PDA

View Full Version : Open carrying long guns on motorcycles


clutch_dust
06-02-2012, 10:27 AM
I've been wondering for quite some time about the legality of throwing my shotgun on my back and riding off into the sunset, and I finally found a decent LEO who was somewhat informed. I gave him the best case scenario, that I was without a car and I wanted to take the 12 gauge to a range, and he said that although it's "sketchy" and I will definitely be harassed, it is legal to carry an unloaded rifle on my back while riding a motorcycle. Most of you may have already known this, but I'd been searching the internet for weeks with no clear answers. This was a Kern County Sheriff so take that into consideration as well; I don't think your average LEO is going to be quite as understanding as the good ol' boys we have up here.

ojisan
06-02-2012, 11:02 AM
Transporting a long gun on a MC is a challenge.
I have a plain rectangular padded case that is about 28" x 14".
To transport a Mossberg 500, I remove the barrel and buttstock from the action, then lock everything in the case.
Then I bungee the case lengthwise to the passenger seat with the extra length sticking out to the rear (sport bike).
A Ruger 1022 with a folding stock can fit in the case as well.
The takedown Ruger 10/22 or the AR-7 type rifles are also easy to transport on a MC.
You could always use a guitar case with a strap on your back.
Just stay low-profile and don't do any wheelies and you will be OK.
:scooter:

Bill Carson
06-02-2012, 11:11 AM
I've been wondering for quite some time about the legality of throwing my shotgun on my back and riding off into the sunset, and I finally found a decent LEO who was somewhat informed. I gave him the best case scenario, that I was without a car and I wanted to take the 12 gauge to a range, and he said that although it's "sketchy" and I will definitely be harassed, it is legal to carry an unloaded rifle on my back while riding a motorcycle. Most of you may have already known this, but I'd been searching the internet for weeks with no clear answers. This was a Kern County Sheriff so take that into consideration as well; I don't think your average LEO is going to be quite as understanding as the good ol' boys we have up here.

AKA. How to get pulled over, guns pointed at and proned out.

G-forceJunkie
06-02-2012, 11:11 AM
legal, but you will get hassled. Put it in a soft sided guitar case.

scarville
06-02-2012, 11:23 AM
Be the Grey Man and use something that doesn't scream "GUN!" to the cops. You may be completely legal but it is not always wise to trust in the good intentions and knowledge of those in authority.

Don't let, "Everything he did was legal", be part of your eulogy.

j-rod
06-02-2012, 1:44 PM
I have a soft case that has a strap. Rode by police and was not hassled.

Manolito
06-02-2012, 2:02 PM
http://i904.photobucket.com/albums/ac245/manolito9/armedrider.jpg

This was part of a training class the end answer is it is legal in California under california law. Now are there city and county ordinances that prohibit?????

Will this get you more attention than you want you bet. 8 agencies and each officer had an opinion of why it was illegal not a one for why it was legal.

Best advice cover it up with a case of some kind that looks like anything but a gun.

This is just advice not a legal opinion of any kind.

If you decide to open carry let us know how it goes.

Respectfully,
Bill

Librarian
06-02-2012, 2:37 PM
I've been wondering for quite some time about the legality of throwing my shotgun on my back and riding off into the sunset, and I finally found a decent LEO who was somewhat informed. I gave him the best case scenario, that I was without a car and I wanted to take the 12 gauge to a range, and he said that although it's "sketchy" and I will definitely be harassed, it is legal to carry an unloaded rifle on my back while riding a motorcycle. Most of you may have already known this, but I'd been searching the internet for weeks with no clear answers. This was a Kern County Sheriff so take that into consideration as well; I don't think your average LEO is going to be quite as understanding as the good ol' boys we have up here.

Nothing specific to charge someone with for that behavior, until AB 144 1527 passes and is implemented.

Excluding school zones, and RAWs, which do require a locked case for long guns, no law forbids open carry of an unloaded long gun.

Prudence suggests you shouldn't risk ruining your day by doing that in urban areas.

CitaDeL
06-02-2012, 6:07 PM
Nothing specific to charge someone with for that behavior, until AB 144 passes and is implemented.

Excluding school zones, and RAWs, which do require a locked case for long guns, no law forbids open carry of an unloaded long gun.

Prudence suggests you shouldn't risk ruining your day by doing that in urban areas.

Correction; that is AB1527, not AB144.

Librarian
06-02-2012, 6:44 PM
Correction; that is AB1527, not AB144.

So it is - thanks. Fixed.

Mssr. Eleganté
06-02-2012, 6:57 PM
Get yourself a locking rack for your motorcycle to avoid any Gun Free School Zone charges from the Feds.



http://dragon.hematite.com/LAPD_0742.jpg

http://inlinethumb58.webshots.com/47353/2753116370072664822S500x500Q85.jpg

YubaRiver
06-02-2012, 7:08 PM
Could I use one of those on my bicycle?

sherm2954
06-02-2012, 9:25 PM
soft guitar case...have someone with a commercial sewing machine put in a loop system with additional velcro straps and you're good to go. straps hold the gun...any gun that fits can be secured and will be "out of sight, out of mind".

Burbur
06-03-2012, 8:35 AM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=152837&stc=1&d=1338741273 (http://www.zmotorcase.com/)

Guitar case!

Here is one that mounts to your bike. I have seen on that you wear like a backpack. Both can provide lockable, disguised carrying.

SJgunguy24
06-03-2012, 11:22 AM
http://www.blackhawk.com/product/Homeland-Security-Discreet-Weapons-Carry-Case,142,134.htm

I transport with one of these on public transit and my bicycle. Never been messed with ever while carrying with this case.

oni.dori
06-03-2012, 4:51 PM
Open carry in CA is ALWAYS a bad idea in urban public areas, regardess of the type of firearm being carried; it causes FAR more trouble and stigma than it is worth. In NO WAY are you proving any point, making any statement (other than, "please, I am BEEGGING YOU to make this illegal too, and FURTHER restrict our 2A Rights"), or "sticking it to the man", you are just asking for trouble. IANAL, but I would STRONGLY advise against it; because you are not only effecting your rights, but the rights of EVERY OTHER gun owner in CA.
Your best option is to LUCC.

CitaDeL
06-03-2012, 5:38 PM
Open carry in CA is ALWAYS a bad idea in urban public areas, regardess of the type of firearm being carried; it causes FAR more trouble and stigma than it is worth. In NO WAY are you proving any point, making any statement (other than, "please, I am BEEGGING YOU to make this illegal too, and FURTHER restrict our 2A Rights"), or "sticking it to the man", you are just asking for trouble. IANAL, but I would STRONGLY advise against it; because you are not only effecting your rights, but the rights of EVERY OTHER gun owner in CA.
Your best option is to LUCC.

Only truth is 'absolute'. While it may be true from your perspective that open carry is 'always' bad, that 'no good' can possibly come of transporting a firearm openly, your thesis can be disproved with a single account when nothing negative occurs. There have been more than one.

While I agree that it is not beneficial to use it as a political tool at this time, open carry isn't always as stigmatized or troublesome as is being supposed here.

oni.dori
06-03-2012, 6:44 PM
Based on recent widespread media coverage, general public opionion in CA, as well as recent passed an proposed laws, I would have to definitely disagree. I have yet to see one instance where it has been beneficial to our cause/movement. I am not saying it couldn't save someone's life, or that people get harrassed EVERY time they participate in said activity; however, it pretty much always creates negative reactions to us and our hinders our progress.

Honestly though, that LEO's open style locked rig is pretty suh-WEET, but I doubt it would do much to help alleviate said hysteria.

artoaster
06-03-2012, 6:44 PM
I'd go with this:


http://i1079.photobucket.com/albums/w515/artoaster/nike_stick_bag_blk_2.jpg

GM4spd
06-03-2012, 7:00 PM
Only truth is 'absolute'. While it may be true from your perspective that open carry is 'always' bad, that 'no good' can possibly come of transporting a firearm openly, your thesis can be disproved with a single account when nothing negative occurs. There have been more than one.


So, if a two year old wets their fingers and sticks them into a 110V
outlet and "nothing" happens they should continue doing this until something
"absolute" happens. Very good. Pete

mtsul
06-03-2012, 8:47 PM
tag

CitaDeL
06-03-2012, 8:53 PM
Based on recent widespread media coverage, general public opionion in CA, as well as recent passed an proposed laws, I would have to definitely disagree. I have yet to see one instance where it has been beneficial to our cause/movement. I am not saying it couldn't save someone's life, or that people get harrassed EVERY time they participate in said activity; however, it pretty much always creates negative reactions to us and our hinders our progress.

Honestly though, that LEO's open style locked rig is pretty suh-WEET, but I doubt it would do much to help alleviate said hysteria.

The only recent media coverage on anything open carry related was about Charles Nichols using it as a sledgehammer to emphasize his considerable ignorance in both political and legal matters. I hardly call that 'widespread'. The other issue is that when open carry is done discretely, few have raised any concern.

So, if a two year old wets their fingers and sticks them into a 110V
outlet and "nothing" happens they should continue doing this until something
"absolute" happens. Very good. Pete

Nice strawman. While it could be said there might be a corollary between using open carry as a political tool and a child sticking a fork in a electrical outlet the results may have some predictable outcome- the same cannot be said of individual open carry outside of inarguably instigative political activities. You seem to share oni dori's affection for absolutes. All cases and circumstances are not equal, and therefore do not have equal outcomes. I believe this is pretty well documented.

oni.dori
06-03-2012, 9:25 PM
The only recent media coverage on anything open carry related was about Charles Nichols using it as a sledgehammer to emphasize his considerable ignorance in both political and legal matters. I hardly call that 'widespread'. The other issue is that when open carry is done discretely, few have raised any concern.

I'm sorry, but discreetly and open carry is an oxymoron. Also, since that is about the only coverage that OC has gotten, that that is the most widespread it has gotten, my point remains the same. No matter what, it got widespread enough that it caught the attention of CA legistators, and they banned it. I would say that is proof enough of the negativity it garners. In the end, touting one man's ignorance is no excuse to remain so yourself. To deny that the participation in OC'ing, and the public image it creates does damage to our movement, then you are oblivious. Why would you want to participate in an activity that is counterproductive to regaining your rights? In the end, I would gladly trade OC for something far better and more effective (CC).

CitaDeL
06-03-2012, 9:59 PM
I'm sorry, but discreetly and open carry is an oxymoron. Also, since that is about the only coverage that OC has gotten, that that is the most widespread it has gotten, my point remains the same. No matter what, it got widespread enough that it caught the attention of CA legistators, and they banned it. I would say that is proof enough of the negativity it garners. In the end, touting one man's ignorance is no excuse to remain so yourself. To deny that the participation in OC'ing, and the public image it creates does damage to our movement, then you are oblivious. Why would you want to participate in an activity that is counterproductive to regaining your rights? In the end, I would gladly trade OC for something far better and more effective (CC).

'Discretion' and 'open carry' are not contradictory terms. Open carry as a first amendment objective (such as a protest) is something distinct and seperate from individual open carry. You are mistaking one for the other. Again.

You also mistake statutorily regulated concealed carry for the right.

Your willingness to trade one form of carry for the other demonstrates a compromise that illustrates exactly why California is going the opposite direction that the nation is... Any reason one would gladly trade a right for the privilege is wholly contrary to the movement to expand and preserve our liberty- and makes them a prostitute to the statists who will compel performance in order to permit their civic duty.

el chivo
06-03-2012, 10:18 PM
one thing to keep in mind, if you carry in a guitar case or lacrosse case (sweet), one of the upcoming bills that may pass has a provision that any case has to be made for firearms, no more disguising the contents.

So if you go on public transit or bike it's will not be legal to have a disguising case. Be sure to keep on top of that; if you buy a guitar case and go happily on your way, in a few months you could be doing something illegal (though it's currently not).

oni.dori
06-03-2012, 11:11 PM
'Discretion' and 'open carry' are not contradictory terms. Open carry as a first amendment objective (such as a protest) is something distinct and seperate from individual open carry. You are mistaking one for the other. Again.

Yes, they are. The ENTIRE point of adhering to CA OC law was to be blatant and unmistakable, otherwise legal problems would ensue. You wouldn't be UOC'ing if you didn't want the attention from it, because there is really no "tactical" advantage gained from it that would outweigh the benefits. In a real conflict, you would make yourself more of a target than a protected individual. There is no way you would be able to draw and load your firearm to be effective in a split-second situation, let alone a standoff. Your assailant would instantaneously attack you the second they saw you trying to load your firearm in a standoff. They automatically have the advantage. The point of CC is discretion. Discretion gives you advantage. Carrying an already loaded firearm gives you an advantage. I am ALL ABOUT the unfair advantage, it saves lives. I support the right to OC, not UOC. UOC is pointless and counterproductive. If we had CC, I would wholeheartedly support a push for OC. CC is just more important, safer, and easier to achieve right now.

You also mistake statutorily regulated concealed carry for the right.

How is CC not a right? I never said OC wasn't a right. However, there are certain ways you have to go about regaining both. Right now, CC is the best option. I never said I didn't want to see OC come back, I don't want to see UOC come back. It is utterly pointless in comparison (other than for gaining attention).

Your willingness to trade one form of carry for the other demonstrates a compromise that illustrates exactly why California is going the opposite direction that the nation is... Any reason one would gladly trade a right for the privilege is wholly contrary to the movement to expand and preserve our liberty- and makes them a prostitute to the statists who will compel performance in order to permit their civic duty.

Incorrect, it's called strategy. Once we have CC, it will be FAR easier to get OC back, LOADED OC. To demand the remenance of HALF of a right, at the expense of all the others is the definition of insanity (and no different than you are accusing me of). You are far to focused on the right in front of your nose to see the whole picture. Chess my friend, chess. There is a method to the madness.

one thing to keep in mind, if you carry in a guitar case or lacrosse case (sweet), one of the upcoming bills that may pass has a provision that any case has to be made for firearms, no more disguising the contents.

So if you go on public transit or bike it's will not be legal to have a disguising case. Be sure to keep on top of that; if you buy a guitar case and go happily on your way, in a few months you could be doing something illegal (though it's currently not).

Link to proposed bill, preferrably the secion in question?

el chivo
06-04-2012, 1:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by el chivo View Post
one thing to keep in mind, if you carry in a guitar case or lacrosse case (sweet), one of the upcoming bills that may pass has a provision that any case has to be made for firearms, no more disguising the contents.

So if you go on public transit or bike it's will not be legal to have a disguising case. Be sure to keep on top of that; if you buy a guitar case and go happily on your way, in a few months you could be doing something illegal (though it's currently not).
Link to proposed bill, preferrably the secion in question?


AB 1527 was the bill in question, although it looks like this part has been removed; I read it a few months ago but couldn't find it this time.

Another thing to keep on top of, if this passes, you will have to go directly to and from the range without deviations. This has been true for handguns but would now be applied to long guns as well. I read about the exception for transporting in a motor vehicle but that exception is for concealable guns, not long guns (of course that exception wasn't necessary since there were no restrictions at the time).

----------------------------------------------------

26405. Section 26400 does not apply to, or affect, the carrying
of an unloaded firearm that is not a handgun in any of the following
circumstances:

...
(c) When the firearm is either in a locked container or encased
and it is being transported directly between places where a person is
not prohibited from possessing that firearm and the course of travel
shall include only those deviations between authorized locations as
are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.

---------------------------------------------------

I don't know who is going to define "reasonably necessary"; if you need to stop and get gas; if the 405 is closed and you have to take a detour, if you combine your trip to the range with running a few errands. "Deviations" meaning off the most direct route? What if you stay on the direct route, but stop to have dinner at a restaurant for two hours? Can you be arrested for not going directly home after the range visit?

Holy Cow.

oni.dori
06-04-2012, 6:37 AM
Then how can you legally LUCC legally? I have heard that was just FUD.

CitaDeL
06-04-2012, 7:29 AM
Yes, they are. The ENTIRE point of adhering to CA OC law was to be blatant and unmistakable, otherwise legal problems would ensue. You wouldn't be UOC'ing if you didn't want the attention from it, because there is really no "tactical" advantage gained from it that would outweigh the benefits. In a real conflict, you would make yourself more of a target than a protected individual. There is no way you would be able to draw and load your firearm to be effective in a split-second situation, let alone a standoff. Your assailant would instantaneously attack you the second they saw you trying to load your firearm in a standoff. They automatically have the advantage. The point of CC is discretion. Discretion gives you advantage. Carrying an already loaded firearm gives you an advantage. I am ALL ABOUT the unfair advantage, it saves lives. I support the right to OC, not UOC. UOC is pointless and counterproductive. If we had CC, I would wholeheartedly support a push for OC. CC is just more important, safer, and easier to achieve right now.

Who said anything about loading a firearm? And even if were were discussing UOC, I think we would be hard pressed to find a criminal who was enthusiastic about attacking anyone with a gun- the chance that the firearm is loaded is sufficient to keep most from trying.


How is CC not a right? I never said OC wasn't a right. However, there are certain ways you have to go about regaining both. Right now, CC is the best option. I never said I didn't want to see OC come back, I don't want to see UOC come back. It is utterly pointless in comparison (other than for gaining attention).

Concealed carry in California is completely discretionary. Even in counties that do issue licenses, you are being compelled to perform so you may exercise your right to self defense. You are compelled to make statements of innocence, subjected to extra scrutiny, molested as your fingerprints are seized, and must agree to comport yourself in the manner they dictate. If you do not perform to their satisfaction, the issuing agency can yank your license for any reason they want. Explain to me how one exercizes a right, through the approval of a government authority and the issuance of a revocable license.


Incorrect, it's called strategy. Once we have CC, it will be FAR easier to get OC back, LOADED OC. To demand the remenance of HALF of a right, at the expense of all the others is the definition of insanity (and no different than you are accusing me of). You are far to focused on the right in front of your nose to see the whole picture. Chess my friend, chess. There is a method to the madness.

The only 'remnants' of the second amendment in California are what you can have in the privacy of your own home. The legislature is almost wholly composed of those who intend to remove guns from every public venue. They intended this even before UOC 'parties' became popular and will continue their mission whether or not people carry openly or unloaded.

You're preaching about strategy to someone who recognizes that when you are surrounded and outnumbered 3 to 1 in enemy territory, what you do 'strategically' is completely irrelevant anymore. They will come to get you even if you do nothing at all. (Which isnt a strategy, but surrender.) I suppose that if we were to agree on one thing, it would be that one should not run directly into the line of fire, exposing remaining friendlies to the enemy, and claim to be a hero while doing so.

clutch_dust
06-04-2012, 7:24 PM
I live in Rosamond which can barely be described as rural, so the whole urban riot theory is null, and I'm not planning on carrying a shotgun around just for the hell of it. I'm talking about loading up the saddlebags with clays and shells, throwing the 12 gauge on my back, and riding ~2 miles to go to a remote location to get some target practice with some friends.

GearsCOG5
06-05-2012, 10:08 AM
Think about all these freaks that live around us, you dont think some old lady or stuck up soccer mom thats driving behind you isnt going to immediately pick up there phone and call the cops spouting off that some mad man is carrying around a gun. Your going to have a minimum of 5 squad cars behind you in a matter of minutes imo.

warkaj
08-17-2012, 10:01 AM
And? So what. They're wasting their time. No law is being broken, they have no reason to detain you and IF they do... you're going to be a rich man once your attorney is done with them. The fact of the matter is this, all I see out of CalGuns is people spouting off "don't you UOC.... Don't you do it! you'll get it taken away from us".... well apparently you folks don't do it anyway so what do you care if it gets taken away? And if UOC for long rifles does get taken away then guess how many lawsuits will come down on this State? MILLIONS. Because then we have no way to exercise our 2A right and CA is on its way to a Shall Issue state. You can thank all us Godless UOC'ers you screamed at.

"A right not exercised is a right soon lost"... I guess we forgot that here.

And by the way, I'm UOC an AR-15 tomorrow... camo'd with all the bells and whistles. And I'm taking it there with my motorcycle. Yes.... I will be pulled over and yes I will be harassed. Do I care? NOPE. I'll also be wearing a vest under my bike jacket and wearing a helmet cam in case I get shot by some rookie cop I can give the video to my lawyer and laugh at the settlement I get.

Eddy's Shooting Sports
08-17-2012, 10:12 AM
I used to ride my MC every week through East Palo Alto with my Benelli M1 in a soft case slung on my back. It was obvious what it was, but I never once got pulled over. Granted I was on a BMW and every cop in EPA knew there was a shotgun range by the bay, so I don't think they ever even looked twice.

Why someone would want to open carry, I have no idea. Just seems silly.

Grumpyoldretiredcop
08-17-2012, 5:05 PM
I live in Rosamond which can barely be described as rural, so the whole urban riot theory is null, and I'm not planning on carrying a shotgun around just for the hell of it. I'm talking about loading up the saddlebags with clays and shells, throwing the 12 gauge on my back, and riding ~2 miles to go to a remote location to get some target practice with some friends.

My advice (free and worth the cost) is to load the ammo into the saddlebags (don't forget to balance the load, wouldn't want to list, would we?), put the shotgun in a bag with shoulder straps, lock the zipper if you have to pass through a school zone on the way, carry it on your back and go shoot. The likelihood of problems under those circumstances is minimal, if not a virtual zero, from a realistic point of view (and my view from the LEO position). The worst that might happen is that you crash, having hard things on your back when you crash isn't comfortable and may cause physical damage. YMMV.

If you feel more comfortable, the guitar case sounds like a good idea... even soccer moms know what guitar cases look like and are unlikely to pull out their cell phones and call 911 if they see one being transported by a motorcyclist. If you can bungee it to the back seat or luggage rack (if your bike has one) that works too, but remember not to split traffic if you do that. :D

Meantime, let the tinfoil hattery continue... dangit, where's that popcorn icon?

ElvenSoul
08-17-2012, 5:08 PM
Put a MLP Sticker on the gun then the LEO's will know your not a killer

AyatollahGondola
08-17-2012, 5:55 PM
And? So what. They're wasting their time. No law is being broken, they have no reason to detain you and IF they do... you're going to be a rich man once your attorney is done with them. The fact of the matter is this, all I see out of CalGuns is people spouting off "don't you UOC.... Don't you do it! you'll get it taken away from us".... well apparently you folks don't do it anyway so what do you care if it gets taken away? And if UOC for long rifles does get taken away then guess how many lawsuits will come down on this State? MILLIONS. Because then we have no way to exercise our 2A right and CA is on its way to a Shall Issue state. You can thank all us Godless UOC'ers you screamed at.

"A right not exercised is a right soon lost"... I guess we forgot that here.

And by the way, I'm UOC an AR-15 tomorrow... camo'd with all the bells and whistles. And I'm taking it there with my motorcycle. Yes.... I will be pulled over and yes I will be harassed. Do I care? NOPE. I'll also be wearing a vest under my bike jacket and wearing a helmet cam in case I get shot by some rookie cop I can give the video to my lawyer and laugh at the settlement I get.

For what it's worth, and I'm nobody really, but when I open carry, I notify the cops. All of them. I want my experience to be as positive as possible for all concerned, and an extra bonus is when the referred to soccer mom calls said dispatchers, the dispatchers then calmly tell them that everything is fine, and the person is within the law. Soccer mom gets an education from someone not in the legislature or the media, or the brady bunch. Plus you get to be known by the local LEO, the dispatchers, the highway patrol in your area, etc. Good for business

AyatollahGondola
08-17-2012, 6:03 PM
I used to ride my MC every week through East Palo Alto with my Benelli M1 in a soft case slung on my back. It was obvious what it was, but I never once got pulled over. Granted I was on a BMW and every cop in EPA knew there was a shotgun range by the bay, so I don't think they ever even looked twice.

Why someone would want to open carry, I have no idea. Just seems silly.

May I answer that? Why thank you.....

Not everyone in the next generation is getting an education about the 2nd amendment or firearms for that matter that isn't biased by anti 2A or anti gun propaganda. Many younger people get only what they learn in school, or community centers and the 'hood, if they live in one. If you've ever wondered why kids don't believe in the constitution, religion, morals, and other concepts that many of us have come to like, look no farther than the education they are NOT getting. Do you think they'll get a lesson in the 2A in school? Lots of kids come from single parent homes that have no hunters, no shooters, and no exposure to the good side of firearms. If we don't teach those kids today, who will bat for 2A in 10 years, 20, or 30?