PDA

View Full Version : Concealed Carry


God Bless The Mauser
08-28-2007, 10:50 PM
I was going to post on the other concealed carry thread but it was locked. Anyways adding to it, why should there be an age limit on it? I was at high school the other day and we were locked down because of a threatening individual with a gun. I did not like the fact of sitting there feeling like a fish in a barrel. I don't like the fact that I'm not allowed to defend my self in any way, shape or form, period. I'm 17 so is there any possible way I could get a permit or is that off limits completely just because of my age?

Is there any orgonizations that are really working to make it easier to get a concealed carry permit here in CA? If so who? I wan't to get involved and make a difference.

Zhukov
08-29-2007, 12:25 AM
I'm personally happy with the current age rules in place. Mainly due to the fact that many 17 year olds I've met aren't very mature. I'm only 23, but I've changed a whole TON since I was 17.

I'm not saying all 17 year olds are immature, but I personally feel the majority are. Immaturity + Firearms = not a very good combo.

jjperl
08-29-2007, 12:44 AM
+100 on that

bulgron
08-29-2007, 12:56 AM
Is there any orgonizations that are really working to make it easier to get a concealed carry permit here in CA? If so who? I wan't to get involved and make a difference.

As far as I know, the answer to this is 'no'. There's a lot of people who want there to be a political movement, but no one is leading the charge. Certainly there's no actual organization, other than people milling around wondering what to do.

You'd think the NRA would get involved, but I guess there's more money to be made in never making any progress on CCW reform, than in actually producing a reform movement.

If Parker/Heller gets to SCOTUS and we win, and the 2A gets incorporated under the 14A, I'm going to go talk to the ACLU. Dealing with civil liberty issues that have been incorporated under the 14th is what those guys do, and they're really good at it too.

If we can get the ACLU on our side, that's a huge win. It would mean massive cognitive dissonance for the antis (who are usually liberal and pro-ACLU), plus the ACLU actually produces results.

This is not a pipe dream, btw. The ACLU HAS taken gun rights cases in the past, but always because they involve the parts of the BoR that have been incorporated.

Glock22Fan
08-29-2007, 1:40 PM
I was going to post on the other concealed carry thread but it was locked. Anyways adding to it, why should there be an age limit on it? I was at high school the other day and we were locked down because of a threatening individual with a gun. I did not like the fact of sitting there feeling like a fish in a barrel. I don't like the fact that I'm not allowed to defend my self in any way, shape or form, period. I'm 17 so is there any possible way I could get a permit or is that off limits completely just because of my age?

Is there any orgonizations that are really working to make it easier to get a concealed carry permit here in CA? If so who? I wan't to get involved and make a difference.

Personally, there are a (very) few 17-year olds that I would trust with a handgun in a stressful situation, and a bunch of 27 year olds that I wouldn't. It's always hard to define how old someone should be for any purpose, and best to err on the safe side when it is something as potentially serious as having a weapon.

Having said this, there are things that schools/colleges can do to make people safer. As far as I know, very few schools or colleges have done these simple things, though I believe one state has made moves in this direction.

The first thing is that classrooms and other common areas (dining rooms, libraries etc.) should be capable of being securely barricaded to keep people out. Students and professors attempting to block the access doors with their bodies shouldn't be necessary.

Second: All rooms should have an alternative exit, even if it is only a breakable window and a rope ladder.

Third. Students should be taught not to hide on the floor or behind furniture if someone starts shooting. Students should grab a pile of books, a chair, desk or anything at hand and mass rush the attacker, screaming their lungs out. Yes, a few might get shot; the alternative is that everyone might get shot, and then the attacker moves on to the next classroom. You have to do a max/min analysis and go for the least worse option. If the gunman has a bunch of screaming students racing at him, he only has a few seconds to get off some shots, he won't have time to reload and the shots will not be carefully aimed. A pile of textbooks should stop them from reaching vital places. The people in that Pennsylvania plane on 9/11 were heroes. They did die, but they would have died anyway. By taking the initiative, they probably saved several thousand more people.

This can all be done without firearms. However, clearly (to those of us on this side of the issue), allowing people with CCW permits to carry concealed in school is going to help.

Shane916
08-29-2007, 3:55 PM
Where would you be purchasing this handgun and ammunition at the age of 17?

The law states you have to be 21 for a CCW permit.

Not sure what county you are in.. but the policy here in Sac is you can't go within 1000 feet of school grounds. I would imagine other counties have similar policies.

God Bless The Mauser
08-29-2007, 4:08 PM
If you got to know me you would realize that I would be trustworthy with a CCW. I carry when I'm outside at my house since I'm in a rural area. I have never had an accident and I always shoot safely. I have a big dirt pile I use for a backstop and I check for rocks or anything that could be a potential problem before I shoot. When I shot a skunk one night, I got it to go where it was safe and then I took the shot.

This can all be done without firearms. However, clearly (to those of us on this side of the issue), allowing people with CCW permits to carry concealed in school is going to help. I totally agree, that's what always say to people. Arming the people that would be shot at would be a very good idea. Having everyone unarmed is one reason why this things happen. It's a whole lot easier to kill lots of unarmed people. If someone tried to shoot up armed people the situation would not turn out so well for the shooter.

I assume there is no way for me to get a permit? There is no possible way of getting out of the age limit?

MadMex
08-29-2007, 4:27 PM
I was at high school the other day and we were locked down because of a threatening individual with a gun.

Do you go to HS in Placer County?

WolfMansDad
08-29-2007, 4:28 PM
Personally, there are a (very) few 17-year olds that I would trust with a handgun in a stressful situation

How old are our U.S. Marines? You used to be able to sign up at 17.

Teenagers are often at more risk than those of us over 21, mostly because of other teenagers. How many of you high-school students have been threatened with death or grave bodily harm in the last year? I know it happened a lot when I was that age, and sometimes the threats were carried out, up to and including murder.

How many of you who are over 21 have been threatened in the past year?

Now, who needs the CCW more?

It disgusts me that we have prohibitions on carrying at all. What part of "shall not be infringed" is so difficult, anyway?

Glock22Fan
08-29-2007, 4:48 PM
How old are our U.S. Marines? You used to be able to sign up at 17.

I didn't say that no 17 year old could be trusted with a gun. And, once you have gone through boot camp, I think you are some way away from being a typical high school kid.

I know a kid aged 8 that I generally trust around guns. He has had ample opportunity to blow his brains out if he was going to. Owns several handguns, and has free access to several more. Not sure I'd let him take one to school though.

Shane916
08-29-2007, 5:21 PM
Once again...To purchase a handgun or ammunition for the handgun you must be 21.

You can have a handgun transfered to you at the age of 18 from a parent.. if you are legally allowed to possess a firearm and obtain a HSC.

Even if you own the handgun at 18 you will not be allowed to purchase ammunition for it until 21.

From what i've read every county requires the applicant to be 21 at the time of applying for a CCW.

ccwguy
08-29-2007, 5:26 PM
Where would you be purchasing this handgun and ammunition at the age of 17?

The law states you have to be 21 for a CCW permit.

Not sure what county you are in.. but the policy here in Sac is you can't go within 1000 feet of school grounds. I would imagine other counties have similar policies.

Hey Shane, sacs local deal with no carry near schools is illegal. DOJ say OK, so I carry with confidence.



Funny how you need only be 16 to drive a 'deadly weapon'!

Glock22Fan
08-29-2007, 5:40 PM
Funny how you need only be 16 to drive a 'deadly weapon'!

And not at all funny just what a disproportionate number of them kill themselves and others.

And I've seen the result when a 17 year old got her mom's Suburban up to an estimated 70 on my residential road, side swiped two cars, pushed another 30 yards down the road, and ended up hitting a concrete lamppost, which then fell onto my 4-runner (parked in my driveway) and wrote it off. She was on her way to school, showing off to a school friend.

Or how about the 17 year old girl that wiped out my cousin's three young girls on a family outing? They estimated that car's speed as 85 mph around the bend, sealed off the road, and a police driver tried to emulate it. He chickened out, at less than 70. The girl survived and was laughing and joking about it the next day.

ccwguy
08-29-2007, 5:42 PM
And not funny just what a disproportionate number of them kill themselves and others.

And I've seen the result when a 17 year old got her mom's Suburban up to an estimated 70 on my residential road, side swiped two cars, pushed another 30 yards down the road, and ended up hitting a concrete lamppost, which then fell onto my 4-runner (parked in my driveway) and wrote it off. She was on her way to school, showing off to a school friend.

Very true. I say let'em drink at 16, drive at 21. Reduce DUI's by teens.

pepsi2451
08-29-2007, 6:10 PM
From what i've read every county requires the applicant to be 21 at the time of applying for a CCW.

Where did you read that? According to packing.org you have to be 18 to get a ccw in Humbolt county.

Glock22Fan
08-29-2007, 6:19 PM
p.c. 12050 does not mention any age limit. Therefore the Sheriff has discretion to issue CCW's to anyone legally able to own a handgun. 21 is common, but (as far as I can see) is not mandated anywhere.

God Bless The Mauser
08-29-2007, 6:37 PM
MadMex, I do go to school on Placer county, I'm sure you saw what happened at my school on the news.

metalhead357
08-29-2007, 6:42 PM
Not sure what county you are in.. but the policy here in Sac is you can't go within 1000 feet of school grounds. I would imagine other counties have similar policies.



NOT to fuel the guy...but for clarity sake...........
CCW DOES allow carry on school grounds...................

But yep 17=No CCW..........

MadMex
08-31-2007, 10:34 AM
MadMex, I do go to school on Placer county, I'm sure you saw what happened at my school on the news.
Finally, an arrest.

CSDGuy
08-31-2007, 10:47 AM
Sacramento County's CCW policy may state "No CCW within 1000' of school grounds." Unfortunately for the SSD, if your Non-Sacramento County CCW does NOT have that restriction on it, they can NOT impose their OWN restrictions on another County's CCW License.

supersonic
08-31-2007, 1:36 PM
I'm personally happy with the current age rules in place. Mainly due to the fact that many 17 year olds I've met aren't very mature. I'm only 23, but I've changed a whole TON since I was 17.

I'm not saying all 17 year olds are immature, but I personally feel the majority are. Immaturity + Firearms = not a very good combo.

Man, you STILL have M U C H to learn. Wait and see what your attitudes/opinions are of 23-year-olds when you have about another DECADE in your rear view mirror. 17? 23? not a whole lotta difference!;)
S.S.:43:

swhatb
08-31-2007, 10:08 PM
someone's missing the point here...

ammo and handgun sales only at age 21, state law. period!

ccw req. age 21, state law. period!

weapons on campus. zero tolerances, federal law. period!

{sf community college district weapons on campus student, quest, whom ever, ccw not valid. period! it's the law! h*ll, their own cops can't carry by board policy!!!!} removed. was edumacuated ;-)

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 10:18 PM
someone's missing the point here...

ammo and handgun sales only at age 21, state law. period!

ccw req. age 21, state law. period!

weapons on campus. zero tolerances, federal law. period!
sf community college district weapons on campus student, quest, whom ever, ccw not valid. period! it's the law! h*ll, their own cops can't carry by board policy!!!!


Guess again.......California Firearms laws 2007



Firearms on School Grounds
It is unlawful for any person to possess or bring a firearm upon the grounds of, into, or within a
distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades
1 to 12, inclusive, or a campus of the University of California, California State University, or
California community colleges. (Penal Code 626.9.)

Exceptions
• A person who has the written permission of the school district superintendent, designee,
or equivalent school authority.
• Within a place of residence or place of business or on private property, if the place
of residence, place of business, or private property is not part of the school grounds
and the possession of the firearm is otherwise lawful.
• If the firearm is an unloaded handgun in a locked container or within the locked
trunk of a motor vehicle, or the otherwise lawful transportation of an unloaded long
gun.
• The possession or transportation of firearms by a person who is engaged in the
business of manufacturing, importing, wholesaling, repairing, or dealing in firearms
and who is licensed to engage in that business or the authorized representative or
authorized agent of that person while engaged in the lawful course of business.
• Guards or messengers of common carriers, banks, and other financial institutions
while actually employed in and about the shipment, transportation, or delivery of
money, treasure, etc.
• Transportation of unloaded firearms by a person operating a licensed common
carrier or an authorized agent or employee thereof when transported in conformance
with applicable federal law.
• The carrying of unloaded handguns by duly authorized military or civil organizations
while parading or the members thereof when going to and from the places of meeting of
their respective organizations.
• Any peace officer pursuant to Penal Code section 830 who is carrying out official
duties.
• Any person summoned by such peace officer to assist in making an arrest or preserving
the peace while actually so engaged.
• Members of federal or state military forces while engaged in performance of duty.
• Any person authorized to carry a concealed firearm pursuant to Penal Code section12050.
• An armored vehicle guard while engaged in performance of duty pursuant to Business
and Professions Code section 7521.
• A security guard authorized to carry a loaded firearm pursuant to Penal Code section 12030.
• An existing shooting range at a public or private school or university or college
campus.
• An honorably retired peace officer authorized to carry a concealed or loaded firearm.

tango-52
08-31-2007, 10:31 PM
someone's missing the point here...

ammo and handgun sales only at age 21, state law. period!

ccw req. age 21, state law. period!

weapons on campus. zero tolerances, federal law. period!

sf community college district weapons on campus student, quest, whom ever, ccw not valid. period! it's the law! h*ll, their own cops can't carry by board policy!!!!

Before spouting that such is the law, you should actually read it instead of going on hearsay.

I can gift a handgun to my 18 year old child. They can then file a form with the DOJ, legally putting it into their name. If the pistol is in a caliber that rifles also come in (carbines are in 9 mm and others), they can buy ammo for it legally.

If there is a minimum age of 21 in state law to obtain a CCW, please post the California Code section.

If you have a CCW, you may carry on all campuses, K-12 and college. It may be against school policy, but it is not against the law. They can only ask you to leave. If you are a student, faculty or employee (campus cops) you have to follow their poicy or there will be other repercussions from the school, but not from the police. Visitors and guests would only be charged with trespassing if they refused to leave the campus.

Hope this clarifies it for you.

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 10:36 PM
So many myths, so little time.


12050 link here..

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=62532429545+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

FreedomIsNotFree
08-31-2007, 10:41 PM
The University of Utah allows students to carry concealed on campus.

swhatb
08-31-2007, 11:27 PM
Guess again.......California Firearms laws 2007



Firearms on School Grounds
It is unlawful for any person to possess or bring a firearm upon the grounds of, into, or within a
distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades
1 to 12, inclusive, or a campus of the University of California, California State University, or
California community colleges. (Penal Code 626.9.)

Exceptions
A person who has the written permission of the school district superintendent, designee,
or equivalent school authority.
Within a place of residence or place of business or on private property, if the place
of residence, place of business, or private property is not part of the school grounds
and the possession of the firearm is otherwise lawful.
If the firearm is an unloaded handgun in a locked container or within the locked
trunk of a motor vehicle, or the otherwise lawful transportation of an unloaded long
gun.
The possession or transportation of firearms by a person who is engaged in the
business of manufacturing, importing, wholesaling, repairing, or dealing in firearms
and who is licensed to engage in that business or the authorized representative or
authorized agent of that person while engaged in the lawful course of business.
Guards or messengers of common carriers, banks, and other financial institutions
while actually employed in and about the shipment, transportation, or delivery of
money, treasure, etc.
Transportation of unloaded firearms by a person operating a licensed common
carrier or an authorized agent or employee thereof when transported in conformance
with applicable federal law.
The carrying of unloaded handguns by duly authorized military or civil organizations
while parading or the members thereof when going to and from the places of meeting of
their respective organizations.
Any peace officer pursuant to Penal Code section 830 who is carrying out official
duties.
Any person summoned by such peace officer to assist in making an arrest or preserving
the peace while actually so engaged.
Members of federal or state military forces while engaged in performance of duty.
Any person authorized to carry a concealed firearm pursuant to Penal Code section12050.
An armored vehicle guard while engaged in performance of duty pursuant to Business
and Professions Code section 7521.
A security guard authorized to carry a loaded firearm pursuant to Penal Code section 12030.
An existing shooting range at a public or private school or university or college
campus.
An honorably retired peace officer authorized to carry a concealed or loaded firearm.

thanks for the correction to ccw permit holders ok on campus.

but federal law, cannot find my link, states that firearms transported, near or through campus need to be lock in a container as the ammo needs to be locked in separate container. i know! cite the source...

campus policy can dictate that no weapons on campus period, even with ccw, or you'll be asked to leave, unless a designee of campus gives ok. goes along the lines of creating a safe work enviroment policy. sf and sac has this policy. besides, empolyees are bared.

CalNRA
08-31-2007, 11:33 PM
thanks for the correction to ccw permit holders ok on campus.

but federal law, cannot find my link, states that firearms transported, near or through campus need to be lock in a container as the ammo needs to be locked in separate container. i know! cite the source...

campus policy can dictate that no weapons on campus period, even with ccw, or you'll be asked to leave, unless a designee of campus gives ok. goes along the lines of creating a safe work enviroment policy. sf and sac has this policy. besides, empolyees are bared.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act

Cola King Martini
08-31-2007, 11:37 PM
Title 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (ii) contains an exemption in the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act for holders of state-issued CCWs as long as a background check is part of the issuance procedure.

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 11:38 PM
thanks for the correction to ccw permit holders ok on campus.

but federal law, cannot find my link, states that firearms transported, near or through campus need to be lock in a container as the ammo needs to be locked in separate container. i know! cite the source...

campus policy can dictate that no weapons on campus period, even with ccw, or you'll be asked to leave, unless a designee of campus gives ok. goes along the lines of creating a safe work enviroment policy. sf and sac has this policy. besides, empolyees are bared.

Anyone can state NO CARRY on their privately owned property. They must ask you to leave, if you don't then you are breaking State-law.

Federal law states that you may safely and leagally transport in locked container seperate from ammo. It's a 'safe passage' law that protects you nation wide while transporting, even in airports.

SF tried to make a local law saying you CANNOT CCW in that county, they were wrong. Layers of government do NOT overlap. Citing the law is always best when 'discussing' this.

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 11:42 PM
thanks for the correction to ccw permit holders ok on campus.

but federal law, cannot find my link, states that firearms transported, near or through campus need to be lock in a container as the ammo needs to be locked in separate container. i know! cite the source...

campus policy can dictate that no weapons on campus period, even with ccw, or you'll be asked to leave, unless a designee of campus gives ok. goes along the lines of creating a safe work enviroment policy. sf and sac has this policy. besides, empolyees are bared.

Not all of 'em. I have trained many who DO carry. Concealed. wink, wink.

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 11:47 PM
thanks for the correction to ccw permit holders ok on campus.

but federal law, cannot find my link, states that firearms transported, near or through campus need to be lock in a container as the ammo needs to be locked in separate container. i know! cite the source...
campus policy can dictate that no weapons on campus period, even with ccw, or you'll be asked to leave, unless a designee of campus gives ok. goes along the lines of creating a safe work enviroment policy. sf and sac has this policy. besides, empolyees are bared.


CFL 2007 again...

Notwithstanding the exceptions cited in Section 5. Loaded Firearms, individuals may not carry or
transport a loaded firearm. The firearm should be unloaded and placed in the trunk of the vehicle,
or if the vehicle has no trunk, placed in a fully enclosed secure locked container other than the utility
or glove compartment of a motor vehicle (Penal Code 12026.1, 12027.)

swhatb
08-31-2007, 11:47 PM
I can gift a handgun to my 18 year old child. They can then file a form with the DOJ, legally putting it into their name. If the pistol is in a caliber that rifles also come in (carbines are in 9 mm and others), they can buy ammo for it legally.

afaik hanguns purchase if rim fire only. afaik hanguns pruchase/transfer no 9mm, .38spc, .45 acp. that's how i intrep the law. if wrong, i don't mind being edumucated.

If there is a minimum age of 21 in state law to obtain a CCW, please post the California Code section.

could of assumed wrong that it's state law, but was indicated as such on the paperwork filled out with the county i live and permit issued by!

If you have a CCW, you may carry on all campuses, K-12 and college. It may be against school policy, but it is not against the law. They can only ask you to leave. If you are a student, faculty or employee (campus cops) you have to follow their poicy or there will be other repercussions from the school, but not from the police. Visitors and guests would only be charged with trespassing if they refused to leave the campus.

most campus have the policy below. i work here and this is what it says... you will taken to jail. unless, you obtain authorization. period. authorization can be granted. :cool2:

U.C. San Francisco "No person shall possess or have control of any firearm, deadly weapon, or prohibited knife, as legally defined, while on the property of the University of California, San Francisco, except as required in the lawful course of business or as authorized by the UCSF Police Department."
http://ucsfhr.ucsf.edu/index.php/pubs/hrguidearticle/appendix-d-dealing-with-threatening-or-potentially-violent-behavior/

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 11:51 PM
afaik hanguns purchase if rim fire only. afaik hanguns pruchase/transfer no 9mm, .38spc, .45 acp. that's how i intrep the law. if wrong, i don't mind being edumucated.



could of assumed wrong that it's state law, but was indicated as such on the paperwork filled out with the county i live and permit issued by!



most campus have the policy below. i work here and this is what it says... you will taken to jail. unless, you obtain authorization. period. authorization can be granted. :cool2:
U.C. San Francisco "No person shall possess or have control of any firearm, deadly weapon, or prohibited knife, as legally defined, while on the property of the University of California, San Francisco, except as required in the lawful course of business or as authorized by the UCSF Police Department."
http://ucsfhr.ucsf.edu/index.php/pubs/hrguidearticle/appendix-d-dealing-with-threatening-or-potentially-violent-behavior/


Again, you can only be charged with trespassing. You must be asked to leave, then refuse, then and only then can they charge you; only with trespassing. Read the policy, it's a policy, not law. federal or otherwise. Nowhere does it state you will be taken to jail.

Cola King Martini
08-31-2007, 11:54 PM
afaik hanguns purchase if rim fire only. afaik hanguns pruchase/transfer no 9mm, .38spc, .45 acp. that's how i intrep the law. if wrong, i don't mind being edumucated.



could of assumed wrong that it's state law, but was indicated as such on the paperwork filled out with the county i live and permit issued by!



most campus have the policy below. i work here and this is what it says... you will taken to jail. unless, you obtain authorization. period. authorization can be granted. :cool2:

U.C. San Francisco "No person shall possess or have control of any firearm, deadly weapon, or prohibited knife, as legally defined, while on the property of the University of California, San Francisco, except as required in the lawful course of business or as authorized by the UCSF Police Department."
http://ucsfhr.ucsf.edu/index.php/pubs/hrguidearticle/appendix-d-dealing-with-threatening-or-potentially-violent-behavior/

UCSF Policy does not trump Penal Code. They may not like it, and they may arrest you, but they will lose in court. It's called state preemption.

ccwguy
08-31-2007, 11:55 PM
UCSF Policy does not trump Penal Code. They may not like it, and they may arrest you, but they will lose in court. It's called state preemption.

That's the word I was looking for.thx

swhatb
08-31-2007, 11:57 PM
Again, you can only be charged with trespassing. You must be asked to leave, then refuse, then and only then can they charge you; only with trespassing.

just wanted to state that they will arrest you. period. yes, they themselves are in violation of the law, and that would need to be dealt with at a later time. but there policy is to take you to jail. preemention or not.

i understand your point, and thanks for pointing it out. learned somethings here today. ;)

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 12:02 AM
just wanted to state that they will arrest you. period. yes, they themselves are in violation of the law, and that would need to be dealt with at a later time. but there policy is to take you to jail.

i understand your point, and thanks for pointing it out. learned somethings here today. ;) thanks.

Actually, they can only turn you over to a real LEO. Then they will be told they have NO legal case to bother with. They can't arrest you for breaking policy.

As for interfamilial, any pistol or caliber. Trust me on that one. If there is no law stating something, it means it's "legal". Laws usually say what is Illegal.

swhatb
09-01-2007, 12:08 AM
ccwguy, you are a wealth of good info. thanks for 'edumucating' me. that's what education is all about. ccw holder ;);) learned some new stuff here today :)

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 12:09 AM
just wanted to state that they will arrest you. period. yes, they themselves are in violation of the law, and that would need to be dealt with at a later time. but there policy is to take you to jail.

i understand your point, and thanks for pointing it out. learned somethings here today. ;) thanks.

Actually, they can only turn you over to a real LEO. Then they will be told they have NO legal case to bother with. They can't arrest you for breaking policy.

As for interfamilial, any pistol or caliber. Trust me on that one. If there is no law stating something, it means it's "legal". Laws usually say what is Illegal.

Please do NOT go yelling that something is ILLegal when you simply think it is not allowed. It sets the wheels in motion for "urban myths" and incites fear and confusion the community. Most LEOS around me get their gunlaws from gunshop employees, that's scary. The legal system is grossly backed up from this as well. Always get the facts first, from law.

For future reference... http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 12:10 AM
ccwguy, you are a wealth of good info. thanks for 'edumucating' me. that's what education is all about. ccw holder ;);) learned some new stuff here today :)

You have A CCW?

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 12:23 AM
You have A CCW?


If you do, you are required to know PC12050. Everything that has been discussed in this thread!!!It is mandated as a minmum study in your CCW class. Who was your Instructor? Is he/she a flake or were you sleeping thru that part? It's 4 hours of study in my classes. That would be a hell of a long nap!

swhatb
09-01-2007, 2:57 AM
Actually, they can only turn you over to a real LEO. Then they will be told they have NO legal case to bother with. They can't arrest you for breaking policy.

college cops are LEOs, transport you and book you themselves in to jail. there is no turning you over to a real LEO.

btw, three agency wrk for over years req. to follow pol. whether it preempt or not. that what told and do, let court sys. fight it out. there're many agencies that do this. just like how listen to the niiiice flks at d*j to take what they say. believe it or not, policy r followed just like law. even though i see it waz wrong 2 do, now. just did what waz told.

If you do, you are required to know PC12050. Everything that has been discussed in this thread!!!It is mandated as a minmum study in your CCW class. Who was your Instructor? Is he/she a flake or were you sleeping thru that part? It's 4 hours of study in my classes. That would be a hell of a long nap!

it was by one of those shall issue by way of, agency retired. :chris: no one re quals, just new ret id card issue when exp.

moving from edumacated to educated in this is good. so thnks.

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 8:26 AM
college cops are LEOs, transport you and book you themselves in to jail. there is no turning you over to a real LEO.

btw, three agency wrk for over years req. to follow pol. whether it preempt or not. that what told and do, let court sys. fight it out. there're many agencies that do this. just like how listen to the niiiice flks at d*j to take what they say. believe it or not, policy r followed just like law. even though i see it waz wrong 2 do, now. just did what waz told.



it was by one of those shall issue by way of, agency retired. :chris: no one re quals, just new ret id card issue when exp.

moving from edumacated to educated in this is good. so thnks.

You are required to requalify, even under HR218. Yearly.

Wulf
09-01-2007, 8:38 AM
Problem with allow old teens to carry is that there's no practical method for telling which one is the one that would be an asset during a lock down and which one would be the dumb arse that flashed his piece to show how bad he was an initiated the lock down.

For sure some 17 are capable of being responsible, but you'd have to put them all through a closely monitored stressor like boot camp to figure out which are which.

In leu of boot camp, a couple decades of problem free living...out on your own with plenty of opportunity to go off the rails...gives society a pretty good read on whether you're stable enough to go armed in public. Its just that at 17 you're as much who your parents allow you to be as you are the person you'll become when you're on your own and left to your own devices.

swhatb
09-01-2007, 11:51 AM
You are required to requalify, even under HR218. Yearly.

wel no one does. this is reprev. thru out lots of agencies in cal. :D there r those that do requal even yr b/c they want 2. others, ho um. an no repacus. it would take an earth mov to make that hap. viol or not that what happen. just state what places wrk 4 done and those knw for sure.

glad a mem here. learn a lot error of thought my past ways. so, again thnk for educating me on what's the law. as they say, true knowlege is power!

Glock22Fan
09-01-2007, 1:14 PM
SWATB,

Would you please mind talking in English?

Don't mind the odd typo or slang, but your postings are meaningless to this old brain.

Thanks

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 1:27 PM
wel no one does. this is reprev. thru out lots of agencies in cal. :D there r those that do requal even yr b/c they want 2. others, ho um. an no repacus. it would take an earth mov to make that hap. viol or not that what happen. just state what places wrk 4 done and those knw for sure.

glad a mem here. learn a lot error of thought my past ways. so, again thnk for educating me on what's the law. as they say, true knowlege is power!


HUH?

HR218;

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926A the following:

`Sec. 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers

`(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

`(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--

`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or

`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

`(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified law enforcement officer' means an employee of a governmental agency who--

`(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;

`(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

`(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

`(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

`(d) The identification required by this subsection is the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer.

`(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--

`(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);

`(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and

`(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926A the following:

`926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers.'.



SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is further amended by inserting after section 926B the following:

`Sec. 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers

`(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

`(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--

`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or

`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

`(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified retired law enforcement officer' means an individual who--

`(1) retired in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of mental instability;

`(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;

`(3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or

`(B) retired from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency;

`(4) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the retirement plan of the agency;

`(5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the State's standards for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry firearms;

`(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

`(d) The identification required by this subsection is--

`(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual retired from service as a law enforcement officer that indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the agency to meet the standards established by the agency for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or
`(2)(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual retired from service as a law enforcement officer; and

`(B) a certification issued by the State in which the individual resides that indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State to meet the standards established by the State for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.
`(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--

`(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);

`(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and

`(3) a destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is further amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926B the following:

`926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers.'.

swhatb
09-01-2007, 7:28 PM
ccwguy,

i appreciate you taking the time and brining me up to speed regarding the laws concerning this matter. now that i know something about this, and for liability reasons, i'm going to requalify. thanks for sharing.

just wanted to point out though and share...

there are lots of agencies in ca., especially the ones i know of, that don't do HR218 :D there are those people that do requalify per HR218 every year because they want to, and those that don't want to, the agency just reissue the cards no matter with ccw endorsement marked. the expiration date is set at 5 years from each issue. there are no repercussions of doing this. a letter given by doj to the agencies stated as long as a background check is conducted, no felony and disqualifying positions, then they said don't worry about...we realize a lot of time and expense is involved in going through this process. there have been retired officers that have been involved in shootings, not done HR218, and doj nor the da put up a stink about this. in the cases i've heard, they were review and were all justified, maybe that was why not stink about HR218. in my opinion, it would take an earth moving to make that happen and be followed. by the way, doj gives a lot of leeway for agencies in mandating the laws to be followed, do to cost, agency time, and personal availability. hell, they let us only have to qualify every two years because of those issues when wearing the badge, the agency checked with the da of the area and he said no problem with him either in a written memo.

virulosity
09-01-2007, 8:18 PM
Allowing minors to carry guns to school undermines the purpose of high school. You are supposed to be learning about tactics with edged weapons in high school like the kids in Britain. (Sorry that was a bad joke). Seriously though, looking at how many fights I saw at school with sharp instruments, I think adding firearms is a bad idea. Hell, one of my friends was almost stabbed with a shiv made from a soda can. Those are the kinds of things you learn in public schools.

ccwguy
09-01-2007, 8:21 PM
ccwguy,

i appreciate you taking the time and brining me up to speed regarding the laws concerning this matter. now that i know something about this, and for liability reasons, i'm going to requalify. thanks for sharing.

just wanted to point out though and share...

there are lots of agencies in ca., especially the ones i know of, that don't do HR218 :D there are those people that do requalify per HR218 every year because they want to, and those that don't want to, the agency just reissue the cards no matter with ccw endorsement marked. the expiration date is set at 5 years from each issue. there are no repercussions of doing this. a letter given by doj to the agencies stated as long as a background check is conducted, no felony and disqualifying positions, then they said don't worry about...we realize a lot of time and expense is involved in going through this process. there have been retired officers that have been involved in shootings, not done HR218, and doj nor the da put up a stink about this. in the cases i've heard, they were review and were all justified, maybe that was why not stink about HR218. in my opinion, it would take an earth moving to make that happen and be followed. by the way, doj gives a lot of leeway for agencies in mandating the laws to be followed, do to cost, agency time, and personal availability. hell, they let us only have to qualify every two years because of those issues when wearing the badge, the agency checked with the da of the area and he said no problem with him either in a written memo.

Yes, it is all about LIABILITY. I'd hate to be the agency that just ok'd someone for renewal or yearly requal without mandated policy, then had a bad shooting by one of those in an HR218 scenario.
As a bad guy, I'd surely look into the status of the renewal process.

As a federally mandated policy, I would not chance anything, especially Kommiefornia related. I have a 1300 word 'release' that all my students MUST sign before they can even take my class! Again, Kommiefornia lawyer BS.



Sorry if I offend, but, It is sad when the 'public' finds themselves educating the people who 'serve and protect' us.

metalhead357
09-01-2007, 8:52 PM
Ya' thanx CCWguy.....I getts tired, as does Wes and the librarian of constantly trying to cite these sources, nice to have another informed-one around here;)

swhatb
09-01-2007, 9:28 PM
Sorry if I offend, but, It is sad when the 'public' finds themselves educating the people who 'serve and protect' us.

no offense taken... wish i would have been more educated during those times. so not to cause undo grief upon people that weren't educated, just plea bargained out, and the time of those that did know! but had to waste time to work the process to get them in the right again.

exceptions are pretty previlant still in agencies not having to do what's promulgated by the law, due to all the mandated updates each year one has to have, the lack of funds and STAFF like you which isn't provided.

you know, those who 'serve and protect' are promulgated to follow policy whether good or bad, right or wrong, and if know it's wrong and brings it up to the higher ups, told to do it anyway and let the person fight it out in the courts. bad answer :mad:but that's the true fact of the matter.

thanks for educating an old timer, just wish it would have happened when still on the job and not retired. old dogs can be taught new tricks :D at least to cover my *ss now.

CSDGuy
09-01-2007, 9:39 PM
swhatb: There is a HUGE difference for MOST retired LEO's to requalify under 12027 and the LEOSA. Most Retired LEO's (near as I can tell) only have to petition to renew their CCW authorization under 12027 every 5 years. What gets interesting is that certain types of Peace Officers that are listed under 830.5 must meet PC 832 standards every year. They would be likely considered OK to CCW under the LEOSA simply by requalifying yearly. Other Retired LEOs would not be covered under the LEOSA unless they DO requalify yearly.

Quite simply, the LEOSA and 12027 CCW authorizations haven't been tested in court against each other. IOW, if a retired LEO gets his 12027 yanked, but maintains his firearms qualification status yearly, he/she would possibly still be qualified to CCW under the LEOSA as current authorization to CCW is not in the text of the LEOSA...

I doubt anyone wants to be the test case for this...

MadMex
09-02-2007, 3:22 PM
MadMex, I do go to school on Placer county, I'm sure you saw what happened at my school on the news.

Damn this case took a strange twist. It turns out that one of the H.S. teachers hid the gun toting perp inside a classroom while the police searched the school. Sends an eerie and bizarre message to parents and students.