View Full Version : LUCC and the LA Metro System?

05-27-2012, 3:28 AM
Alright, I've Google'd and searched this site back quite a ways, and I couldn't really find a definitive answer.

The LA Metro Code of Conduct (http://www.metro.net/about_us/ethics/images/Customer-Code-of-Conduct-rev.pdf), Section 6-05-220 states:

6-05-220 Weapons:
A. A weapon or instrument intended for use as a weapon shall not be discharged or
directed at a Metro facility or vehicle, or at a person or object in a Metro facility or
B. Entering a Metro facility or vehicle with a weapon or instrument intended for use as
a weapon is prohibited.39
This provision does not apply to law enforcement or
security personnel.

Section 6-05-020 defines "weapon":

Q. “Weapon or instrument intended for use as a weapon” includes but is not limited to
firearms, switchblade knives, axes, gravity knives, box cutters, straight razors,
unpackaged razor blades, swords, nunchucks, explosives, dangerous chemicals or
devices, radioactive materials, and highly combustible materials.

Oddly enough, the footnote #39 they have for Section 6-05-220(B) is PC 653K (http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/15/2/s653k) which talks about switchblades.
So no tricky arguments there, a firearm is by their definition a "weapon or instrument intended for use as a weapon". Now, I remember from a thread I started a year or so ago that the general CCW/LUCC rule of "if there's a metal detector, you can't carry; if there's no metal detector, then the worst they can do is find out you're carrying and tell you to leave" doesn't apply to common carriers. (My thread was about Amtrak)

LUCCing on Amtrak isn't just a "aw shucks, you caught me. Ok, I'll leave at the next stop" thing, it's an actual crime. Unfortunately, the actual US Code section was never cited in that thread. (Just Gene saying "[you] can be charged with and convicted of the Federal 'must provide notice to common carriers' law. Someone lost this in the 3rd Circuit.")

Is the Metro a similar situation, or is it one of those "if they find out they'll get pissy, but you won't have violated any laws" ones?

05-27-2012, 4:16 AM
It's an 'if they find out' thing, I'm pretty sure.

Carrying your firearm unloaded in a locked case, from home to someplace legal to have it, is not 'intended for use as a weapon'.

The other part is 18 USC 922 (e) (e) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to deliver or cause to be delivered to any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors, any package or other container in which there is any firearm or ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or ammunition is being transported or shipped;

except that any passenger who owns or legally possesses a firearm or ammunition being transported aboard any common or contract carrier for movement with the passenger in interstate or foreign commerce may deliver said firearm or ammunition into the custody of the pilot, captain, conductor or operator of such common or contract carrier for the duration of the trip without violating any of the provisions of this chapter.

No common or contract carrier shall require or cause any label, tag, or other written notice to be placed on the outside of any package, luggage, or other container that such package, luggage, or other container contains a firearm.

Doesn't apply to Metro, since Metro is not interstate.

05-27-2012, 6:47 AM
I would think your covered by the "intended for use as" language. I know for a fact VTA (public transit south bay area) is GTG with locked unloaded carry. They may not be happy but from my contact yesterday there is no law banning lawful transport of unloaded locked firearms.

05-27-2012, 10:05 AM
All of the metro trains are governed under the Federal Rail Administration rules concerning conductors, engineers, operating protocols, etc so you might have issues with the federal laws too.

05-27-2012, 8:42 PM
Thanks guys.

Ron-Solo, are you referencing any particular Federal code, or just pointing out that it may run afoul of Federal laws as well? Because that was the entire point of my post, asking whether or not Federal laws on common carriers/public transportation apply, or if it's merely a "our policy is no" kind of thing I can ignore along with "no outside drinks in the movie theater".


05-27-2012, 9:00 PM
I'm not referencing any particular code. I used to ride the Metrolink from LA to Riverside daily for nine years. The train crews are all federally licensed and they could cite for fare evasion to the local or US District Court, which is why I brought it up. I haven't ridden the train in several years, so I don't know if it is current.

If it runs on rails, it is regulated by the Feds, that much I know.