, while carrying the firearm,
the firearm is contained within a locked container.

The firearm can hardly be in both situations at once. :rolleyes:

lavgrunt
08-10-2010, 6:07 PM
Sometimes a simple "we're looking into it" is the best answer. The community here is more than sophisticated enough to understand these issues and the information offered by all organizations who do.

By the way, when is my and my wife's August edition of Firing Line going to arrive?

I got mine yesterday !! You should get it today or tomorrow !!

Good luck, Brandon.........

wildhawker
08-10-2010, 6:20 PM
Thank you. I hope that all the candidates and their supporters can again rise up to overcome the adversity of late publication of forms. I look forward to our making them "not late" next year.

Flouncer
08-10-2010, 6:28 PM
is CRPA

Throwing any type of NYM or abbreviation without a first use explanation around is frustrating to a lot of people whom you might have interested as a reader.

I know I can search it, but a rule of any basic English says you should explain first, not make a prospective reader search to find your meaning....

It's a disease here.

I tried to read the first 6 posts and still have zero idea what you are talking about. We are on the same side, so make it easier to gain soldiers..... :)

Thanks

Vox
08-10-2010, 6:52 PM
is CRPA

Throwing any type of NYM or abbreviation without a first use explanation around is frustrating to a lot of people whom you might have interested as a reader.

I know I can search it, but a rule of any basic English says you should explain first, not make a prospective reader search to find your meaning....

It's a disease here.

I tried to read the first 6 posts and still have zero idea what you are talking about. We are on the same side, so make it easier to gain soldiers..... :)



Thanks

The California Rifle and Pistol Association.

I think most people thing there are certain acronyms and initialisms (which is what CRPA is) are well enough known they need no explanation, though when I first showed up I had some trouble with a couple myself SAF, for example, I had never heard of before a couple weeks ago.

I have tried to find a list of acronyms and initialisms commonly used on CalGuns but haven't found such a list.

ke6guj
08-10-2010, 6:52 PM
CRPA = california rifle and pistol association, so you can see why it gets abbreviated.

Unfortunately many items gets abbreviated or acronymed in everyday forum use. You just have to learn the speak, either by asking or by looking in the acronym thread, http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=78606

resonance
08-10-2010, 7:52 PM
I feel your pain....with trying to understand the acronyms, with out a source or list...Im still trying to make up words for FUD....although, I have a pretty good idea , Im still not sure.....

Cokebottle
08-10-2010, 7:55 PM
I feel your pain....with trying to understand the acronyms, with out a source or list...Im still trying to make up words for FUD....although, I have a pretty good idea , Im still not sure.....
Fear
Uncertainty
Doubt

Used quite successfully by IBM.

Don't actually LIE about your competitor, but cause your customer to question whether what they believe about your competitor is correct.
Make your customer feel "safe" with you.

sandwich
08-10-2010, 7:58 PM
Usually google does a good job of acronyms. Like FUD links to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt

(if you're not sure, like PorI, you'll need to try to isolate like "site:calguns.net PorI" (without the double quotes) and if you read the first thread long enough, you'll find the answer.)

Librarian
08-10-2010, 8:05 PM
is CRPA

Throwing any type of NYM or abbreviation without a first use explanation around is frustrating to a lot of people whom you might have interested as a reader.

I know I can search it, but a rule of any basic English says you should explain first, not make a prospective reader search to find your meaning....

It's a disease here.

I tried to read the first 6 posts and still have zero idea what you are talking about. We are on the same side, so make it easier to gain soldiers..... :)

Thanks

Well, the problem is for most of us it isn't 'first use'; re-defining a TLA (Three Letter Acronym :D ) EVERY time you use it, just in case there might be someone who has never seen it, is rather painful.

Try this link for some help: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Firearms_Terms_and_Acronyms

ke6guj
08-10-2010, 8:32 PM
Well, the problem is for most of us it isn't 'first use'; re-defining a TLA (Three Letter Acronym :D ) EVERY time you use it, just in case there might be someone who has never seen it, is rather painful.

Try this link for some help: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Firearms_Terms_and_Acronymsexactly. Having to redefine every TLA that you want to use in a thread is a pain. I try to define it when I know that I am helping someone who I assume probably doesn't know it, but it does slow me down.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of info flowing in this forum and you have to try and keep up. Repeatedly explaining TLA's and other legal ideas can slow down the conversation. I know that when I watch NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing :D ), it irritates me when they repeatedly explain basic racing information, as if everyone is a first time viewr. But when I watch an Formula1 race, they seem to expect the viewer to have a better understanding of the sport. Same goes for watching football, weekly broadcasts seem to expect a knowledgable viewer, but the Super Bowl broadcasters know that there is a large crowd that only watches football once a year, so everything has to be explained in detail.

Deucer
08-11-2010, 8:31 AM
CRPA (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=CRPA)

I didn't know what CRPA was either. Part of being a noob is searching for info instead of pestering the veterans for a definition that comes up as the result when you search the term.

JFGI (http://tinyurl.com/2c9np)

Glock22Fan
08-11-2010, 8:44 AM
I have not yet come across an acronym that wasn't explained by googling it, along with words such as in this example "CRPA acronym definition"

I must say, CRPA gave a few variations. One of the suggested answers was "CRPA, Certified Royal Pain in the A--. "

Nowever, the first Google link (http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/CRPA)gave (my highlighting in red):

Acronym Definition
CRPA Centro Ricerche Produzioni Animali
CRPA Canadian Radiation Protection Association
CRPA Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna
CRPA California Rifle & Pistol Association
CRPA Controlled Radiation Pattern Antenna
CRPA Columbia River Packers Association
CRPA Centre Regional Planning Agency
CRPA Continuum Random Phase Approximation (nuclear physics)
CRPA Centre for Research, Planning and Action (India)


from which the correct answer should be obvious.

Decoligny
08-11-2010, 9:20 AM
You know, I was in the state law library today looking for some indication of the intent of Secure container definition of this section, and I did see something in there that was relative to the original posters question. There was a specific reference to having the law applicable to taking a gun to a gun buy-back program. Because I was looking for something else, I did not follow that lead, but remembering it, there was one thing the assemblyman stated in the file as that a specific mention of transporting for a gun buy-back was unnecessary because it was covered in another part of the code. Now there is some case law as I remember that says you have to be transporting it for a lawful purpose, but that didn't apply to just driving around with it with no specific lawful destination. Now keep in mind that this all revolves around concealed weapons, and not one carried in open view.

A lawful purpose is any purpose that isn't illegal. I transport my handgun in a locked container in my car for the lawful purpose of having it near me if I should happen to need it.

paul0660
08-11-2010, 9:50 AM
addressing a provision in the Penal Code that is unclear at best, and definitely not settled.

Tony, it isn't at all unclear. Citizens certainly do not need a specific destination or purpose to transport a handgun in an approved fashion. Others can either transport to the specified destinations OR apply the exception

(c) This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person in accordance with this
chapter.


In any case, I CONSTANTLY run into supposedly informed people, some teaching firearms classes, who recite the need for specific destinations. CRPA is respected and misinformation supplied by it gets multiplied a hundredfold. Fix it please.

GrizzlyGuy
08-11-2010, 12:09 PM
CRPA says locked unloaded handgun carryin car is illegal unless you are going to and from a shooting range. this horse aint dead yet :)

. they (CRPA) claim PC 12026.1 and 12026.2 only applies while going to or from specific places (shooting range, hunting etc). this is in their guide to Claifornia laws. Is this just FUD or is there a change in the law or law case that settled this?

CRPA is partially right and partially wrong.

Wrong: There are no destination restrictions when transporting a concealable firearm via motor vehicle (see 12026.1 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.1.html)) but they imply that there are.

Right: When transporting a concealable firearm via some means other than a motor vehicle (ex: walking, riding a bicycle, riding a horse, hang gliding, skateboarding, skiing) there ARE destination/purpose restrictions and transport is only legal if you are using one of the specific exemptions in 12025.5 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12025.5.html), 12026 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.html), 12026.2 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.2.html) or 12027 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12027.html).

Contrary to popular belief, LUCC is not always legal. Here is just one example of a transport scenario when it isn't legal: You walk from your home to the public park, hang out for a few hours reading and sunbathing, then you walk home. LUCC was illegal from the time that you stepped across your property line until you stepped across it again when you returned home. This is true even though reading and sunbathing are lawful activities, and having your gun handy for protection during your day is a lawful purpose.

Note that this from 12026.2 is often misinterpreted as being some type of 'universal exemption' that spans all possible transport scenarios that they didn't happen to list in the PC:

(c) This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person in accordance with this
chapter.

That's not what it means. It simply acknowledges that there are other legal means of transporting a concealable firearm (e.g., openly carrying it or using any of the exemptions in 12025.5/12026/12026.1/12027) and points out that the existence of 12026.2 does not prohibit or limit any of those other legal means from being used.

pullnshoot25
08-11-2010, 12:12 PM
CRPA says locked unloaded handgun carryin car is illegal unless you are going to and from a shooting range. this horse aint dead yet :)

. the

CRPA is partially right and partially wrong.

Wrong: There are no destination restrictions when transporting a concealable firearm via motor vehicle (see 12026.1 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.1.html)) but they imply that there are.

Right: When transporting a concealable firearm via some means other than a motor vehicle (ex: walking, riding a bicycle, riding a horse, hang gliding, skateboarding, skiing) there ARE destination/purpose restrictions and transport is only legal if you are using one of the specific exemptions in 12025.5 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12025.5.html), 12026 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.html), 12026.2 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.2.html) or 12027 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12027.html).

Contrary to popular belief, LUCC is not always legal. Here is just one example of a transport scenario when it isn't legal: You walk from your home to the public park, hang out for a few hours reading and sunbathing, then you walk home. LUCC was illegal from the time that you stepped across your property line until you stepped across it again when you returned home. This is true even though reading and sunbathing are lawful activities, and having your gun handy for protection during your day is a lawful purpose.

Note that this from 12026.2 is often misinterpreted as being some type of 'universal exemption' that spans all possible transport scenarios that they didn't happen to list in the PC:

(c) This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of bei

That's not what it means. It simply acknowledges that there are other legal means of transporting a concealable firearm (e.g., openly carrying it or using any of the exemptions in 12025.5/12026/12026.1/12027) and points out that the existence of 12026.2 does not prohibit or limit any of those other legal means from being used.

I am always going to a range.

GrizzlyGuy
08-11-2010, 12:19 PM
I am always going to a range.

I'm never telling them where I am going or coming from, nor will I admit that there is a gun in the locked container they are eyeballing, and of course... I do not consent to a search. :)

AyatollahGondola
08-11-2010, 12:19 PM
CRPA is partially right and partially wrong.

Wrong: There are no destination restrictions when transporting a concealable firearm via motor vehicle (see 12026.1 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.1.html)) but they imply that there are.

Right: When transporting a concealable firearm via some means other than a motor vehicle (ex: walking, riding a bicycle, riding a horse, hang gliding, skateboarding, skiing) there ARE destination/purpose restrictions and transport is only legal if you are using one of the specific exemptions in 12025.5 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12025.5.html), 12026 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.html), 12026.2 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.2.html) or 12027 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12027.html).

Contrary to popular belief, LUCC is not always legal. Here is just one example of a transport scenario when it isn't legal: You walk from your home to the public park, hang out for a few hours reading and sunbathing, then you walk home. LUCC was illegal from the time that you stepped across your property line until you stepped across it again when you returned home. This is true even though reading and sunbathing are lawful activities, and having your gun handy for protection during your day is a lawful purpose.

Note that this from 12026.2 is often misinterpreted as being some type of 'universal exemption' that spans all possible transport scenarios that they didn't happen to list in the PC:



That's not what it means. It simply acknowledges that there are other legal means of transporting a concealable firearm (e.g., openly carrying it or using any of the exemptions in 12025.5/12026/12026.1/12027) and points out that the existence of 12026.2 does not prohibit or limit any of those other legal means from being used.

Perhaps those documents I uploaded yesterday regaurding legislative intent might go towards clearing this up

pullnshoot25
08-11-2010, 12:35 PM
I am always going to a range.

I'm never telling them where I am going or coming from, nor will I admit that there is a gun in the locked container they are eyeballing, and of course... I do not consent to a search. :)

Exactly. I love your style :)

pullnshoot25
08-11-2010, 12:36 PM
CRPA is partially right and partially wrong.

Wrong: There are no destination restrictions when transporting a concealable firearm via motor vehicl

Perhaps those documents I uploaded yesterday regaurding legislative intent might go towards clearing this up


Are they ready?

Saym14
08-11-2010, 12:48 PM
By the way, when is my and my wife's August edition of Firing Line going to arrive?


they're looking into it! :D

AyatollahGondola
08-11-2010, 3:04 PM
Are they ready?

I posted a link to them last night in that other thread

AyatollahGondola
08-11-2010, 3:06 PM
http://publicdocumentdistributors.com/forums/showthread.php?t=519

Glock22Fan
08-11-2010, 4:37 PM
http://publicdocumentdistributors.com/forums/showthread.php?t=519


Well, I read all four documents and in three of them it is plainly stated that the intent was to allow you to carry the firearm in a locked case to or from the place of purchase or repair, your home or your business. The third document does point out that this was too restrictive, and specifically illustrates this by observing that it does not cover taking the firearm to a place of sale. It recommends loosening this, but I see no evidence of discussion of this topic.

Indeed, the whole tenor of all four documents was that although it was legal to carry a firearm between certain places, this (prior to this bill) had to be done openly, and that balancing the firearm on the dashboard frightened the sheep and police officers, and could attract thieves. Thus, the bill's intent was not to permit carrying the firearm any further afield than before, but rather proposing an alternative method to allow you to carry a firearm to the same places as before, but without it being on display.

Now, you could read into this that you could thus carry LUCC anywhere that it was legal to UOC, and this seems reasonable.

However, you could also take the intent (from the wording on home/business/place of sale or repair) to indicate that they intended it to be a very narrow interpretation. This is supported by the fact that there was also an intent in the proposals to limit the distance to 200 feet, which was apparently thrown out after document three's suggestion that that was an arbitrary distance, and why should 199 feet be legal and 209 not. Again an indicator that they did not intend you to wander freely around the mall or park with LUCC.

Still a gray area to my mind. Anyone with more experience understanding politicians' minds? (Maybe a psychiatrist?)

I think I have seen elsewhere that the CGF would support a member caught in a disagreement in court over this, provided that there was no "color." Does that mean that the Right Minds are convinced, as a result of legal advice, that such a case would be dismissed, or might we get the wrong D.A./judge and find ourselves in a bind as did Theseus, who, we all believe, was acting within the letter of the law?

AyatollahGondola
08-11-2010, 5:34 PM
Theseus was in violation of the school zone code 626 point something, and there the restriction goes a bit further. It has to be locked up, and there's no exception for open carry when your not CCW or LEO or so. the whole point is, there is more than the letter of the law apparently. I've been doing research on a "letter of the law" issue unrelated to firearms. Well, at least I haven't come to the point of using one yet anyway. Anyway, the law is quite clearly written, but that did not stop the legislature from violating it in another section, and I've found case law that kinda says that the section they violated doesn't mean anything, presumably where it tends to hurt the states pocketbook or take up the courts time frivilously.

Glock22Fan
08-11-2010, 10:21 PM
Theseus was in violation of the school zone code 626 point something, and there the restriction goes a bit further. It has to be locked up, and there's no exception for open carry when your not CCW or LEO or so. the whole point is, there is more than the letter of the law apparently. I've been doing research on a "letter of the law" issue unrelated to firearms. Well, at least I haven't come to the point of using one yet anyway. Anyway, the law is quite clearly written, but that did not stop the legislature from violating it in another section, and I've found case law that kinda says that the section they violated doesn't mean anything, presumably where it tends to hurt the states pocketbook or take up the courts time frivilously.

But the law said that Theseus had to "reasonably know" that he was in a school zone, and the D.A. successfully argued that that point should not be presented to the jury.

Cokebottle
08-12-2010, 6:24 PM
But the law said that Theseus had to "reasonably know" that he was in a school zone, and the D.A. successfully argued that that point should not be presented to the jury.
The law also exempts private property and a place of business, and the D.A. successfully argued that that point should not be presented to the jury.

Glock22Fan
08-12-2010, 6:29 PM
The law also exempts private property and a place of business, and the D.A. successfully argued that that point should not be presented to the jury.

Yes, I know, I was just answering the Ayatollah's post.

AyatollahGondola
08-12-2010, 8:58 PM
You'll get very little argument from me about the courts being biased,

I've been there myself, and after having spent abour 50K on a lazy attorney, spending countless days and hours in court, sitting up days and nights preparing legal documents after firing the lazy attorney, then waiting two months for the judgement which seemed ridiculous when I read it, I can honestly say that justice is not always served in California, and may be tilting towards seldom for the uninitiated or underfinanced.

that is why I started the PDD website where those doc's are uploaded. I wanted to do something, .....anything.... to make a dent in the impending pitfalls of the legal system, as well as the corrupt scum you may be dealing with in day to day business. There most certainly is an undercurrent in government and the courts that drags down poor people or those whose mindsets clash with the current political order. I don't believe we can just go anarchist though. These are our courts, and the best thing we can do is to get control of them again, as we have already paid dearly in one form or another to obtain them, as well as the premise behind them. It's not the system that is corrupt, it's the people who are in charge now.