Thread: CCW at SF Zoo?
View Single Post
  #44  
Old 02-20-2018, 1:17 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is offline
Some Yahoo on the Web
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Ventura County, near where the big fire started...
Posts: 3,021
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotron2k84 View Post
Re: PC 602 - being asked to leave: this is not necessarily the case; some of the violations are statutory and based on actions of the violator with respect to posted signage. 602(k) and 602(l)(4) are both statutory and at trial would have to be proven by the prosecution.

As for the reading of SFPC 617 - the first definition of City Property says: "San Francisco Zoo," inclusive. They further go on to list items that are not City Property, but it can be read as "Areas that are not explicitly mentioned follow these rules."

As for PC 171(b) it is not just enough that public employees are present, such as eating lunch at a cafe, but that their material function be present at the building in question. That to me means they spend more than a few minutes each day at that location and it is their primary work assignment.

The latter two would probably have to be decided by a trial.

Maybe case law would be instructive at this point.
As a CCW holder I'd be less concerned with being prosecuted if caught than I would having my IA discover that I was caught and decide to revoke my license or deny me at renewal because I couldn't use common sense/good judgement and not carry at the zoo.
__________________
"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Whether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love. -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015


Reply With Quote