View Single Post
  #45  
Old 11-15-2012, 3:27 PM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 4,088
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meplat1 View Post
Law Officers cannot make law by notion or whim. Most CA officers are now aware of the Clark case law, largely through the efforts of CGF.
People v Clark has been pretty well briefed through my own agency and most other agencies that I am aware of.

It is important to note that the DGM employee's statement is not complete FUD. There is a small amount of truth to it.

There are two instances where the Penal Code defines a weapon as being loaded when the weapon and ammunition are in simply in the possession of the same person. These sections were not addressed by the Clark decision. The first is where the weapon is being carried with the intent to commit a felony (see Post #29 for details). The second is where a firearm is carried into designated buildings (refer to Penal Code section 171e).
Reply With Quote