PDA

View Full Version : Sunday Drive?


Fish
02-13-2011, 4:44 PM
This came up in a thread on Friday, but I wasn't home Saturday and now the thread's aged out. I want to resurrect it so I can make sure my understanding of California firearms laws is correct.

Suppose a normal citizen (meaning, not LEO, not CCW holder, not prohibited person) locks an unloaded pistol in a pistol case, walks out their front door directly to a car parked in their driveway, tosses it into the back of their car, and goes for a Sunday drive. When they get back home they take the (still locked) pistol case out of their car and walk directly in their front door with it.

The claim was made (sorry, I forget by whom) on the thread that this would be illegal. However, as I understand things it falls completely within the 12026.1 exemption:


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 within the excepted classes prescribed by Section 12021 or 12021.1 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, 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.


While the firearm is in the car, it's covered by 12026.1(a)(1), and therefore lawful. While I am transporting it between the house and the car it is covered by 12026.1(a)(2): I transported directly to or from a motor vehicle, and my purpose was lawful at all times. Therefore, no law was broken in the course of this scenario.

My understanding is that often-quoted "specific places" exceptions created in 12026.2 (must be going directly to or from a gun show, dealer, repair, shooting range, etc.) have absolutely nothing to do with this -- 12026.1 is a blanket exception for transporting a pistol by car, unloaded in a locked container, as long as you aren't otherwise breaking the law. Doesn't matter why or where I am going, as long as I don't intend to break the law when I get there.

Am I off base about this?

Dreaded Claymore
02-13-2011, 4:59 PM
This is a good question. I also want to know the answer.

CalBear
02-13-2011, 5:01 PM
This came up in a thread on Friday, but I wasn't home Saturday and now the thread's aged out. I want to resurrect it so I can make sure my understanding of California firearms laws is correct.

Suppose a normal citizen (meaning, not LEO, not CCW holder, not prohibited person) locks an unloaded pistol in a pistol case, walks out their front door directly to a car parked in their driveway, tosses it into the back of their car, and goes for a Sunday drive. When they get back home they take the (still locked) pistol case out of their car and walk directly in their front door with it.

The claim was made (sorry, I forget by whom) on the thread that this would be illegal. However, as I understand things it falls completely within the 12026.1 exemption:



While the firearm is in the car, it's covered by 12026.1(a)(1), and therefore lawful. While I am transporting it between the house and the car it is covered by 12026.1(a)(2): I transported directly to or from a motor vehicle, and my purpose was lawful at all times. Therefore, no law was broken in the course of this scenario.

My understanding is that often-quoted "specific places" exceptions created in 12026.2 (must be going directly to or from a gun show, dealer, repair, shooting range, etc.) have absolutely nothing to do with this -- 12026.1 is a blanket exception for transporting a pistol by car, unloaded in a locked container, as long as you aren't otherwise breaking the law. Doesn't matter why or where I am going, as long as I don't intend to break the law when I get there.

Am I off base about this?

The person is completely wrong, IMO.

12025 sets out what is considered a concealed weapon and prohibits the act of concealing, subject to exemptions in additional sections of the CA PC. 12026.1 does just that... it exempts legal possessors from 12025 as long as the firearm in stored in the vehicle in a locked container, and is carried directly to or from any motor vehicle (in a locked container) for any lawful purpose. 12026 exempts one's private residence from 12025. 12026.2 merely supplies additional exemptions -- it doesn't specifically relate to motor vehicles, just any transportation (e.g. walking).

Legal start? Personal residence.
Legal transport? Locked container, into vehicle.
Legal end? Personal residence.

Nothing wrong with that.

chris12
02-13-2011, 5:48 PM
I'm no expert, but my understanding is the same. However (a) has more conditions on it than (b). For instance you couldn't do that if you were a legal resident instead of a citizen. Also you couldn't go for a Sunday horse and buggy ride or bike ride, etc as it is restricted to motor vehicles.

MasterYong
02-13-2011, 5:55 PM
Wait WHAT? I can't put a pistol in a locked container in my backpack, and go for a walk? It has to be a MOTOR vehicle? What happened to equal protection? People without cars can't carry locked handguns???

Until a legal eagle chimes in, I may have to switch back to a shotgun for a truck gun. Or a featureless AR, just to thumb my nose at this stupid BS.

Librarian
02-13-2011, 7:01 PM
1) AFAIK, the scenario Fish relates is entirely legal, for the reasons he notes.

2) on foot (or otherwise out of a motor vehicle), however, generally DOES require that one meets the destination requirements of 12026.2.

The 'listed' destinations cover quite a lot, and there is an escape clause: (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.What is 'otherwise lawful'? I don't know.

Don29palms
02-13-2011, 8:27 PM
Wouldn't unloaded and locked in a case in a backpack be Locked Unloaded Concealed Carry? Isn't that legal?

MasterYong
02-13-2011, 10:32 PM
Wouldn't unloaded and locked in a case in a backpack be Locked Unloaded Concealed Carry? Isn't that legal?

I was being a bit sarcastic, but now librarians post has me puzzled. Guess it all boils down to the same thing: avoid attention to begin with a try to comply with what you believe is the law, what else can you do?

jtmkinsd
02-13-2011, 10:46 PM
I think people are confusing transporting a general firearm with transporting a registered assault weapon...take your regular firearm anywhere you want so long it's properly stored...all the restrictions people have mentioned on destinations and such is usually reserved for registered assault weapons...and even then, you gotta do something really stupid for them to matter.

CalBear
02-14-2011, 8:59 AM
Wouldn't unloaded and locked in a case in a backpack be Locked Unloaded Concealed Carry? Isn't that legal?
The legality of LUCC is very much on a case by case basis, and still debatable given the current CPC, IMO.

A very clear exemption is given to motor vehicle transportation in 12026.1... that one is basically settled.

LUCC relies on one exemption found in CPC 12026.2(a):

(a) Section 12025 does not apply to, or affect, any of the
following:

(4) The transportation of a firearm by a person listed in Section
12026 directly between any of the places mentioned in Section 12026.

So, what are those places listed in 12026?

(a) Section 12025 shall not apply to or affect any citizen
of the United States or legal resident over the age of 18 years who
resides or is temporarily within this state, and who is not within
the excepted classes prescribed by Section 12021 or 12021.1 of this
code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code,
who carries, either openly or concealed, anywhere within the citizen'
s or legal resident's place of residence, place of business, or on
private property owned or lawfully possessed by the citizen or legal
resident any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being
concealed upon the person.
The general idea to justify LUCC is to assert that you "lawfully possess" space on private property when you're there (eg a seat or section in a business". Whether or not this is actually true is up for debate. I could see "lawfully possessing" as only applying to possessing an apartment or something similar. You may never "possess" private property such as a business.

There is also a requirement to go "directly between" any of the places mentioned in 12026. One could argue that the only way to go directly between the same private residence is to never leave. Taking a meandering course that involves a neighborhood stroll could violate the law, unless you are going to another place of lawful possession and back again later.

Keep in mind, this all revolves around the CA concealed firearm law. Only handguns or other weapons capable of being concealed fall under these penal code sections. The law makes concealed illegal, and then lays forth certain exemptions to that act -- CCW, motor vehicle transportation, legal place to legal place transportation, etc.

tonelar
02-14-2011, 9:10 AM
I think people are confusing transporting a general firearm with transporting a registered assault weapon...take your regular firearm anywhere you want so long it's properly stored...all the restrictions people have mentioned on destinations and such is usually reserved for registered assault weapons...and even then, you gotta do something really stupid for them to matter.

which I never signed up for when I registered my Cali AWs... sons of finches!

someone asked me why I bothered getting OLLs; the above is my reasoning. my RAWs are more limited than my featureless or BB OLLs (in regards to having one stowed in my friends' RV, cabin or motor vehicle).

CalNRA
02-14-2011, 9:13 AM
The legality of LUCC is very much on a case by case basis, and still debatable given the current CPC, IMO.

A very clear exemption is given to motor vehicle transportation in 12026.1... that one is basically settled.

LUCC relies on one exemption found in CPC 12026.2(a):



So, what are those places listed in 12026?


The general idea to justify LUCC is to assert that you "lawfully possess" space on private property when you're there (eg a seat or section in a business". Whether or not this is actually true is up for debate. I could see "lawfully possessing" as only applying to possessing an apartment or something similar. You may never "possess" private property such as a business.

There is also a requirement to go "directly between" any of the places mentioned in 12026. One could argue that the only way to go directly between the same private residence is to never leave. Taking a meandering course that involves a neighborhood stroll could violate the law, unless you are going to another place of lawful possession and back again later.

Keep in mind, this all revolves around the CA concealed firearm law. Only handguns or other weapons capable of being concealed fall under these penal code sections. The law makes concealed illegal, and then lays forth certain exemptions to that act -- CCW, motor vehicle transportation, legal place to legal place transportation, etc.


this was a little before your time but it may help a little on the matter at hand:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=278739

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=259795

GrizzlyGuy
02-14-2011, 9:31 AM
You are correct, your Sunday drive is legal.

As Librarian pointed out, it would be a different story if you were not transporting via a motor vehicle (e.g., on foot). It would also be a different story if you were storing the gun in your car vs. transporting it, as the 12026.1 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.1.html) exemption only applies to "transporting or carrying".

CalBear
02-14-2011, 9:49 AM
this was a little before your time but it may help a little on the matter at hand:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=278739

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=259795
Thanks. The way I see it, there are plenty of legal place exemptions to 12025, so long as the weapon is properly stored. And at the end of the day, there is no mere possession illegality, as with general concealing or LOC. In those cases, if a cop finds you with the weapon, you're busted. In LUCC, if you're found to have a weapon on you, there is nothing incriminating about it (as long as you're a legal possessor). There's no burden to prove your innocence, so at the very least, any LUCC case would be remarkably hard for the state to craft.

luckystrike
02-14-2011, 3:58 PM
so you cant go for a walk with a pistol in a locked breifcase?

MasterYong
02-14-2011, 4:11 PM
so you cant go for a walk with a pistol in a locked breifcase?

Yeah I'm still confused on this one. It sounds to me like Librarian was saying that it was something that basically still needed a test case. I don't wanna be a test case. Is it or is it not 100% legal to LUCC? I dunno anymore.

mej16489
02-14-2011, 4:27 PM
so you cant go for a walk with a pistol in a locked breifcase?

Unfortunately, the answer to your question is a definate maybe. :rolleyes:

The answer lies in where you are going to/from.

If your walk in any way involves a motor vehicle, you have exemptions in 12026.1

If no motor vehicle is involved it get's iffy.

You can legally go for a walk with a pistol in a locked briefcase to the range or to work due to the exemptions available in 12026.2

The ultimate question is can you go for a walk to a destination that is not specifically enumerated in 12026 or 12026.2? The answer is noone really knows for sure...12026.2(c) as posted by Librarian above might be a valid exemption...

Skidmark
02-14-2011, 5:04 PM
You can also legally have a firearm in your campsite, which is considered your residence while camping there. But you don't have to drive or ride to a campground, it's perfectly reasonable to walk there, and should be legal to transport a your firearm in a locked container, inside your pack.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Transporting

CalBear
02-14-2011, 5:14 PM
Unfortunately, the answer to your question is a definate maybe. :rolleyes:

The answer lies in where you are going to/from.

If your walk in any way involves a motor vehicle, you have exemptions in 12026.1

If no motor vehicle is involved it get's iffy.

You can legally go for a walk with a pistol in a locked briefcase to the range or to work due to the exemptions available in 12026.2

The ultimate question is can you go for a walk to a destination that is not specifically enumerated in 12026 or 12026.2? The answer is noone really knows for sure...12026.2(c) as posted by Librarian above might be a valid exemption...
I'm in agreement with you about it being a "maybe." Gene gave some indication on it a while back:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=163061&highlight=lucc

His opinion is LCC is legal in a car or are at a place of private property where you have permission (or presumably are in transit to one of those places). I would tend to agree.

12026.2(c) is definitely not a valid exemption from anything. It's merely a part of the structure of the firearms chapter of the CPC. You have to look at the structure of the firearms chapter of the CA Penal Code to understand what these sections do.

CHAPTER 1. FIREARMS
Article 1. General Provisions .............................. 12000-12003
Article 1.5. Prohibited Armed Persons File ................. 12010-12012
Article 2. Unlawful Carrying and Possession of Weapons ..... 12020-12040
Article 3. Licenses to Carry Pistols and Revolvers ......... 12050-12054
Article 3.5. Handgun Ammunition Vendors .................... 12060-12061
Article 4. Licenses to Sell Firearms ....................... 12070-12086
Article 4.5. Firearms Safety Devices ..................... 12087-12088.9
Article 5. Obliteration of Identification Marks ............ 12090-12094
Article 6. Permits ......................................... 12095-12099
Article 7. Juveniles ............................................ 12101

12025 - Makes concealed carry a crime by default
12025.5 - Justifies "grave danger" exception with a current restraining order
12026 - Allows possession on "private property owned or lawfully possessed"
12026.1 - Exempts motor vehicle transportation and transit to/from the vehicle for any lawful purpose
12026.2 - Exempts many activities, including transportation of a firearm between places in 12026

So what's with 12026.1(b) and 12026.1(c)?

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.

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.

What are "otherwise lawful carry and transportation?" The answer is lawful carry and transportation are the very exemptions set forth by the other sections of the firearms chapter (peace officer, CCW permit holders, vehicle transport, legal transport between lawfully possessed space, etc.) There is no blanket exemption there. It merely says those particular sections shall not be construed to prohibit or otherwise limit the exemptions set forth in the other sections of the chapter.

For that reason, 12026.1 and 12026.2 are both critical to the legality of LUCC. 12026.1 is the source of an exemption for transportation in a motor vehicle and to/from a motor vehicle for a lawful use. 12026.2 is the source of an exemption for transportation directly between the places mentioned in 12026. 12026.1 by itself does NOT exempt travel between two lawfully possessed private properties -- it only exempts travel to/from a motor vehicle. 12026.2 is absolutely necessary for LUCC to be practical and legal.

It really comes down to this: what constitutes lawfully possessed private property? Is it any private property you have permission to be in? Does it have to be a non-public private place (i.e. not a shopping mall or movie theater)? That, I'd say, is where the jury is still out.

chris12
02-14-2011, 5:39 PM
It is so sad that we can't even transport firearms let alone carry them.

luckystrike
02-14-2011, 5:40 PM
either way, its the right to keep and bear arms, NOT the right to take arms to the range and back only.

stix213
02-14-2011, 5:47 PM
Its important to note in this discussion that the motor vehicle general exemption in 12026.1 is only for US citizens. Non-citizens traveling with a LUCC firearm in a motor vehicle have to conform with the 12026.2 exemptions based on destination.

Fish in the original post mentioned "normal citizen" so his sunday drive scenario sounds fine. If this were a non-citizen though who was in legal possession of the handgun, the sunday drive scenario is probably not legal.

Skidmark
02-14-2011, 6:04 PM
It is so sad that we can't even transport firearms let alone carry them.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Transporting

Fish
02-14-2011, 9:00 PM
It would also be a different story if you were storing the gun in your car vs. transporting it, as the 12026.1 (http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/12026.1.html) exemption only applies to "transporting or carrying".

But 12025 only applies to vehicles which are under my control or direction (12025(a)) or in which I am an occupant (12025(c)). So simply storing a firearm in a car is not a violation either. A truly gonzo prosecutor could try play games with the definition of "control or direction" and try to assert that my car still qualifies even when I'm not in it... but that prosecutor would be in the position of asserting that I was "carrying" as the word is used in 12025 while at the same time not "carrying" as the word is used in 12026.1. I suspect Messrs. Hoffman and company would have little trouble straightening that one right up.

dave1947
02-14-2011, 9:23 PM
LUCC is where " I do not consent to any searches" come into play.

CalBear
02-14-2011, 9:26 PM
FYI, I've continued further discussion of general LUCC in a new thread.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=397026

The motor vehicle side of things is pretty well settled. The Sunday drive is legal for citizens. The other thread talks about the 12026.2 exemptions.

N6ATF
02-15-2011, 12:03 AM
LUCC is where " I do not consent to any searches" come into play.

At least until UOC is banned, then the legislature moves on to stripping away even more civil gun rights as it is wont to do, and authorizes police to break open all locked containers in search for guns, take the guns and/or arrest the carriers, then claim qualified immunity and get it rubber stamped, all the while the violated law-abider is out of tens of thousands of $, a job, a gun, and any illusion of liberty.

GrizzlyGuy
02-15-2011, 8:49 AM
But 12025 only applies to vehicles which are under my control or direction (12025(a)) or in which I am an occupant (12025(c)). So simply storing a firearm in a car is not a violation either. A truly gonzo prosecutor could try play games with the definition of "control or direction" and try to assert that my car still qualifies even when I'm not in it... but that prosecutor would be in the position of asserting that I was "carrying" as the word is used in 12025 while at the same time not "carrying" as the word is used in 12026.1. I suspect Messrs. Hoffman and company would have little trouble straightening that one right up.

That's interesting, good insight, I hadn't noticed those nuances in 12025(a)(1) and 12025(a)(3).

Yup, as long as a person exercises their 4A and 5A rights, I suspect Messrs. Hoffman and company could get them out of just about anything - maybe even if there is a dead hooker in the trunk and/or a severed finger from a dead hooker inside the locked container with the gun. ;)

Fish
02-15-2011, 9:35 AM
That's interesting, good insight, I hadn't noticed those nuances in 12025(a)(1) and 12025(a)(3).


Yeah, that's what I meant, (a)(1) and (a)(3), not (a) and (c).

It all blurs together after a long day...

gravedigger
02-15-2011, 10:20 AM
and to think people still ask me why I am moving out of CommieFornia!