PDA

View Full Version : Regarding my previous thread about the class I took


Anchors
06-06-2011, 5:19 PM
No one has asked me to remove the thread and I am doing it of my own free will. This isn't one of those "I messed up, please don't ban me" posts. I wasn't in any sort of trouble for my post and this is coming straight from me and only me.

I have had it deleted because I talked to him today on the phone.

Some people took the time to try and figure out who the instructor was and bother/berate him even though I stated in the thread that I would not reveal his name/class because he is a great instructor and great guy.
Attacking someone's business and character is not what CalGuns is about and I have inadvertently done just that in my attempt to discuss my experience.

I never intended to hurt his business and simply wanted to open a discussion about public awareness of 2A laws and issues. I was hoping to keep him anonymous.

I have had the thread removed in an effort to repair whatever damage might have been done by it and I am sorry to all the people involved with that class and especially the instructor.

I'm sorry that it got out of hand and that I didn't use more discretion with the details of my post.

I screwed up and I feel really bad about it. Terrible actually.
The instructor has my honest apology and I hope to take some classes with him again in the future.

Thanks

[Mods, please don't move this thread because the original thread was in the 2A forum and I want the same community to see where I am coming from. Thank you and thank you for removing my previous thread].

CHS
06-07-2011, 9:46 AM
I have had it deleted because I talked to him today on the phone.


So does he know about People Vs. Clark now? :)

Spelunker
06-07-2011, 9:52 AM
Has he read the CHP website about transporting guns? Did he promise to stop spreading FUD? Shouldn't he be apologising for spreading wrong information to god knows how many students of his?

paul0660
06-07-2011, 9:57 AM
you didn't do anything wrong, he did..........and charged for it.

12voltguy
06-07-2011, 10:40 AM
you didn't do anything wrong, he did..........and charged for it.

true enough;)

1BigPea
06-07-2011, 10:44 AM
So does he know about People Vs. Clark now? :)

My question exactly, is he going to change the way he teaches the class about transportation of ammunition?

paul0660
06-07-2011, 11:01 AM
great guy.

When discussing the law and its implications, I will take a knowledgeable jerk over a dumb sweetheart every time...........ESPECIALLY when they are in a position of authority.

Anchors
06-07-2011, 12:39 PM
He is an understanding and knowledgeable guy. He said he would have been fine with me bringing it up on the spot and that he is always happy to learn new things to make the experience better.

All in all, I think we both learned a lot from it, I just wish the process hadn't followed the path it did.

ZombieTactics
06-07-2011, 1:24 PM
... he is a great instructor and great guy. Given that the instructor in question (and I have no idea who this is/was) taught material which was:
Incorrect.
Easily identifiable as such by anyone who cared to find out.


I really don't understand the "great instructor" part.

mofugly13
06-07-2011, 1:45 PM
Given that the instructor in question (and I have no idea who this is/was) taught material which was:
Incorrect.
Easily identifiable as such by anyone who cared to find out.


I really don't understand the "great instructor" part.

I thought it was incorrect and set in stone until I read this post (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=6413187#post6413187)by Don Kilmer...

...The facts of Clark were that the ammo, for a single shot shotgun, was stored in a compartment of the butt stock. Ergo, not in a position for ready firing. It might be a closer question, and one that gets to a jury (who might disagree with you, and find you guilty) if the ammo is attached to the receiver of the gun in a position for quick loading/firing. [Yes, this does seem to be in some tension with Judge Englands theory that UOC with readiliy available ammo is a reasonable alternative to unconstitutional denials of CCW permits.]

Please also consider that Clark is a decision out of the intermediate court of appeal in the 4th Judicial District, and while binding on all trial courts, is only persuasive authority in the other districts.

Finally, (as we are seeing in many cases) there is a big difference between what an appellate judge opines and how the cop on the street is trained.

If I am in a fight on a close case of defending a 12031 charge, I invoke Clark.

If I am advising friends and relatives about how to stay out of the criminal justice system in the first place, my advice is to transport guns and ammo in a way that leaves no ambiguity about whether the "ammo is attached to the gun in such a way as to make it readily available for firing." Unless of course you qualify for any of the multiple exceptions to 12031. Like having a CCW permit issued under 12050.

Librarian
06-07-2011, 3:15 PM
At the risk of dissent It might be a closer question, and one that gets to a jury (who might disagree with you, and find you guilty) if the ammo is attached to the receiver of the gun in a position for quick loading/firing.this does not seem to be even a small divergence from the text of Clark. The term "loaded" has a commonly understood meaning: "to put a load
or charge in (a device or piece of equipment) a gun" or "to put a
load on or in a carrier, device, or container; esp: to insert the
charge or cartridge into the chamber of a firearm." (Webster's New
Collegiate Dict. (1976) p. 674.) Under the commonly understood
meaning of the term "loaded," a firearm is "loaded" when a shell
or cartridge has been placed into a position from which it can be
fired; the shotgun is not "loaded" if the shell or cartridge is
stored elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position.
...
Our conclusion
that the Legislature intended "loaded" as used in Penal Code section
12031 to reflect the common definition is supported by the court in
People v. Heffner (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 643, 650 [139 Cal.Rptr. 45],
which reached the same conclusion …
San Diego PD believes Case Law Definition of “Loaded” = Ready for Firing
For purposes of PC 12031, a firearm is loaded when a shell or
cartridge has been placed into a position from which it can be
fired. A firearm is not loaded if the shell or cartridge is stored
elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position. People v.
Clark, 45 Cal. App. 4th 1147, 1153 (1996). LASD believes When is a firearm considered "Loaded"?
The short answer is that it depends on the circumstances.
Ordinarily, a firearm is loaded if the ammunition is placed into
the weapon in a manner that it could be fired. LA DA's office believes Per PC 12031(g) (also for H&S 11370.1—possession of certain drugs while armed with a loaded firearm, and for PC 12035—criminal storage), a firearm is "loaded" if there is matching ammunition in or attached to the weapon in such a way that it can be fired. People v. Clark (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1147. Under this definition, neither 12025 nor 12031 is violated merely because a person openly carrying an unloaded firearm in a belt holster has matching ammunition on him, or close at hand.That is to say, a number of prosecution-side legal staff agree with Clark.

See the wiki - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California - for more.

All that said, acting in a way to help out the possibly under-trained can make your day go more smoothly, until those training issues have been addressed throughout the state.

Anchors
06-07-2011, 4:38 PM
Thank you for clearing that up Librarian.

Given that the instructor in question (and I have no idea who this is/was) taught material which was:
Incorrect.
Easily identifiable as such by anyone who cared to find out.


I really don't understand the "great instructor" part.

Because we're all human and we're all wrong sometimes, that doesn't mean that everything else he taught wasn't awesome.
All his other legal stuff was right on par and all his practical firearm handling and shooting stuff was great too.
I improved my groupings dramatically within five minutes of live-fire instruction.
He is a great instructor.