PDA

View Full Version : Field Time Range in Stanton: "Loaded Magazines are a felony"


glbtrottr
01-01-2013, 3:28 PM
We are platinum members of this range and love the facility. They have some people working there that are truly very nice.


http://www.fieldtimetargetandtraining.com/images/building_full.jpg


That said, They have a policy of all weapons being cased (including specifically long guns) as well as being chamber flagged.

More than one occasion, the helpful (and the not so helpful) people of the range have been fairly forceful with their statement regarding bringing loaded magazines into the range as them being considered "loaded guns".

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DISCUSS THIS OR EDUCATE THEM, as they seem to be consistently and repeatedly passing bum scoop and being overly aggressive with some of their customers.

The first time, the chubbier of the helpers took on a very strong tone, virtually implying that we were committing a felony. I asked him for a cite, and he said he didn't have it, but insisted that it was a felony. I dismissed it as his being ignorant.

Yesterday while at the range, the girls and I walked in and ...yet again...the same conversation is had, as we usually keep our magazines loaded in our cases.

No less than 2 people on staff at Field Time stated that the mags being loaded were "felonies" in the state of California. Again, I asked for a cite, and none was provided. One nice older fellow finally shed some light on the source of this information.

Apparently, Field Time gets their CCW training from a gentleman named "Bill Murphy".

The gentleman said that it was not a Penal Code or case law, but a "Vehicle Code" in the State of California. He read the exact vehicle code cite, he said, and read it in the blue book, "how to own guns and stay out of jail in California".

Hm. I own the book.

OK, here's my problem: I've actually taken a ride to Orange County Jail courtesy of CHP charging me with the same ignorant police offense: Possessing a concealed loaded weapon. Case dismissed, and screw the CHP officer for wasting my time and money.

When pulled over, long story short, the CHP officer called a locked safe with an unloaded Kimber 1911 with no rounds in the chamber and no magazine attached as a "Loaded Weapon", verified by the Field Training Officer and Sergeant that evening.

Another time, Irvine PD, on a separate incident, decided that a shotgun in my trunk with a shell caddy with rounds in it, though no rounds in the chamber, was a loaded weapon. I spoke with the Captain of the area who actually wrote the 12031 policy, and he was equally as ignorant while being open to a training opportunity, which we never followed up with as an organization.

In other words, I have a bit of a sore spot against this business of a "loaded magazine" being a felony.

I called Jason Davis, but alas...the holidays are here.

Upon finding out who Mr. Bill Murphy was, I tried reaching out to the lad.

Apparently, Mr. Murphy has a 31 year law enforcement career. He spent 22 years in Huntington Beach as a Police Officer, has owned Firearms Training Associates for 15 years, and works with his daughter at Surefire as their Director of Training.

http://www.surefireinstitute.com/images/instructors/william_murphy.jpg

http://www.tactical-life.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pocket-4.jpg

www.linkedin.com/pub/bill-murphy/30/38a/79b

When I called Surefire, his daughter, Christen Durham, answered - she also works at Surefire, and is in charge of contracts at the institute and other departments there. She also mentioned that Murphy had taught classes under their Firearms Training Associates business as opposed to Surefire.

www.linkedin.com/pub/cristen-durham/35/89b/83b

http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrink_200_200/p/1/000/11f/10a/0977e5f.jpg
I shared my experience at Field Time, and she defended the statements.

"I'm in Wyoming right now, and my dad is out of the country, but you bet - we have lots of judges and police officers who go through our courses and yes, many judges interpret the law to read that a loaded magazine, without a firearm, is considered a loaded firearm".

Interesting.

According to 12031(g) of the Penal code:



A firearm shall be deemed to be loaded for the purposes of this section when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell, consisting of a case that holds a charge of powder and a bullet or shot, in, or attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm; except that a muzzle-loader firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder.

So, their argument is that "ATTACHED IN ANY MANNER" (i.e. being in the proximate area of and touching" constitutes a loaded weapon. Nothing like new and interesting ways of accusing honest citizens of a crime.

What a lot of these people seem to miss, in my opinion, is this, from our own Calguns Wiki:

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. The shells here were placed in a separate storage compartment of the shotgun and were not yet "loaded" as the term is commonly understood.

There is nothing in Health and Safety Code section 11370.1 which indicates the Legislature did not intend to use the term "loaded" in its commonly understood meaning.

We note Penal Code section 12031 states it is defining the term "loaded" "for the purposes of this section" (Pen. Code, 12031, subd. (g)); it does not state it is applicable to a Health and Safety Code offense nor does Health and Safety Code section 11370.1 refer to the Penal Code definition.

Second, even if we were to accept the Attorney General's assertionthat the definition of "loaded" contained in Penal Code section 12031, subdivision (g) applies to Health and Safety Code section 11370.1, subdivision (a), we would still conclude the shotgun here was not loaded.

[2] A statute "must be given a reasonable and commonsense interpretation consistent with the apparent purpose and intention of the Legislature, practical rather than technical in nature, and which, when applied, will result in wise policy rather than mischief or absurdity. [Citations.]" (Beaty v. Imperial Irrigation Dist. (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 897, 902 [231 Cal.Rptr. 128].) "The words must be construed in context in light of the nature and obvious purpose of the statute where they appear. [Citation.]" (Decker v. City of Imperial Beach (1989) 209 Cal.App.3d 349, 354 [257 Cal.Rptr. 356]; Lakin v. Watkins Associated Industries(1993) 6 Cal.4th 644, 659 [25 Cal.Rptr.2d 109, 863 P.2d 179].)

Given the examples are all consistent with an intent to use the common meaning of "loaded," it follows the Legislature's use of the phrase "attached in any manner" to the firearm was intended to encompass a situation where a shell or cartridge might be attached to a firearm or "loaded" for firing by some
unconventional method. The phrase does not demonstrate a clear Legislative intent to deem a firearm loaded no matter how a shell is attached to a firearm; in particular, it does not indicate a clear intent to deem a gun "loaded" when the ammunition, as here, is in a storage compartment which is not equivalent to either a magazine or clip and from which the ammunition cannot be fired. 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 …

Unless I'm wrong, I can't imagine that somehow the law has changed to deem a loaded magazine a "loaded firearm" as both Cristen and Bill Murphy seem to teach. She quickly reverted to open carry being outlawed, and changes in the law, but the issue of loaded magazines being firearms stayed affirmed and she stated they certainly teach this. Your thoughts?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8444/7984815150_4ace26617c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32271230@N08/7984815150/) Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32271230@N08/7984815150/) by

tankerman
01-01-2013, 3:43 PM
Another cop that thinks their word is law.

There's a lot of them that feel they're on par with god when it comes to ordering people around.

Scratch705
01-01-2013, 3:47 PM
those are some high heels to be wearing to the range.

JMP
01-01-2013, 3:49 PM
It's hogwash.

However, given that the people tasked to enforce firearm laws don't know the laws themselves, sometimes it's better to err on the side of caution to avoid aggravation.

glbtrottr
01-01-2013, 3:54 PM
those are some high heels to be wearing to the range.

They must be her lucky heels. Their targets tell a story. Granted, 25 yards, but for a girl? Give them a break, no? :) It was only her 3rd time shooting an AR, 1st time with optics.

They say in their defense they weren't planning on going to the range; however, since the all the rangemasters were thrilled to have a girl shoot in heels, they obliged.

And yes, they were told that loaded magazines were felonies in California / Loaded Firearms. That day as well.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8081/8319401424_73c770d0ec_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32271230@N08/8319401424/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32271230@N08/8319401424/) by

GrizFyrFyter
01-01-2013, 3:56 PM
I just read something abiut a court case in LA where canguns defended a guy that arrested fir the same thing and it was dismessed because the firearm is not loaded unless the is a round in the chamber or a loaded magazine in the firearm. What a load of crap.

yoteassasin
01-01-2013, 3:56 PM
sounds like typical douchery coming from the normally suspect assclowns . normally too many sheeple belive horsecrap fud coming from the "my dad has a friend who is a cop and he said" morons.
I was privileged enough the have a heated road-side discourse with a Napoleonic traffic cop regarding legally transporting a long-gun ( for the record my 243 was in the back of my extra cab and 4 shells were in my cup holder )
it seems there is a law ,not even on the books, that guns and ammo cant be in the same " compartment" or it is a concealed loaded weapon. luckly for me i was able to talk him down. but not apleasant situation and quite a anyoyance
moral of the story people are stupid, just keep reminding them maybe they will stop
btw isn't there some case law further defing a loaded weapon in ca?

colt1191
01-01-2013, 3:56 PM
In America it doesnt matter what the penal code says. It only mattters what kind of mood the police officer is in.

Rob454
01-01-2013, 4:03 PM
Open top dresses for the range? High heels? Little inappropriate simply from a safety standpoint.

As for the loaded gun why don't you just carry the ammo separated from the guns. As long as the ammo is attached to the gun in some manner cops are gonna go by that PC not calguns wiki. I just don't think its worth the hassle that you are putting yourself through.

Fjold
01-01-2013, 4:03 PM
They've been teaching that for years and it's been pointed out many times.

gregorio
01-01-2013, 4:06 PM
Had a similar situation a while back. My house is 2 miles from my vineyard on a rural mostly county road. I usually lock a shotgun in the rack and grab a pistol in a lock box out of the safe when I leave the house every day for work. The wild life is pretty dangerous up here not to mention the drug dealers growing pot and making meth in the MidPen Open Space area behind us. I leave a magazine for the pistol and shells for the shotgun in the aftermarket lock box in my console. I'll make several trips back and forth every day. On one quick trip home, I was hit by another vehicle and since the other guy was heavily injured, the police came out to investigate. This day, I had left the shells in the caddy which were clearly visible through my open window.

The first LEA on the scene was local PD followed by CHP a few minutes later. Since the road winds in and out of city/county jurisdiction, the were both called. After dealing with the reports, both got in a pretty heated discussion about the shells in the caddy making the gun a loaded weapon. CHP was adamant that it was loaded and I should be hauled off. Local PD was equally adamant that the gun was not loaded. The CHP finally gave up and told PD that the problem was his and then sped off.

Afer having a racks in my vehicles for over 35 years, I have since removed them. I also installed a small safe at the vineyard to leave a shotgun there. No way am I going to be put in that situation again where my fate is left up to which LEA takes jurisdiction.

Twist18
01-01-2013, 4:07 PM
Can't people who've been arrested for "carrying a loaded gun" when it wasn't really loaded sue the Officer and the Department that falsely arrested them? It seems like this would be good way for Officers who don't know what they're doing to learn their lesson!

Rob454
01-01-2013, 4:10 PM
Can't people who've been arrested for "carrying a loaded gun" when it wasn't really loaded sue the Officer and the Department that falsely arrested them? It seems like this would be good way for Officers who don't know what they're doing to learn their lesson!


How much money do you have and what is it worth to you to prove your point?

1Fastrider
01-01-2013, 4:10 PM
so back to the Field Time issue. I was thinking about joining so I can not have to drive hours to shoot a rifle. I'm not about to spend my range time standing there and loading magazines so do they check your range bag to look for loaded mags or has anyone been kicked out for showing up w/ loaded magazines?

glbtrottr
01-01-2013, 4:12 PM
It's bad enough that we have laws on the books that are unconstitutional, and that we have to waste time in the courts affirming them. No one wants to bean activist, but the intentional disregard for the law by law enforcement is pathetic, further perpetuated by people we sponsor.

Harrison_Bergeron
01-01-2013, 4:12 PM
Maybe I missed it, but I did not see People v. Clark mentioned in this thread, kinda hard to argue that a loaded mag is not a loaded gun without it.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Defining_loaded_in_California#People_v._Clark

glbtrottr
01-01-2013, 4:14 PM
the cite above is people v clark, quoted in relevance

SilverTauron
01-01-2013, 4:15 PM
In America it doesnt matter what the penal code says. It only mattters what kind of mood the police officer is in.

Agreed.

In Illinois its state law that transporting a gun without a loaded mag being inserted is legal. In real life if you get pulled over in a 100 mile radius of Chicago with a gun in the trunk you're going to jail, full stop.

This puts the ethical rangemaster/instructor in a bind-do they teach according to the law and risk their students being jailed , or do they teach the "XTRA SAFE" method to ensure no one can possibly be locked up? I'd imagine most instructors and rangemasters go beyond the published law to ensure the local Constable doesn't have the slightest reason to blow a gasket.

IMO, while the rangemaster may be dead wrong he's also got a valid point with his diatribes. I doubt youre the only person arrested in CA because of the crime of "driving while exercising your RKBA". (DwE)

In Illinois, the armed citizen who wishes to avoid a DwE transports his heater field stripped with the gun and ammo locked in two separate cases. In California DwE avoidance means travelling with unloaded magazines. Such is life in Socialist America.

Scratch705
01-01-2013, 4:17 PM
They must be her lucky heels. Their targets tell a story. Granted, 25 yards, but for a girl? Give them a break, no? :) It was only her 3rd time shooting an AR, 1st time with optics.

oh, i didn't mean anything. just saying since there are loose casings along the line, would hate to see them step on one and take a fall.

rabagley
01-01-2013, 4:18 PM
As for the loaded gun why don't you just carry the ammo separated from the guns. As long as the ammo is attached to the gun in some manner cops are gonna go by that PC not calguns wiki. I just don't think its worth the hassle that you are putting yourself through.

The situation being discussed here is where the ammo is in a magazine, not in a gun. The ammo most definitely is not attached to the gun in any manner.

Rob454
01-01-2013, 4:19 PM
It's bad enough that we have laws on the books that are unconstitutional, and that we have to waste time in the courts affirming them. No one wants to bean activist, but the intentional disregard for the law by law enforcement is pathetic, further perpetuated by people we sponsor.

I understand your frustration so how do you go about educating LEOs? Side of the road lawyering? Arguing with the counter guy at the range? Posting on calguns?
Or going and speaking to management and presenting your case to both LEO and gun range?

Most carry gun and ammo separately. Weather it's right or wrong it's acceptable to both. I just think you are fighting to prove a point that isn't a issue to most
The situation being discussed here is where the ammo is in a magazine, not in a gun. The ammo most definitely is not attached to the gun in any manner.

Shot shells on a shotgun shell carrier attached to a shotgun. I understood the mag loaded issue not attached to the gun he is having a problem with. Is it worth the hassle of dealing with a uneducated LEO on the side of the road the legality of a mag and what is and isn't loaded. You know all LEOs will err on the side of caution and if they are wrong. Oh sorry sir you have a nice day

MountainMike
01-01-2013, 4:20 PM
All this confusion is proof positive we have too many laws on the books.

ramathorn
01-01-2013, 4:23 PM
Whether its law or not remains unclear, very grey. I wouldn't want to let a judge interpret it if i was on trial. I was taught that a loaded mag (unattached to gun) was considered a loaded firearm also. They say the mag is part of the gun. A good way around this junk is to apply (and wait forever) to get a CCW which will cover your a**.

JMP
01-01-2013, 4:26 PM
FYI, email from CGF from December 20, 2012

Joseph Fernandez thankful CGF was there to help, considers legal options against Los Angeles County Sheriff

On October 8, 2012, Joseph Fernandez was driving normally down Hawthorn Blvd. when a Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy pulled him over, alleging that he stopped to warn Fernandez that there was an unknown object hanging from the rear view mirror and that the vehicle was allegedly straddling lanes, both violations of the Vehicle Code.

During the stop, the Deputy asked Fernandez if there were any weapons inside the vehicle. Fernandez informed the Deputy that he had. The Deputy detained Fernandez and the other vehicle occupants and conducted a search. The Deputy recovered a "locked black gun case." Fernandez provided the code for the gun case, and the Deputy recovered two registered and unloaded firearms, magazines, and ammunition. According to Fernandez, the Deputy believed that the firearms were deemed loaded because the magazines and ammunition were carried in the same case as the firearm.

The Deputy read Fernandez his Miranda rights and arrested him, "due to the fact that the firearms were concealed in a case, that they were readily accessible and within his immediate reach, and that there were two loaded magazines directly next to the firearm which can be quickly and easily loaded into the firearm." According to Fernandez, only after the Deputy's watch supervisor informed him that the firearms were not "loaded" was he cited for possession of a concealed firearm within a vehicle.

This unfortunate event could have been avoided had the officer been properly trained on the definition of loaded as well as the exemptions to Penal Code section 25400, including Penal Code section 25610(a)(1) which expressly exempts firearms carried "in a locked container."

Significantly, a criminal case was filed by the Hawthorne City Attorney's office against Mr. Fernandez, indicating a lack of firearms knowledge by the prosecutors. Mr. Fernandez contacted The Calguns Foundation, which considered the matter and took on his legal defense.

On December, 18, 2012, Attorney Jason Davis represented Mr. Fernandez in Court. After Mr. Davis discussed the false arrest error in the arrest and complaint and some professional arguing with the City Prosecutor, the City Prosecutor wisely dismissed the case.

After his case was dismissed, Mr. Fernandez stated, "I really appreciate The Calguns Foundation's efforts and that there's someone out there to protect the firearm rights of Californians like me. Few people know the details of California's intricate firearm laws, and even fewer can effectively represent their members and our Second Amendment rights like CGF does."

"Please, support CGF so that they can continue defending innocent California gun owners in circumstances like mine."

Mr. Fernandez is now considering his legal options against Los Angeles.

yoteassasin
01-01-2013, 4:29 PM
wow , just a tinge of defeatist ? wtf these are laws we are takling about and to be exact LAWS THAT DONT EXIST:facepalm: the horsecrap REAL laws are bad enough. why would you resign yourself to obeying laws THAT DONT EXIST??????????

I understand your frustration so how do you go about educating LEOs? Side of the road lawyering? Arguing with the counter guy at the range? Posting on calguns?
Or going and speaking to management and presenting your case to both LEO and gun range?

Most carry gun and ammo separately. Weather it's right or wrong it's acceptable to both. I just think you are fighting to prove a point that isn't a issue to most


Shot shells on a shotgun shell carrier attached to a shotgun. I understood the mag loaded issue not attached to the gun he is having a problem with.

Rob454
01-01-2013, 4:36 PM
wow , just a tinge of defeatist ? wtf these are laws we are takling about and to be exact LAWS THAT DONT EXIST:facepalm: the horsecrap REAL laws are bad enough. why would you resign yourself to obeying laws THAT DONT EXIST??????????


Do what you gotta do then. Don't worry about me and what i do. I got other things to do besides argue with some counter guy at a range who doesn't care and is sure he is right or a LEO on the side of the road who doesnt care and is sure he is right. But feel free to waste your time and breath teaching people who don't wanna be taught.

You wanna do something? Go speak to management or the chief of police. Or better yet let them arrest you and sue them. Seems the only way to get anyone's attention is through their wallet

Tripper
01-01-2013, 4:38 PM
There was a recent calgunner that got arrested and released on the loaded mag thing
End of the thread talked about suing the dept if I recall the thread correctly, then I recall a press release from CGF in relation to the whole thing
Someone remembers that and can link the thread I'm sure

choprzrul
01-01-2013, 4:43 PM
The founding fathers would openly weep after reading this thread...

.

Mossy Man
01-01-2013, 4:46 PM
It's not illegal. It can be their policy, though.

Respect their policy if you want to shoot there.

sully007
01-01-2013, 4:56 PM
There was a recent calgunner that got arrested and released on the loaded mag thing
End of the thread talked about suing the dept if I recall the thread correctly, then I recall a press release from CGF in relation to the whole thing
Someone remembers that and can link the thread I'm sure

Did you not read post number 24 before you posted your reply?

Rob454
01-01-2013, 4:57 PM
The founding fathers would openly weep after reading this thread...

.

They have been weeping long before this


What do you think works better. Arguing with low man on the totem pole or going to the top?

Ninety
01-01-2013, 5:06 PM
The rule about Field Time is we don't talk about Field Time


I will run this past a couple of my LEO friends and see what their position is on it .. . . I'm real curious as to the Sherrif's position on this as it is in their juristiction. I don't think that we should have to follow a made up law or act a certain way to avoid being improperly charged for a crime not committed.. I feel that if you give in to that "grey" area that you are encouraging more Encroachment of your rights.

glbtrottr
01-01-2013, 5:10 PM
Thanks, guys! Precisely my opinion.

At this point I've done what I can to help educate Mr. Murphy's daughter on the relevant statutes, as Mr Murphy is not around. She committed to having him call me upon return. I have also sent a note to Field Time so that hopefully they get some updated, accurate information that may improve their customer service. Great facility, bum scoop.

All of you chiming in to clarify would be a great help as well.

Mr.1904
01-01-2013, 5:10 PM
Murphy's a good guy and he teaches a solid school. In my last course there i was about to go get lunch and threw my gear in my car. Which had loaded mags in it. Also threw the unloaded pistol in the trunk. One of the students stopped me and told me that i was breaking the law (according the murphy) an to unload the mags.

I wrote the conversation off as misinformation and went about my business. It's not just murphy who has that school of thought. As the OP has experienced a lot of LE interpret the law as such.

Lumpia is sarap!
01-01-2013, 5:13 PM
Valid argument but it always falls down to their house, their rules clause.

Lumpia is sarap!
01-01-2013, 5:14 PM
Valid argument but it always falls down to their house, their rules clause.

CitaDeL
01-01-2013, 5:17 PM
No less than 2 people on staff at Field Time stated that the mags being loaded were "felonies" in the state of California.

My response;

"Felonies, hmm? I guess you should be calling the police." (Show them loaded magazine and put it back in my pocket.) "I will wait right here.";)

brassburnz
01-01-2013, 5:18 PM
I have heard this before so I asked my friend who is an investigator for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office. He is a former LAPD police officer.

LAPD CRASH units (gang units) have been arresting people who have unloaded firearms but loaded magazines in the same vehicle. The DA's office has been charging them with felony possession of a loaded weapon. They used the legal fiction of "constructive possession" if the firearm and loaded magazine are together.

Apparently the DA's office asked for an Opinion Letter from the California Attorney General's office. I can't find the AG's opinion letter on this subject but:

"Although an official interpretation of a statute by the Attorney General is not controlling, it is entitled to great respect." (Thorning v. Hollister School Dist. (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1598, 1604.)

"Opinions of the Attorney General, while not binding, are entitled to great weight. [Citations.] In the absence of controlling authority, these opinions are persuasive 'since the legislature is presumed to be cognizant of that construction of the statute.' [Citation.] " (Napa Valley Educators' Assn. v. Napa Valley Unified School Dist.(1987) 194 Cal.App.3rd 243, 251.)

The CHP takes the opinion letters as gospel, since the California Attorney General is their boss. For all other jurisdictions, it up to them.

So now I don't load my mags before going to the range. You've got to weigh the benefits vs. the burdens.

FullAuto
01-01-2013, 5:24 PM
Good looking girls in heels, shooting with good marksmanship? Who could ask for more?

yoteassasin
01-01-2013, 5:33 PM
Murphy's a good guy and he teaches a solid school. In my last course there i was about to go get lunch and threw my gear in my car. Which had loaded mags in it. Also threw the unloaded pistol in the trunk. One of the students stopped me and told me that i was breaking the law (according the murphy) an to unload the mags.

I wrote the conversation off as misinformation and went about my business. It's not just murphy who has that school of thought. As the OP has experienced a lot of LE interpret the law as such.

IT IS NOT THEIR JOB OR RIGHT TO INTEREPRET THE LAW WTF?:facepalm:

yoteassasin
01-01-2013, 5:39 PM
I have heard this before so I asked my friend who is an investigator for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office. He is a former LAPD police officer.

LAPD CRASH units (gang units) have been arresting people who have unloaded firearms but loaded magazines in the same vehicle. The DA's office has been charging them with felony possession of a loaded weapon. They used the legal fiction of "constructive possession" if the firearm and loaded magazine are together.

Apparently the DA's office asked for an Opinion Letter from the California Attorney General's office. I can't find the AG's opinion letter on this subject but:

"Although an official interpretation of a statute by the Attorney General is not controlling, it is entitled to great respect." (Thorning v. Hollister School Dist. (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1598, 1604.)

"Opinions of the Attorney General, while not binding, are entitled to great weight. [Citations.] In the absence of controlling authority, these opinions are persuasive 'since the legislature is presumed to be cognizant of that construction of the statute.' [Citation.] " (Napa Valley Educators' Assn. v. Napa Valley Unified School Dist.(1987) 194 Cal.App.3rd 243, 251.)

The CHP takes the opinion letters as gospel, since the California Attorney General is their boss. For all other jurisdictions, it up to them.

So now I don't load my mags before going to the range. You've got to weigh the benefits vs. the burdens.

ERRONEOUS! PROVE IT:mad: (the opinion letter regarding constuctive possesion of a loaded firearm)

mindofarock
01-01-2013, 5:49 PM
They've had multiple chances to find the law/penal codes and none have it so far. Let's stop bending over and taking it in the you know where.

Rob454
01-01-2013, 5:50 PM
IT IS NOT THEIR JOB OR RIGHT TO INTEREPRET THE LAW WTF?:facepalm:


They are doing it though. The way to educate is top down not bottom up. That's all I'm trying to get across. I don't really care if you have loaded mags. But the uneducated cop pulling you over does. You wanna change things go to the guy at the top. Arguing with the counter guy does absolutely nothing. Just like arguing with the cop that pulled you over. If he knws the law there won't be a issue. It's a issue when he doesn't. Cops will err on the side of caution. Always.

SilverTauron
01-01-2013, 5:54 PM
ERRONEOUS! PROVE IT:mad: (the opinion letter regarding constuctive possesion of a loaded firearm)

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lets be candid. On the side of the road the law is whatever the cop says it is. In places like Urban California, the lawmakers are the police and Attorneys General, and the Judiciary is just another rubber stamp squad meant to cover the backsides of the real lawmakers- the police and state prosecutor.

EM2
01-01-2013, 5:57 PM
wow , just a tinge of defeatist ? wtf these are laws we are takling about and to be exact LAWS THAT DONT EXIST:facepalm: the horsecrap REAL laws are bad enough. why would you resign yourself to obeying laws THAT DONT EXIST??????????


Just what do you think you are doing?
You throw around logic & good sense at these boys and you are a gonna scare em right good ya know.;)

elsolo
01-01-2013, 5:58 PM
I went to that store once, with a neighbor.
They were putting on a free reloading class, I was trying to get my neighbor to start using his Dillon 550, so I encouraged him to stay for the class.

Lots of misinformation being taught in that class, and the instructor had a real attitude about knowing more than some reloading book Speer publishes. Based on several comments he made, I showed him where the books say the opposite, he pulled the know-it-all card.

Some gems:

"Smokeless powder won't burn if I put this match to a pile of it."

"You can swap any component, and just go right back to the same load, because all primers are the same and any bullet in the same weight is identical."

"You never want to get any lube on the inside of a case neck."

ewarmour
01-01-2013, 6:11 PM
Joseph Fernandez thankful CGF was there to help, considers legal options against Los Angeles County Sheriff

On October 8, 2012, Joseph Fernandez was driving normally down Hawthorn Blvd. when a Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy pulled him over, alleging that he stopped to warn Fernandez that there was an unknown object hanging from the rear view mirror and that the vehicle was allegedly straddling lanes, both violations of the Vehicle Code.

During the stop, the Deputy asked Fernandez if there were any weapons inside the vehicle. Fernandez informed the Deputy that he had. The Deputy detained Fernandez and the other vehicle occupants and conducted a search. The Deputy recovered a "locked black gun case." Fernandez provided the code for the gun case, and the Deputy recovered two registered and unloaded firearms, magazines, and ammunition. According to Fernandez, the Deputy believed that the firearms were deemed loaded because the magazines and ammunition were carried in the same case as the firearm.

The Deputy read Fernandez his Miranda rights and arrested him, "due to the fact that the firearms were concealed in a case, that they were readily accessible and within his immediate reach, and that there were two loaded magazines directly next to the firearm which can be quickly and easily loaded into the firearm." According to Fernandez, only after the Deputy's watch supervisor informed him that the firearms were not "loaded" was he cited for possession of a concealed firearm within a vehicle.

This unfortunate event could have been avoided had the officer been properly trained on the definition of loaded as well as the exemptions to Penal Code section 25400, including Penal Code section 25610(a)(1) which expressly exempts firearms carried "in a locked container."

Significantly, a criminal case was filed by the Hawthorne City Attorney's office against Mr. Fernandez, indicating a lack of firearms knowledge by the prosecutors. Mr. Fernandez contacted The Calguns Foundation, which considered the matter and took on his legal defense.

On December, 18, 2012, Attorney Jason Davis represented Mr. Fernandez in Court. After Mr. Davis discussed the false arrest error in the arrest and complaint and some professional arguing with the City Prosecutor, the City Prosecutor wisely dismissed the case.

After his case was dismissed, Mr. Fernandez stated, "I really appreciate The Calguns Foundation's efforts and that there's someone out there to protect the firearm rights of Californians like me. Few people know the details of California's intricate firearm laws, and even fewer can effectively represent their members and our Second Amendment rights like CGF does."

"Please, support CGF so that they can continue defending innocent California gun owners in circumstances like mine."

Mr. Fernandez is now considering his legal options against Los Angeles.
yep

Librarian
01-01-2013, 6:14 PM
The wiki has the whole story - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Defining_loaded_in_California

See especially the set of training materials linked, as well as the Fernandez/LA caase cited in 47, above, as well as other places.

In short, no, loaded magazines are NOT felonies, and NOT themselves 'loaded guns' and charges under that misinformation are very likely to be dismissed with competent representation.

SilverTauron
01-01-2013, 6:19 PM
The wiki has the whole story - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Defining_loaded_in_California

See especially the set of training materials linked, as well as the Fernandez/LA caase cited in 47, above, as well as other places.

In short, no, loaded magazines are NOT felonies, and NOT themselves 'loaded guns' and charges under that misinformation are very likely to be dismissed with competent representation.

True.

That said, I point you to the old police saying: you may beat the rap , but you won't beat the ride.

yoteassasin
01-01-2013, 6:22 PM
Just what do you think you are doing?
You throw around logic & good sense at these boys and you are a gonna scare em right good ya know.;)

aperently we are part of a newly discovered oppresed minority class
MEN WITH BRAINS AND BALLS who would have thought:rolleyes:

yoteassasin
01-01-2013, 6:25 PM
True.

That said, I point you to the old police saying: you may beat the rap , but you won't beat the ride.

AND as society dictates this is ok and not a problem .... UNTILL?

Ninety
01-01-2013, 6:35 PM
I think you are talking about the LGS in Westminster, Not the shooting range. I was in the store during one of these free reloading classes.. interesting to see that they may be teaching improperly, that said I thought it was pretty cool that they offer the class and the people in the shop seem to be very helpful and customer service driven.


I went to that store once, with a neighbor.
They were putting on a free reloading class, I was trying to get my neighbor to start using his Dillon 550, so I encouraged him to stay for the class.

Lots of misinformation being taught in that class, and the instructor had a real attitude about knowing more than some reloading book Speer publishes. Based on several comments he made, I showed him where the books say the opposite, he pulled the know-it-all card.

Some gems:

"Smokeless powder won't burn if I put this match to a pile of it."

"You can swap any component, and just go right back to the same load, because all primers are the same and any bullet in the same weight is identical."

"You never want to get any lube on the inside of a case neck."

Paul S
01-01-2013, 6:44 PM
There was a recent calgunner that got arrested and released on the loaded mag thing
End of the thread talked about suing the dept if I recall the thread correctly, then I recall a press release from CGF in relation to the whole thing
Someone remembers that and can link the thread I'm sure

Hey friend...your post is #27. Apparently you missed post #24 :D

scarville
01-01-2013, 6:50 PM
Open top dresses for the range? High heels? Little inappropriate simply from a safety standpoint.

I was thinking that too. That range has very lax safety rules if they let anyone on the range in heels.

Hope no one from their insurance carrier sees that picture.

Malmon
01-01-2013, 6:53 PM
I shoot at this range every week, bringing 20 loaded D&H magazines for 556, approximately 25 loaded 1911 magazines for 9mm and 45 acp, 8 loaded p220 magazines and 15 loaded p226 magazines.
Does that mean that I commit 68 felonies every week?


Oftentimes I don't get to finish shooting all of them, I shoot until I get tired and switch to another gun. I do not like to waste time and energy loading mags at the range.

ryang
01-01-2013, 7:13 PM
Three things:

1. The "constructive possession" law was specifically written (and mentions) it applies only for gang members.
2. There is at least one Assistant DA (and by extension, one county) that teaches the definition of "loaded firearm" excludes a loaded mag if it is not inserted into the pistol.
3. I read a CCW book published by Bill Murphy. While I do not doubt his credentials or long years of service, I cringed every time I saw multiple typos on practically every page. Apparently he's so old school he doesn't believe in spell check.

marcusrn
01-01-2013, 7:33 PM
If your fortunate enough to take a CCW or shooting class from Bill Murphy and his wife Cheryl you will be well served.

He was a cop when he was 19 and up until a few years ago he would go out of his way to work nights so he could make felony arrests. No desk rat mentality there.

Many people in this state carry "commando style" or "constitutional carry". If you believe it's an enumerated right and your carrying in what a cop thinks is extra legal I would think it's a good thing to know how they think. ( I have never broken the law.) I found it refreshing to get if from a cops point of few. He is a great trainer and he probably dosen't give a shaet about what people on this site think of his purported errors. Good God the OP even admitted he was arrested for carrying by CHP although nothing came of it. I want to know how to never talk to I cop while I'm carrying and if I do I want to know how to make it as short and sweet as possible.

I personally get the cutting edge law from lawyers and common folks who share and give PC texts on this site. Bill Murphy is just telling it from a cops perspective. He is the last guy in the world that wants to bust a mall ninja for open carrying or any misdemeanor gun stuff.

In an Urban Rifle class I took from him there were cops taking the same class with select fire for their qualification for SWAT team. So we all learned at what distance full auto and bursts were appropriate. So you get the Gunsite script and the SWAT approach.

At the end of a CCW class i took from him 7 yrs ago he wanted to show the class how chaotic a shoot situation can be. He had a local news film clip of him shooting an apparently drug crazed man attacking police with a large knife. This was taken from above by a news helicopter and there were 4 cops surrounding the guy IIRC. His MP5 burst downed the guy and went thru+thru without injuring any others around. It was very fast and very chaotic with cops running in all directions.

It always astonishes me when people complain about Bill Murphy on this site. He's a cop! So what? Your not going to light up a joint with him and your not going to talk about your unregistered mac 10 with him. Take his Shotgun and carbine classes and CCW and come to this site for the punctilio.

Marcus

HowardW56
01-01-2013, 7:48 PM
Maybe I missed it, but I did not see People v. Clark mentioned in this thread, kinda hard to argue that a loaded mag is not a loaded gun without it.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Defining_loaded_in_California#People_v._Clark


Bingo

HowardW56
01-01-2013, 7:59 PM
I have heard this before so I asked my friend who is an investigator for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office. He is a former LAPD police officer.

LAPD CRASH units (gang units) have been arresting people who have unloaded firearms but loaded magazines in the same vehicle. The DA's office has been charging them with felony possession of a loaded weapon. They used the legal fiction of "constructive possession" if the firearm and loaded magazine are together.

Apparently the DA's office asked for an Opinion Letter from the California Attorney General's office. I can't find the AG's opinion letter on this subject but:

"Although an official interpretation of a statute by the Attorney General is not controlling, it is entitled to great respect." (Thorning v. Hollister School Dist. (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1598, 1604.)

"Opinions of the Attorney General, while not binding, are entitled to great weight. [Citations.] In the absence of controlling authority, these opinions are persuasive 'since the legislature is presumed to be cognizant of that construction of the statute.' [Citation.] " (Napa Valley Educators' Assn. v. Napa Valley Unified School Dist.(1987) 194 Cal.App.3rd 243, 251.)

The CHP takes the opinion letters as gospel, since the California Attorney General is their boss. For all other jurisdictions, it up to them.

So now I don't load my mags before going to the range. You've got to weigh the benefits vs. the burdens.

ERRONEOUS! PROVE IT:mad: (the opinion letter regarding constuctive possesion of a loaded firearm)


I checked the AG's index https://oag.ca.gov/opinions/search?populate=loaded+magazine&=Search No such opinion.

It would be very odd to have the Attorney General publish an opinion that contradicts an appellate court decision.

Kid Stanislaus
01-01-2013, 8:03 PM
those are some high heels to be wearing to the range.

Especially since it is well known that criminals NEVER attack women wearing high heels!;) I urge people to wear their every day gitup when going to the range.

EDIT: Although I do recommend that BOTH sexes not wear shirts/blouses/tops that allow a hot case to drop in. I do base that recommendation on personal experience!

choprzrul
01-01-2013, 8:08 PM
Print off a copy of People v. Clark and deliver it to the range. Iquire as to whether their opinion supersedes the opinion of the court.

Perhaps Mr. Murphy is not familiar with the Clark decision. Email his office a pdf copy or a link.

Educate.

.

sully007
01-01-2013, 8:10 PM
Hey friend...your post is #27. Apparently you missed post #24 :D

And you missed post #30


Just Saying!

Librarian
01-01-2013, 8:10 PM
There is more than one dimension to a firearms class.

Providing incorrect legal information taints the rest of the class; it's a simple thing to correct.

People v Clark was 1996 - the 'magazine as loaded gun' error has been clear for 16 years.

FoxTrot87
01-01-2013, 8:12 PM
OP... we need more like you

Malmon
01-01-2013, 8:14 PM
Not all cops think like Bill Murphy. A couple of years back, I was at Insight Shooting Range in Artesia when the guy at the counter asked to check my ammo, he was taken aback when I showed him a bag full of loaded magazines. I am familiar with the owner and I kind of suggested if he can ask the two uniformed deputies who happened to be there if this was legal. They said of course, a loaded magazine is not the same as a loaded gun.

It doesn't matter how good Bill Murphy is at shooting his MP5, that doesn't make him infallible. His actions of spreading FUD are encouraging the false arrests of law abiding citizens.

Kid Stanislaus
01-01-2013, 8:15 PM
Can't people who've been arrested for "carrying a loaded gun" when it wasn't really loaded sue the Officer and the Department that falsely arrested them? It seems like this would be good way for Officers who don't know what they're doing to learn their lesson!

The officer does not have to pay, his agency does. So, unless the person in charge of the agency comes down on him he'll just keep on doing the same thing.

SwissFluCase
01-01-2013, 9:07 PM
The officer does not have to pay, his agency does. So, unless the person in charge of the agency comes down on him he'll just keep on doing the same thing.

As far as I know about these things...

...if the agency does not train their officers, then the agency is liable. More violations seems like bigger payouts for non compliance. If the agency trains the officers correctly, and the officers ignore the training, then they are personally liable.

If it is a civil rights lawsuit Calguns (or the citizen's counsel) gets paid.

Regards,


SwissFluCase

robcoe
01-01-2013, 9:24 PM
Valid argument but it always falls down to their house, their rules clause.

No, it dosn't.

I agree it can be their policy, but then they have to say it is their policy.

Being their policy does not in any way make it a felony.

speleogist
01-01-2013, 9:32 PM
Had a similar situation a while back. My house is 2 miles from my vineyard on a rural mostly county road. I usually lock a shotgun in the rack and grab a pistol in a lock box out of the safe when I leave the house every day for work. The wild life is pretty dangerous up here not to mention the drug dealers growing pot and making meth in the MidPen Open Space area behind us. I leave a magazine for the pistol and shells for the shotgun in the aftermarket lock box in my console. I'll make several trips back and forth every day. On one quick trip home, I was hit by another vehicle and since the other guy was heavily injured, the police came out to investigate. This day, I had left the shells in the caddy which were clearly visible through my open window.

The first LEA on the scene was local PD followed by CHP a few minutes later. Since the road winds in and out of city/county jurisdiction, the were both called. After dealing with the reports, both got in a pretty heated discussion about the shells in the caddy making the gun a loaded weapon. CHP was adamant that it was loaded and I should be hauled off. Local PD was equally adamant that the gun was not loaded. The CHP finally gave up and told PD that the problem was his and then sped off.

Afer having a racks in my vehicles for over 35 years, I have since removed them. I also installed a small safe at the vineyard to leave a shotgun there. No way am I going to be put in that situation again where my fate is left up to which LEA takes jurisdiction.

CHP is such a douchebag organization. Anyone know what the hell their problem is? In other states, the state troopers are usually the informed ones who know the laws and correct the local PDs and its a blessing when they come on the scene.

Just another thing wrong with this state.

speleogist
01-01-2013, 9:38 PM
He's a cop! So what? Your not going to light up a joint with him and your not going to talk about your unregistered mac 10 with him. Take his Shotgun and carbine classes and CCW and come to this site for the punctilio.

Marcus


Thank you for your insight that demonstrates how doing something completely legal is comparable to committing federal crimes depending on the perspective it is taken from.

10mm
01-01-2013, 10:14 PM
The heels were how should I put it, unconventional. All the less very easy on the eyes. :D

bwiese
01-01-2013, 10:22 PM
True.

That said, I point you to the old police saying: you may beat the rap , but you won't beat the ride.

And a few more 'rides' like that in a dept/county etc. gives us the magic 4 digits: "1983".

Paul S
01-01-2013, 10:46 PM
Did you not read post number 24 before you posted your reply?

Good catch...you got me. :D

DrDavid
01-01-2013, 10:50 PM
...Mr. Murphy has a 31 year law enforcement career. He spent 22 years in Huntington Beach as a Police Officer, has owned Firearms Training Associates for 15 years, and works with his daughter at Surefire as their Director of Training.
I took FTA's CCW class. The tactical training was great. A full day of shooting, learning how to holster/draw, fire, etc..

But, the classroom stuff was absolute crap. Apparently, according to Mr. Murphy, a CCW doesn't allow you to go in a GFSZ in CA... There were all sorts of gems from that class. I posted on it after I took the class. Here's the thread: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=551977

There's a whole lot of FUD in his class. Frankly, I think he needs to be educated. :oji:

SoCal Bob
01-01-2013, 10:53 PM
Next time anyone has a problem with CHP just ask them to check their own website: http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html

I will be traveling to California and want to carry my weapon. I currently have a concealed weapon permit. How can I legally transport my weapon while driving through the state?
California law does not recognize concealed weapon permits from other states; therefore, they would not be held valid. If you wish to transport a handgun during your California visit, it should be carried unloaded in a locked container. In the absence of a suitable container, you may secure the unloaded handgun in the locked trunk of a passenger car. Ammunition may be kept in the same container or trunk, but the handgun must remain unloaded with no rounds in the cylinder and no loaded magazines in the magazine well.

If you have additional questions, contact the California Department of Justice at 916-227-3703.

bwiese
01-01-2013, 10:56 PM
I took FTA's CCW class. The tactical training was great.... {snip}
But, the classroom stuff was absolute crap.
{snip}
There's a whole lot of FUD in his class. Frankly, I think he needs to be educated. :oji:

Great Sarah Silverman skit... traffic stop:

Officer: "Do you know why I'm standing here?"
Driver: "Because you got all Cs in high school?"

The worst part of this is this guy has the hubris to *train*. Imagine how misinformed he was while on duty.

glbtrottr
01-01-2013, 11:01 PM
Just what do you think you are doing?
You throw around logic & good sense at these boys and you are a gonna scare em right good ya know.;)

So...a little trip down logic lane. Let me get this straight:

Because...

If your fortunate enough to take a CCW or shooting class ... you will be well served.

...Murphy and Cheryl are nice people...

He was a cop when he was 19 ...would go out of his way to work nights so he could make felony arrests

...he likes making felony arrests and is not a desk cop, plus he was a cop since 19...

I found it refreshing to get if from a cops point of few.

...you like hearing the opinion or point of view of a cop...

He is a great trainer and he probably dosen't give a shaet about what people on this site think of his purported errors.

...he doesn't care what people think of his opinions, or interpretation of the law...

Good God the OP even admitted he was arrested for carrying by CHP although nothing came of it.

...you think people wrongfully arrested or detained more than once for ignorance on the part of law enforcement and the laws they're supposed to enforce is the innocent person's fault...presuming all people charged should be deemed guilty...

I want to know how to never talk to I cop while I'm carrying and if I do I want to know how to make it as short and sweet as possible.

...you believe that cops only go through people's cars based on how you talk to them...

In an Urban Rifle class I took from him there were cops taking the same class with select fire for their qualification for SWAT team. So we all learned at what distance full auto and bursts were appropriate. So you get the Gunsite script and the SWAT approach.

...in Urban Rifle classes he teaches Gunsite and Swat tactics...

At the end of a CCW class i took from him 7 yrs ago he wanted to show the class how chaotic a shoot situation can be. He had a local news film clip of him shooting an apparently drug crazed man attacking police with a large knife. This was taken from above by a news helicopter and there were 4 cops surrounding the guy IIRC. His MP5 burst downed the guy and went thru+thru without injuring any others around. It was very fast and very chaotic with cops running in all directions.

...he shows his own clips of him killing criminals while working for swat...

It always astonishes me when people complain about Bill Murphy on this site. He's a cop! So what? Your not going to light up a joint with him and your not going to talk about your unregistered mac 10 with him. Take his Shotgun and carbine classes and CCW and come to this site for the punctilio.

...You like his shotgun and carbine and CCW classes...

....and because of all of the positives above, you think it's OK for Bill Murphy to perpetuate teaching bad information and opinion as the law, even though the information is incorrect simply because law enforcement may not like it, agree with it, because he's a long term cop, a good teacher, teaches you swat and gunsite tactics in an urban rifle class while showing you clips of him killing bad guys...for all those reasons, it's OK to teach wrong information?

Got it. I just wanted to make sure we're on the same page.
:facepalm:

Lc17smp
01-01-2013, 11:27 PM
I went there on sat with my wife for the first time. All my mags (8) were loaded and they didnt say a word. They looked right at all of them. I would have said something if I had to listen to the felony bs.

rgraham
01-01-2013, 11:28 PM
So, if you do have a gun in a locked case in your vehicle, and you tell the officer that you do, does that mean you have to concede to a search of your locked case? Vehicle?

kantstudien
01-01-2013, 11:46 PM
So, if you do have a gun in a locked case in your vehicle, and you tell the officer that you do, does that mean you have to concede to a search of your locked case? Vehicle?

I believe so, because now he probable cause (your admission) to check the weapons to make sure they are unloaded.

GOEX FFF
01-02-2013, 12:54 AM
Great Sarah Silverman skit... traffic stop:

Officer: "Do you know why I'm standing here?"
Driver: "Because you got all Cs in high school?"

The worst part of this is this guy has the hubris to *train*. Imagine how misinformed he was while on duty.

That, and misinforming the ones who are still on duty.

Safety1st
01-02-2013, 1:15 AM
Cops will err on the side of caution. Always.

Actually in this case they are erring on the side of error.

Erring on the side of caution would mean verifing the law before making an arrest.

Anchors
01-02-2013, 2:06 AM
People v. Clark. Load your magazines and side-saddles all you want.
I don't really blame officers for not knowing every intricacy of California law (especially gun laws which are probably like 1% of the stuff they deal with daily).
I do blame the legislature for passing 700 new laws a year though.


However, if the range chooses to make it a policy that you cannot bring loaded mags to their range and must only load them on the firing line, they certainly have the right to do so. Their house, their rules.

mrdd
01-02-2013, 3:07 AM
However, if the range chooses to make it a policy that you cannot bring loaded mags to their range and must only load them on the firing line, they certainly have the right to do so. Their house, their rules.

Of course they do have that right. However, it is pure FUD to say it is against the law.

Bill Carson
01-02-2013, 3:50 AM
Not all cops think like Bill Murphy. A couple of years back, I was at Insight Shooting Range in Artesia when the guy at the counter asked to check my ammo, he was taken aback when I showed him a bag full of loaded magazines. I am familiar with the owner and I kind of suggested if he can ask the two uniformed deputies who happened to be there if this was legal. They said of course, a loaded magazine is not the same as a loaded gun.

It doesn't matter how good Bill Murphy is at shooting his MP5, that doesn't make him infallible. His actions of spreading FUD are encouraging the false arrests of law abiding citizens.

I roll in there with loaded mags all the time. Just not in my range bag with my guns. I usually have one or two HD mags in my pocket that I have removed from my range back while taking it out of the trunk and I walk the 50 ft to the front door. Then I leave with the loaded mags back in my range bag and back to my trunk.

victor1echo
01-02-2013, 3:57 AM
.You like his shotgun and carbine and CCW classes...

....and because of all of the positives above, you think it's OK for Bill Murphy to perpetuate teaching bad information and opinion as the law, even though the information is incorrect simply because law enforcement may not like it, agree with it, because he's a long term cop, a good teacher, teaches you swat and gunsite tactics in an urban rifle class while showing you clips of him killing bad guys...for all those reasons, it's OK to teach wrong information?

Got it. I just wanted to make sure we're on the same page.

A cop at 19 --that's one brainwashed cop who never learned to think for himself, and only follow policy. The last guy I'd want to take a class from.

robcoe
01-02-2013, 5:12 AM
People v. Clark. Load your magazines and side-saddles all you want.
I don't really blame officers for not knowing every intricacy of California law (especially gun laws which are probably like 1% of the stuff they deal with daily).I do blame the legislature for passing 700 new laws a year though.


However, if the range chooses to make it a policy that you cannot bring loaded mags to their range and must only load them on the firing line, they certainly have the right to do so. Their house, their rules.

I do, if ignorance of the law is no excuse for me if I break it without knowing, I see no reasion it should be an excuse for people who are PAID to know it.

If an officer arrests someone for a "crime" that does not exist he is not compitent and should not be wearing a uniform.

In the case of this Murphy guy, if I were field time I would be demanding a refund for anything I paid him since he was obviously spreading BS.

choprzrul
01-02-2013, 6:11 AM
We are platinum members of this range and love the facility. They have some people working there that are truly very nice.


http://www.fieldtimetargetandtraining.com/images/building_full.jpg


That said, They have a policy of all weapons being cased (including specifically long guns) as well as being chamber flagged.

More than one occasion, the helpful (and the not so helpful) people of the range have been fairly forceful with their statement regarding bringing loaded magazines into the range as them being considered "loaded guns".

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DISCUSS THIS OR EDUCATE THEM, as they seem to be consistently and repeatedly passing bum scoop and being overly aggressive with some of their customers.

The first time, the chubbier of the helpers took on a very strong tone, virtually implying that we were committing a felony. I asked him for a cite, and he said he didn't have it, but insisted that it was a felony. I dismissed it as his being ignorant.

Yesterday while at the range, the girls and I walked in and ...yet again...the same conversation is had, as we usually keep our magazines loaded in our cases.

No less than 2 people on staff at Field Time stated that the mags being loaded were "felonies" in the state of California. Again, I asked for a cite, and none was provided. One nice older fellow finally shed some light on the source of this information.

Apparently, Field Time gets their CCW training from a gentleman named "Bill Murphy".

The gentleman said that it was not a Penal Code or case law, but a "Vehicle Code" in the State of California. He read the exact vehicle code cite, he said, and read it in the blue book, "how to own guns and stay out of jail in California".

Hm. I own the book.

OK, here's my problem: I've actually taken a ride to Orange County Jail courtesy of CHP charging me with the same ignorant police offense: Possessing a concealed loaded weapon. Case dismissed, and screw the CHP officer for wasting my time and money.

When pulled over, long story short, the CHP officer called a locked safe with an unloaded Kimber 1911 with no rounds in the chamber and no magazine attached as a "Loaded Weapon", verified by the Field Training Officer and Sergeant that evening.

Another time, Irvine PD, on a separate incident, decided that a shotgun in my trunk with a shell caddy with rounds in it, though no rounds in the chamber, was a loaded weapon. I spoke with the Captain of the area who actually wrote the 12031 policy, and he was equally as ignorant while being open to a training opportunity, which we never followed up with as an organization.

In other words, I have a bit of a sore spot against this business of a "loaded magazine" being a felony.

I called Jason Davis, but alas...the holidays are here.

Upon finding out who Mr. Bill Murphy was, I tried reaching out to the lad.

Apparently, Mr. Murphy has a 31 year law enforcement career. He spent 22 years in Huntington Beach as a Police Officer, has owned Firearms Training Associates for 15 years, and works with his daughter at Surefire as their Director of Training.

http://www.surefireinstitute.com/images/instructors/william_murphy.jpg

http://www.tactical-life.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pocket-4.jpg

www.linkedin.com/pub/bill-murphy/30/38a/79b

When I called Surefire, his daughter, Christen Durham, answered - she also works at Surefire, and is in charge of contracts at the institute and other departments there. She also mentioned that Murphy had taught classes under their Firearms Training Associates business as opposed to Surefire.

www.linkedin.com/pub/cristen-durham/35/89b/83b

http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrink_200_200/p/1/000/11f/10a/0977e5f.jpg
I shared my experience at Field Time, and she defended the statements.

"I'm in Wyoming right now, and my dad is out of the country, but you bet - we have lots of judges and police officers who go through our courses and yes, many judges interpret the law to read that a loaded magazine, without a firearm, is considered a loaded firearm".

Interesting.

According to 12031(g) of the Penal code:



So, their argument is that "ATTACHED IN ANY MANNER" (i.e. being in the proximate area of and touching" constitutes a loaded weapon. Nothing like new and interesting ways of accusing honest citizens of a crime.

What a lot of these people seem to miss, in my opinion, is this, from our own Calguns Wiki:



Unless I'm wrong, I can't imagine that somehow the law has changed to deem a loaded magazine a "loaded firearm" as both Cristen and Bill Murphy seem to teach. She quickly reverted to open carry being outlawed, and changes in the law, but the issue of loaded magazines being firearms stayed affirmed and she stated they certainly teach this. Your thoughts?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8444/7984815150_4ace26617c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32271230@N08/7984815150/) Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/32271230@N08/7984815150/) by [/url]


Me wonders if the Murphy in this story is of the same lineage as [URL="http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=322376"]the Murphy in this story (http://www.flickr.com/people/32271230@N08/)? It sure seems like a similar mentality between the Murphy's.

.

live2suck
01-02-2013, 6:39 AM
Maybe I missed it, but I did not see People v. Clark mentioned in this thread, kinda hard to argue that a loaded mag is not a loaded gun without it.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Defining_loaded_in_California#People_v._Clark

I just cite People v. Clark every time I go in there, it shuts them up fairly quickly. Then, when they argue what a PITA a wrongful arrest is, I laugh and say I could use the payout.

trevorlc
01-02-2013, 7:12 AM
Sad that legislators have people so afraid of breaking the overly complex and often unnecessary gun laws that this sort of thing happens..

It sounds like in this case it all started with a specific firearms instructor, it would seem to me that the appropriate steps when teaching regarding this and some of the other "grey" area firearms laws is to teach students the actual law and how actual court cases have applied it but then offer some "best practices" and point out that these will help prevent you from running into any issues, but are not technically law yet.

The gun laws are overly complex, and seems to always be changing but as an teacher/instructor its their job to teach accurately but also practically and identify the difference. In any other education situation no one would find it acceptable for a teacher/instructor to be presenting false information as fact because its easier, why should it be here? Think about it how pissed would you be as a student, or a parent of a student if you found out something like this was going on with regards to any other subject?

Sniper3142
01-02-2013, 7:28 AM
So, if you do have a gun in a locked case in your vehicle, and you tell the officer that you do, does that mean you have to concede to a search of your locked case? Vehicle?

If you make the mistake of telling a cop that there is a firearm in the vehicle, they have the authority to check that weapon to ensure it is properly stored for transport. They are not automatically also allowed to search the entire vehicle.

Because of all these stupid laws, ignorant DAs, & arrogant cops, I never admit to having firearms in my vehicle. :mad:

When asked, JUST SAY NO!

tcrpe
01-02-2013, 7:37 AM
I have no idea who this Murphy clown is, by he certainly is tacticool!

PM720
01-02-2013, 9:31 PM
Any coincidence that they don't want you to bring in your mags pre-loaded and the fact that they charge by the hour? :confused: :facepalm:

Scott

Realitychecker
01-02-2013, 9:41 PM
The sad thing about all these so called laws is they are all illegal. Your right to carry any type of firearm including full automatic weapons loaded and ready at all times is your birthright. And anyone who would deny you your civil birthright is a criminal. Just sayin.

epilepticninja
01-02-2013, 10:13 PM
I have a CCW, so I don't have to sweat this mess. But damn, how soon can I move to AZ where this kind of garbage is moot?

madjack956
01-02-2013, 10:15 PM
It's hogwash.

However, given that the people tasked to enforce firearm laws don't know the laws themselves, sometimes it's better to err on the side of caution to avoid aggravation.

Well I understand its easier to go along so to avoid trouble but, thats a bad road to go down, especially if they keep coming up with their own rules and convincing everyone its law.

Where would it end...

Sillyguy
01-02-2013, 10:24 PM
man i thought this was the best range out there....i guess not

Sillyguy
01-02-2013, 10:24 PM
man i thought this was the best range out there....i guess not

randian
01-03-2013, 11:10 AM
Can't people who've been arrested for "carrying a loaded gun" when it wasn't really loaded sue the Officer and the Department that falsely arrested them?
Technically, yes. You'd never get past a Motion to Dismiss (Qualified Immunity), though.

sarabellum
01-03-2013, 12:24 PM
glbtrttr,
I suspect that the range does not want you to have pre-loaded magazines in order to force you to expend time reloading- just like Scott said. You could just as easily have your firearm locked in one case and your mags locked in another, without any plausible argument that the ammunition is in contact with the firearm.

You may want to send a courtesy letter and copy of the following case to the range owners:

Given the examples are all consistent with an intent to use the common meaning of "loaded," it follows the Legislature's use of the phrase "attached in any manner" to the firearm was intended to encompass a situation where a shell or cartridge might be attached to a firearm or "loaded" for firing by some unconventional method. The phrase does not demonstrate a clear Legislative intent to deem a firearm loaded no matter how a shell is attached to a firearm; in particular, it does not indicate a clear intent to deem a gun "loaded" when the ammunition, as here, is in a storage compartment which is not equivalent to either a magazine or clip and from which the ammunition cannot be fired.

People v. Clark (http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/45/1147.html) (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1147, 1150 (emphasis added).

As for qualified immunity for false arrest as urged by one member, a qualified immunity conclusion is premature. Qualified immunity is just that qualified. Under 42 USC section 1983 local law enforcement officers are not liable for violating a person's civil rights while acting under color of law, "unless their actions violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Weaver v. State of California (http://law.justia.com/cases/california/caapp4th/63/188.html) (1998) 63 Cal. App. 4th 188, 198. The clearly established right is that of possessing a firearm, locked in a container in your auto with with no ammunition in the chamber as stated in People v. Clark. Whether the officer reasonably knows or should know is where the officers' case would hinge. Carry copies of People v. Clark in a folder with you when transporting your arms properly in your auto. If stopped by an officer, hand People v. Clark to him/her and the watch commander. That should end the matter. If they proceed to take adverse action, they do so at their own peril of liability for false arrest as they know of your right to transport in a locked container as you expressly put them on notice of that right.

Those are my humble thoughts on the subject. Glbttr, thank you for sharing this story with us. I will vote by not going to that or any other range that bars loaded magazines to force me to waste valuable range time re-loading.

Curtis
01-03-2013, 12:34 PM
I have taken many classes at FTA with and without Bill involved. I have a great deal of respect and positive to say about the class. When it comes to laws, it should come from a trusted lawyer vs. a trainer, teacher, or business policy.

As for this company, it seems that it is their policy. The hired someone to provide their input on company policies. Stating that it is a crime is the only thing I would consider wrong. Accept it or move on.

ray90813
01-03-2013, 12:40 PM
I go to Field Time all the time and although they're unloaded vs loaded magazine personal opinion is a bit annoying, I make it a point to just unload my mags before going there. As far as wasting time loading, c'mon, how long does it really take to load while you're there? Never had them give me a hard time for being there longer than they specify.

1BigPea
01-03-2013, 1:02 PM
Next time anyone has a problem with CHP just ask them to check their own website: http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html

I will be traveling to California and want to carry my weapon. I currently have a concealed weapon permit. How can I legally transport my weapon while driving through the state?
California law does not recognize concealed weapon permits from other states; therefore, they would not be held valid. If you wish to transport a handgun during your California visit, it should be carried unloaded in a locked container. In the absence of a suitable container, you may secure the unloaded handgun in the locked trunk of a passenger car. Ammunition may be kept in the same container or trunk, but the handgun must remain unloaded with no rounds in the cylinder and no loaded magazines in the magazine well.

If you have additional questions, contact the California Department of Justice at 916-227-3703.

THIS!!!

I would have a field day with CHP if they pulled the loaded card on me.

madjack956
01-03-2013, 2:12 PM
So, if you have a revolver with either loose rounds or a box of rounds in the bag, would that be considered loaded too? LOL

RomanDad
01-03-2013, 2:35 PM
I have heard this before so I asked my friend who is an investigator for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office. He is a former LAPD police officer.

LAPD CRASH units (gang units) have been arresting people who have unloaded firearms but loaded magazines in the same vehicle. The DA's office has been charging them with felony possession of a loaded weapon. They used the legal fiction of "constructive possession" if the firearm and loaded magazine are together.

Apparently the DA's office asked for an Opinion Letter from the California Attorney General's office. I can't find the AG's opinion letter on this subject but:

"Although an official interpretation of a statute by the Attorney General is not controlling, it is entitled to great respect." (Thorning v. Hollister School Dist. (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1598, 1604.)

"Opinions of the Attorney General, while not binding, are entitled to great weight. [Citations.] In the absence of controlling authority, these opinions are persuasive 'since the legislature is presumed to be cognizant of that construction of the statute.' [Citation.] " (Napa Valley Educators' Assn. v. Napa Valley Unified School Dist.(1987) 194 Cal.App.3rd 243, 251.)

You know what's entitled to even greater respect, and IS binding? A published opinion from the California Court of Appeals. Which is What People v. Clark is.... Its no coincidence that the losing party in Clark was- Wait for it- No other than the California Attorney General. So a contradictory opinion letter from him on the subject is actually NOT entitled any respect, let alone "great respect", because it has been ruled to be incorrect by the second highest Court in the state.

omnitravis
01-03-2013, 3:04 PM
"A firearm is deemed loaded when there is a live cartridge or shell in, or attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm. A muzzle-loading firearm is deemed loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder. (Penal Code 12031(g).)

For the purposes of Penal Code section 12023 (commission or attempted commission of a felony while armed with a loaded firearm), a firearm is deemed loaded when both the firearm and the unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged from the firearm are in the immediate possession of the same person."
On page 31.
http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/forms/Cfl2007.pdf?
http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/travel
So, that definition doesn't apply if you aren't committing a felony?

To add:
"Target shooters at target ranges and shooting club members while hunting on the
club premises, provided possession and use of the firearm is otherwise lawful."
From the exemptions, also on page 30. So you are exempt from the transporting a loaded gun law while at a range. You should tell them that.

Librarian
01-03-2013, 4:44 PM
For the purposes of Penal Code section 12023 (commission or attempted commission of a felony while armed with a loaded firearm), a firearm is deemed loaded when both the firearm and the unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged from the firearm are in the immediate possession of the same person."
On page 30.
http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/forms/Cfl2007.pdf?
http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/travel
So, that definition doesn't apply if you aren't committing a felony?


Correct.

RickD427
01-03-2013, 6:27 PM
"A firearm is deemed loaded when there is a live cartridge or shell in, or attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm. A muzzle-loading firearm is deemed loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder. (Penal Code 12031(g).)

For the purposes of Penal Code section 12023 (commission or attempted commission of a felony while armed with a loaded firearm), a firearm is deemed loaded when both the firearm and the unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged from the firearm are in the immediate possession of the same person."
On page 30.
http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/forms/Cfl2007.pdf?
http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/travel
So, that definition doesn't apply if you aren't committing a felony?

To add:
"Target shooters at target ranges and shooting club members while hunting on the
club premises, provided possession and use of the firearm is otherwise lawful."
From the exemptions, also on page 30. So you are exempt from the transporting a loaded gun law while at a range. You should tell them that.

Excellent Posting. You've just highlighted one of the idiosyncrasies of California's law. There are actually two places in the law where a weapon is deemed "loaded" if the weapon and ammunition are in the possession of the same individual - Section 12023 as you have pointed out, and also in section 171e (Relating to the carrying of weapons in specified state buildings). In all other cases People v. Clark applies.

Unfortunately, a lot of cops read sections 171e and 12023 without keeping in mind their limited application. That's probably where we get the "weapon and ammunition together" mindset.

jccam
01-03-2013, 8:07 PM
I would have a field day with CHP if they pulled the loaded card on me.

This is a great thread and I don't want to hijack it, but this comment made me think about what important documents I might want to have in the car when transporting firearms. For starters, I can think of:

1. CA Semiauto Ban (AW) ID Flowchart
2. CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart
3. CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
4. copy of the CHP web site quoted above (with gun section marked)
5. copy of People v. Clark (maybe abbreviated, with key sections called out)
6. my attorney's card

#1 to 3 would be useful even if you don't own any of those types of guns--you never know what might be useful. Anything else? Or maybe just a copy of "How to Own a Gun and Stay of Jail...", with stickies on important sections?

Apologies if this should be a new thread.

jccam
01-03-2013, 8:07 PM
I would have a field day with CHP if they pulled the loaded card on me.

This is a great thread and I don't want to hijack it, but this comment made me think about what important documents I might want to have in the car when transporting firearms. For starters, I can think of:

1. CA Semiauto Ban (AW) ID Flowchart
2. CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart
3. CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
4. copy of the CHP web site quoted above (with gun section marked)
5. copy of People v. Clark (maybe abbreviated, with key sections called out)
6. my attorney's card

#1 to 3 would be useful even if you don't own any of those types of guns--you never know what might be useful. Anything else? Or maybe just a copy of "How to Own a Gun and Stay of Jail...", with stickies on important sections?

Apologies if this should be a new thread.

EWILKE
01-03-2013, 9:33 PM
Bill murphy is a respected man in law enforcement and the firearm community and you are taking the word of a minimum wage gun range kid that he is teaching this.Have some respect for people before you run your mouth.
you sound like a person looking for trouble and you keep finding it.

tcrpe
01-03-2013, 9:41 PM
Bill murphy is a respected man in law enforcement and the firearm community and you are taking the word of a minimum wage gun range kid that he is teaching this.Have some respect for people before you run your mouth.
you sound like a person looking for trouble and you keep finding it.

I guess you're saying his daughter lied, too?

At any rate, he is Mr. Tacticool!





BTW, exactly what kind of "trouble"? Inquiring minds want to know!

tcrpe
01-03-2013, 9:42 PM
Also license, insurance and registration.



This is a great thread and I don't want to hijack it, but this comment made me think about what important documents I might want to have in the car when transporting firearms. For starters, I can think of:

1. CA Semiauto Ban (AW) ID Flowchart
2. CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart
3. CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
4. copy of the CHP web site quoted above (with gun section marked)
5. copy of People v. Clark (maybe abbreviated, with key sections called out)
6. my attorney's card

#1 to 3 would be useful even if you don't own any of those types of guns--you never know what might be useful. Anything else? Or maybe just a copy of "How to Own a Gun and Stay of Jail...", with stickies on important sections?

Apologies if this should be a new thread.

Ninety
01-03-2013, 9:43 PM
While I agree that some of the comments here have been a bit negative.... I don't think the consensus is that Murphy is a bad person.. Just mistaken of the legal interpretation of "loaded gun" . Given his long history of civil service and his position as an instructor I would expect different.

I understand better safe then sorry, but the law is the law as supported by the Courts in People v Clark. I think there have been a couple people who have confirmed that this is what he is teaching and what the counter people are telling the customers.

minimum wage gun range kid? Not sure what to say to that.





carry on...

eaglemike
01-03-2013, 9:50 PM
Bill murphy is a respected man in law enforcement and the firearm community and you are taking the word of a minimum wage gun range kid that he is teaching this.Have some respect for people before you run your mouth.
you sound like a person looking for trouble and you keep finding it.
Did you notice (above in this thread) that a person on this forum had a similar experience while taking a class from Murphy?
Please see post #74, and the link therein.

glbtrottr
01-04-2013, 12:07 AM
Bill murphy is a respected man in law enforcement and the firearm community



.... so because in your opinion since he gets your respect, it is OK for him to teach people about laws that don't exist and instill fear in His customers? Kind of like...because he is or has been a cop, he should get a pass?

Ok...

you are taking the word of a minimum wage gun range kid that he is teaching this.

Err, no, I am quoting chapter and verse what 3 separate employees at field time stated and quoted, some of who present themselves as former law enforcement, none are "kids" (unless you're in your nineties, since the men I referred to are in either their forties or sixties), moreover, their wage is immaterial and not worth even a retort.

Are you saying somehow that people on minimum wage have comprehension problems and in your opinion they should shut up, and listen to Mr Respectable cop, the better citizen?

[QUOTE=EWILKE;10104170] have some respect for people before you run your mouth.

Huh? You strike me as a bully in the schoolyard...show respect? Run my mouth? Is this a gangsters and coppers movie? Are you part of the Sopranos cast? Are you channeling Paulie Walnuts here? Or are you in law enforcement and this is how you talk in every day life?

I have to give you the benefit of the doubt and think you're kidding here...specially since we are discussing serious laws, serious arrest potential, am innocent people unnecessarily going to jail over the ignorance of law enforcement.


you sound like a person looking for trouble and you keep finding it.

I guess you're not kidding and you really talk like that. Let me run my mouth more...your phraseology reminds me of the kind of individual that demands women get back in the kitchen, or if things aren't done "just your way" one is looking for trouble.

Your statement is Conjecture not based in evidence. Please justify your statement.

Being pulled over and being charged for a locked pistol in a locked safe with magazines in the same safe is looking for trouble? What if this was your mother or wife? (Hint: it was my wife's pistol in her car)

Or...taking a nap at a park and ride and having LE notice a shotgun through the inaccessible trunk of a car is looking for trouble? (Hint: the chronicled incident resulted in a formal apology and an offer for retraining as oppose to my pursuing a cause I action)

Wondering what your kids and wife are like...if you have them

tcrpe
01-04-2013, 6:03 AM
Wondering what your kids and wife are like...if you have them

I found the goombah's post to be odd, too.

TeddyBallgame
01-04-2013, 9:26 AM
I've been to the Insight Range in Artesia a few times...none of them ever said anything about my loaded magazines sitting next to my handguns, in the same case...the first few times there, they were more concerned about what ammo I was bringing in, versus, how I was transporting it...now, I guess they know me well enough, don't even check my case or ammo anymore

I'd like to try this new place in Stanton, don't get to use my Marlin 30-30 very often anymore, and, from what I've read, they do allow rifles usage...not sure if I want to deal with explaining to anyone the manner in which I transport my firearms

As far as LE goes, I would HOPE the laws for transporting with loaded magazines in the same case were crystal clear by now, yet, we still get instances of people having to retain legal counsel, just to prove they haven't broken any laws...I still find that aspect of the system unacceptable...in this day and age of pulling up information, verifying a law should be a non issue for any LEO...as one poster already said, its not erring on the side of caution, its erring on the side of error...being cautious with the arrest would involve verifying the law beforehand...there are way too many avenues of getting the right information, this should NEVER happen

As far as Mr. Murphy, don't know the man, haven't heard the words come out of his mouth...if, he is indeed, teaching as such, it would be nice to hear his side of the training...it is somewhat amazing how someone, even in a classroom setting can have his actual words misunderstood, or, misinterpreted...so, for now, I'll wait to see if the OP gets a chance to get Mr. Murphys side of his teachings, not just his daughters

Seiran
01-04-2013, 10:21 AM
I've taken several classes at FTA, all of them with Murph, and every time this "loaded gun" thing was brought up he flat out said it was bull**** and the cops are misinformed. And I've never heard his daughter's or anyone else on his staff say anything different.

Just my experience though.

CycloSteve
01-04-2013, 10:35 AM
From the CHP website FAQ, a loaded magazine can be in the same locked container. See half-way down. I keep a printed copy of this in my vehicles.

http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html

I will be traveling to California and want to carry my weapon. I currently have a concealed weapon permit. How can I legally transport my weapon while driving through the state?

California law does not recognize concealed weapon permits from other states; therefore, they would not be held valid. If you wish to transport a handgun during your California visit, it should be carried unloaded in a locked container. In the absence of a suitable container, you may secure the unloaded handgun in the locked trunk of a passenger car. Ammunition may be kept in the same container or trunk, but the handgun must remain unloaded with no rounds in the cylinder and no loaded magazines in the magazine well.

If you have additional questions, contact the California Department of Justice at 916-227-3703.

gregorio
01-04-2013, 11:09 AM
From the CHP website FAQ, a loaded magazine can be in the same locked container. See half-way down. I keep a printed copy of this in my vehicles.

http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html

I've now added this printout to my list of must have info in every auto I own plus my range bags.

Katch
01-04-2013, 11:22 AM
Next time anyone has a problem with CHP just ask them to check their own website: http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html

I will be traveling to California and want to carry my weapon. I currently have a concealed weapon permit. How can I legally transport my weapon while driving through the state?
California law does not recognize concealed weapon permits from other states; therefore, they would not be held valid. If you wish to transport a handgun during your California visit, it should be carried unloaded in a locked container. In the absence of a suitable container, you may secure the unloaded handgun in the locked trunk of a passenger car. Ammunition may be kept in the same container or trunk, but the handgun must remain unloaded with no rounds in the cylinder and no loaded magazines in the magazine well.

If you have additional questions, contact the California Department of Justice at 916-227-3703.

Good Reference

YORCHI117
01-04-2013, 11:37 AM
I just wanted to add that chicks in heels shooting guns are the hottest thing in the world...I'd post a pic of the wifey doing the same but she'd object to it lol

and I was also told that keeping a loaded magazine inside the locked case even though it's not in the gun is a felony unless I have a CCW. This happened to me at "The Gun Range" in Sacramento off of Watt. The guy at the range came to clear our guns and when I opened my locked handgun case he saw the magazines in there and he asked me if I had a CCW. He explained nicely that unless I have my CCW I can't keep loaded magazines in the same container as the guns. I didn't argue with him, I just said oh okay I'll look into it and went on.

I think it's better to be on the safe side so in the future I'll just keep the magazines in another container or in a different pocket in my rifle bag. The only one I'd be worried about is the shotgun because I have one of those side saddles on the buttstock holding 5 shells.

glbtrottr
01-04-2013, 11:58 AM
I just wanted to add that chicks in heels shooting guns are the hottest thing in the world..

I'll let them know :)

The only one I'd be worried about is the shotgun because I have one of those side saddles on the buttstock holding 5 shells.

That is the exact holding of People vs Clark - a shotgun caddy on the buttstock cannot be considered to be loaded unless there's one in the chamber.

Katch
01-04-2013, 12:17 PM
and I was also told that keeping a loaded magazine inside the locked case even though it's not in the gun is a felony unless I have a CCW. This happened to me at "The Gun Range" in Sacramento off of Watt. The guy at the range came to clear our guns and when I opened my locked handgun case he saw the magazines in there and he asked me if I had a CCW. He explained nicely that unless I have my CCW I can't keep loaded magazines in the same container as the guns. I didn't argue with him, I just said oh okay I'll look into it and went on.

The Gun Room freaks out about this too.

GRP17
01-04-2013, 12:21 PM
I've now added this printout to my list of must have info in every auto I own plus my range bags.

I do as well :D

johnny1290
01-04-2013, 8:22 PM
I forgot I had a printout of that in my paperwork. Thanks for reminding me! Not that I keep loaded mags with my guns. Since when do police have to follow the law.

tcrpe
01-04-2013, 9:04 PM
Whew, at least the threats have stopped.

I've been looking over my shoulder all day.

:rofl2:

Tarn_Helm
01-04-2013, 9:23 PM
. . . That said, They have a policy of all weapons being cased (including specifically long guns) as well as being chamber flagged. . . .


Just look the folks straight in the eye and tell them: "It is a felony for you to tell me that a particular act is a felony when it is not."

Then tell them to look up that code themselves, and go back to what you are doing.
:D

fizux
01-04-2013, 10:31 PM
Just look the folks straight in the eye and tell them: "It is a felony for you to tell me that a particular act is a felony when it is not."

Then tell them to look up that code themselves, and go back to what you are doing.
:D

Actually, it is only a misdemeanor. B&P 6125.
Occasionally that ends the argument; the other 80% of people misquoting the law are too stupid to get it.

MattyB
01-04-2013, 11:30 PM
The Gun Room freaks out about this too.

Then go to The Gun Range on Watt and Business 80. Im nothing but impressed there.

The rapid fire permission is worth the price of admission (which isnt expensive at all).

Regarding the rest of the BS. I know two things, the LEOs arrest and detain and the Judge judges. If you are in the right and you know it, don't be afraid to go to jail. 8/10 times you wont go, they are hoping that youll give them a foot in the door. The 2/10, well deal with it. I have personally been jailed falsely and was released later that day. It sucks but it beats saying something stupid or anything at all that WILL be held against you.

Remember this..

If pulled over, stop in a well lit area with no traffic. If its on the freeway, slow down, put your right turnsignal on and motion that you are aware of the siren and you are getting off the freeway.

Hands on the wheel, dont move around while you are waiting for contact with them.

Do not get out your ID, registration or insurance until they ask. I was given a seat belt ticket 9 years ago cause I took my belt off to get my paperwork out before asked for it. Seeing I didnt have a belt on when he walked up, I was ticketed for that AND THAT ALONE!!

If questioned say YES or NO and not much else. Dont plea or try to make an excuse. Its up to you if you tell them if you know why you were stopped.

DONT ARGUE!! Even if the LEO is wrong, it doesnt FKN matter. Arguing will progress a situation that can be short and sweet. Take it up with the Judge NOT THE COP.

If you are asked to step out of your car...

Roll up the windows
Lock the car when you get out and shut the door
Take the keys with you

Since they cant get in your car...

DO NOT CONSENT TO A SEARCH!!!! I cannot stress this enough.

Even if they say you are going to jail if they cant search your vehicle..

DO NOT CONSENT TO A SEARCH!!!

They will need a warrant or probable cause at this point or they will have to let you go. If they get the warrant you will be waiting, if they break in so be it and beyond that IT IS OUT OF YOUR HANDS! STAY QUIET!

Whatever they find in the car. STAY QUIET!

Whatever they ask. STAY QUIET!

If they handcuff you and take you to jail. STAY QUIET!

You will be processed, finger printed, mug shots, holding cell.

You wont get your phone call till you are charged so dont expect anything until then.

If you are questioned, ASK FOR A LAWYER AND STAY QUIET!

Otherwise they will let you go.

By the way.. I was let go, so I have some real world experience THREE TIMES. One time I was actually guilty (not gun related) and was let go because I kept my mouth shut. 9/10 times the person that is being detained incriminates themselves by trying to talk their way out of things.

So remember..

DO AS THEY ASK WHEN STOPPED
REFUSE TO SEARCH
SHUT UP

Tarn_Helm
01-04-2013, 11:55 PM
Actually, it is only a misdemeanor. B&P 6125.
Occasionally that ends the argument; the other 80% of people misquoting the law are too stupid to get it.

If it is part of their organization's policy to tell people that, then the employer and employees are conspiring to commit a misdemeanor--which is a felony!

182 PC

:D

GrizFyrFyter
01-06-2013, 11:48 AM
Actually, it is only a misdemeanor. B&P 6125.
Occasionally that ends the argument; the other 80% of people misquoting the law are too stupid to get it.

All that says is:


6125. No person shall practice law in California unless the person
is an active member of the State Bar



Nvm. I see what you did there.

Tripper
01-06-2013, 1:59 PM
If it is part of their organization's policy to tell people that, then the employer and employees are conspiring to commit a misdemeanor--which is a felony!

182 PC

:D

I'll refrain, cuz that's actually funny

Tripper
01-06-2013, 2:02 PM
Excellent Posting. You've just highlighted one of the idiosyncrasies of California's law. There are actually two places in the law where a weapon is deemed "loaded" if the weapon and ammunition are in the possession of the same individual - Section 12023 as you have pointed out, and also in section 171e (Relating to the carrying of weapons in specified state buildings). In all other cases People v. Clark applies.

Unfortunately, a lot of cops read sections 171e and 12023 without keeping in mind their limited application. That's probably where we get the "weapon and ammunition together" mindset.

That and it's taught that way in the academy
Or is I hear anyway