PDA

View Full Version : San Marcos, CA Local jurisdiction restrictions


notme92069
08-19-2011, 9:58 AM
This is an excerpt from the City of San Marcos, CA Municipal Code

5.60.080 Dangerous weapons - Possession in public - Prohibited. No person shall appear in any street, alley, sidewalk, parkway, or any other public place or place open to public view while carrying upon his or her person, or having in his or her immediate possession, any dangerous or deadly weapon.

It sounds like they prohibit carry of any kind. It would appear that I can't even carry them from my house to my vehicle since that would be open to public view.

There is an exemption for "sport or recreation" I must have missed that part of the 2nd Amendment

Flopper
08-19-2011, 10:12 AM
Obviously I would still be discreet, but this ordinance has about as much weight as the Berkeley code which makes it a nuclear-free zone.

Gray Peterson
08-19-2011, 10:20 AM
Carry with license is protected since GC53071 passed in 1971.

notme92069
08-19-2011, 12:01 PM
That leaves those of us that didn't contribute to Gore's campaign pretty much SOL

Untamed1972
08-19-2011, 12:09 PM
The muni-code as written sounds unconstitutionally vague. So does dangerous and deadly include things like pocket knives? What about a hammer. Can I carry a hammer from my car on the street to my house?

notme92069
08-19-2011, 12:13 PM
This is the exceptions. Tools are exempt

5.60.090 Dangerous weapons - Possession in public - Exceptions. The restrictions contained in the preceding section shall not be deemed to prohibit the bearing of, or having possession of, ordinary tools or equipment carried by any person in connection with his or her trade, employment, business or profession, or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation.

Untamed1972
08-19-2011, 12:49 PM
This is the exceptions. Tools are exempt

5.60.090 Dangerous weapons - Possession in public - Exceptions. The restrictions contained in the preceding section shall not be deemed to prohibit the bearing of, or having possession of, ordinary tools or equipment carried by any person in connection with his or her trade, employment, business or profession, or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation.

So if someone is a computer programmer they would not be able have hammer in their posession?

How does anyone in that town buy a hammer at home depot to hang pictures and get it home w/o violating the law?

I think the real crime here is why cities feel the need to waste time passing redundant laws that are already covered at the state level?

notme92069
08-19-2011, 1:02 PM
So if someone is a computer programmer they would not be able have hammer in their possession?

I think that goes without saying. You know how dangerous those programmers can get

How does anyone in that town buy a hammer at home depot to hang pictures and get it home w/o violating the law?



We don't. They want us all to be law breakers.


I think the real crime here is why cities feel the need to waste time passing redundant laws that are already covered at the state level?

You should read the gun codes. They establish a 5 day waiting period for used guns. Does this supersede the 10 day CA waiting period?

Decoligny
08-19-2011, 1:23 PM
The muni-code as written sounds unconstitutionally vague. So does dangerous and deadly include things like pocket knives? What about a hammer. Can I carry a hammer from my car on the street to my house?

If you take the time to look at the definitions section of San Marcos Municipal Code you would find weapons defined. The bold section makes it unconstitutionally vague, due to the fact that they can claim anything is a weapon based on the "not limited to" verbage.

9.04.020 (o) “Weapon” includes, but is not limited to, any firearm, rifle, pistol, revolver, paintball gun, or any weapon designed or intended to propel a shot, bullet, or other missile of any kind; or any device capable of discharging a projectile by air, spirit, gas or explosive; or any explosive substance or harmful solid, liquid and gaseous substance; or any spear, arrow, bow and arrow, slingshot, crossbow, spear or spear gun; or any dirk, Bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, or any other knife, straight-edged razor, spring stick, metal or any flailing instrument or disk which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or any weapon of like kind, or any stun gun, taser or similar device.

Based on these definitions, blowing a spitball through a straw is "discharge of a weapon".

Untamed1972
08-19-2011, 1:36 PM
If you take the time to look at the definitions section of San Marcos Municipal Code you would find weapons defined. The bold section makes it unconstitutionally vague, due to the fact that they can claim anything is a weapon based on the "not limited to" verbage.

9.04.020 (o) “Weapon” includes, but is not limited to, any firearm, rifle, pistol, revolver, paintball gun, or any weapon designed or intended to propel a shot, bullet, or other missile of any kind; or any device capable of discharging a projectile by air, spirit, gas or explosive; or any explosive substance or harmful solid, liquid and gaseous substance; or any spear, arrow, bow and arrow, slingshot, crossbow, spear or spear gun; or any dirk, Bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, or any other knife, straight-edged razor, spring stick, metal or any flailing instrument or disk which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or any weapon of like kind, or any stun gun, taser or similar device.

Based on these definitions, blowing a spitball through a straw is "discharge of a weapon".


So how do the many divers and spear fisherman there get there gear from house to the car and back?

notme92069
08-19-2011, 1:41 PM
So how do the many divers and spear fisherman there get there gear from house to the car and back?

That would go back to the " or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation." exception

Untamed1972
08-19-2011, 1:45 PM
That would go back to the " or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation." exception

Ehh....yeah that's true. Got me on that one.

NoJoke
08-19-2011, 5:12 PM
That would go back to the " or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation." exception

I consider going to the range a legitimate sport AND recreation. Case closed.

...on the flip side, can't spit wads be shot through a straw? Mmmmm? :) Ban them straws!