Range Drama

[Ronin2]

Originally Posted by kauaibuilt

For the record, I had a run in with that specific employee previous to that. He tried to tell me that Coast Guard was military (they're DHS and can be detailed to military units) .

As a Former US Naval officer who worked closely with US Coast Guard officers and men when they were aboard my ship to assist us in drug interdiction efforts, and as a military historian and someone who is somewhat aware of Admiralty Law, I can assure you that the U.S.Coast Guard, dispute my teasing them to the contrary, is a branch of the U.S. Military.

Here is what the U.S. Coast Guard web site has to say about the organization:

The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. Since 1790 the Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation's maritime interests and environment around the world. The Coast Guard is an adaptable, responsive military force of maritime professionals whose broad legal authorities, capable assets, geographic diversity and expansive partnerships provide a persistent presence along our rivers, in the ports, littoral regions and on the high seas. Coast Guard presence and impact is local, regional, national and international. These attributes make the Coast Guard a unique instrument of maritime safety, security and environmental stewardship.

Note the following list of U.S.Department of Defense websites includes U.S.Coast Guard websites.

http://www.defense.gov/RegisteredSit...eredSites.aspx

Originally Posted by kauaibuilt

1 - a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing and 2 - it takes a lot to prove you're knowledgeable, but only 1 to prove your ignorance.

You should take your own advice!

And finally, tell the remaining U.S.Coast Guard COMBAT vets from WW2, Korea and Vietnam, to their faces, that they are not a branch of the U.S.Military and I hope they "DECK YA"!

SJF, Lt., USNR (ret.)

[AndRenner]

Same thing happened to me at the gun range in Sacramento off watt and orange grove. Glock with lock through the slide in my case, had a magazine loaded in pouches behind it, fat dude(idk name) flipped out on me and told me never to bring a firearm in like that again or I wouldn't be welcomed because it is considered loaded. I just apologized and went on. THEN that same night we had 3 shooting lanes and 2 friends who had never shot before accidentally shot the strings with shotguns down before we left LOL. Now I don't give that place my business. Karma is a *****. Place sucks. "End rant here"

[Ronin2]

Far too many shooting range employees are "frustrated LEO wannabe's" (but not all) making minimal wages so they can "wear a gun for work" and "be in charge here now"...LOL.

Remember their place in the grand scheme of things and feel sorry for them.

[Eat Dirt]

Originally Posted by Kodemonkey

http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=...0&e=3475ad019a

CGF just defended a guy last month.

" 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."

Well, the deputy was wrong and CGF got the case dismissed. Seems pretty clear to me...

I'm going to make a copy of that one and keep it in the gun bag

[Merc1138]

Originally Posted by 211275

...but we are in CA where anything over 10 rounds is against the law, so thats a moot point.

To think someone laughed at my complaint about people making things up just a couple of days ago...

211275, go read the laws and stop posting nonsense. Don't even bother replying unless you're going to

a: Apologize for making things up.
or
b: Cite the penal code that supports your claim(lol).

We have so much information available at our fingertips, and people continue to make up garbage on a regular basis about gun laws, even on this website of all places when they could have just verified things before posting FUD/lies.

[kauaibuilt]

Originally Posted by Ronin2

As a Former US Naval officer who worked closely with US Coast Guard officers and men when they were aboard my ship to assist us in drug interdiction efforts, and as a military historian and someone who is somewhat aware of Admiralty Law, I can assure you that the U.S.Coast Guard, dispute my teasing them to the contrary, is a branch of the U.S. Military.

Here is what the U.S. Coast Guard web site has to say about the organization:

The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. Since 1790 the Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation's maritime interests and environment around the world. The Coast Guard is an adaptable, responsive military force of maritime professionals whose broad legal authorities, capable assets, geographic diversity and expansive partnerships provide a persistent presence along our rivers, in the ports, littoral regions and on the high seas. Coast Guard presence and impact is local, regional, national and international. These attributes make the Coast Guard a unique instrument of maritime safety, security and environmental stewardship.

Note the following list of U.S.Department of Defense websites includes U.S.Coast Guard websites.

http://www.defense.gov/RegisteredSit...eredSites.aspx



You should take your own advice!

And finally, tell the remaining U.S.Coast Guard COMBAT vets from WW2, Korea and Vietnam, to their faces, that they are not a branch of the U.S.Military and I hope they "DECK YA"!

SJF, Lt., USNR (ret.)

So to my understanding, perhaps incorrwct, the USCG used to fall under DOT and currently fall under DHS. They are armed and are consider a part of the "Uniformed Services" but are not military per se since they do not fall under the DOD.

CPT, USA (honorably discharged), LCDR active uniformed services (won't as which specifically because of what I do/where I work).

USCG personnel I saw/met in Kuwait were detailed to he DOD, just as other uniformed service members may be as well, but they are not DOD and therefore not military.

Edit: peacetime they're DHS, wartime they may be transferred and fall under Dept of the Navy. So they're technically both but only "military" if they're detailed as such. The question is, in CA law, are they classified as "military", again traditionally DOD, or are they a Uniformed Service.

And I stand by my assertion that, unless they are actively attached to the DON they are DHS/uniformed service and not military. If they were military they would not be allowed to practice their craft stateside because of posse comitatus (I'll Admit I know too little about posse comitatus to speak intelligently about it - see 2nd edit).

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite...es_Coast_Guard
It operates under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime, and can be transferred to the Department of the Navy by the President at any time, or by Congress during time of war.

2nd edit re posse comitatus:
The U.S. Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is also not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act, primarily because the Coast Guard has both a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency mission.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Ronin2]

Originally Posted by kauaibuilt

So to my understanding, perhaps incorrwct, the USCG used to fall under DOT and currently fall under DHS. They are armed and are consider a part of the "Uniformed Services" but are not military per se since they do not fall under the DOD.

CPT, USA (honorably discharged), LCDR active uniformed services (won't as which specifically because of what I do/where I work).

USCG personnel I saw/met in Kuwait were detailed to he DOD, just as other uniformed service members may be as well, but they are not DOD and therefore not military.

Edit: peacetime they're DHS, wartime they may be transferred and fall under Dept of the Navy. So they're technically both but only "military" if they're detailed as such. The question is, in CA law, are they classified as "military", again traditionally DOD, or are they a Uniformed Service.

And I stand by my assertion that, unless they are actively attached to the DON they are DHS/uniformed service and not military. If they were military they would not be allowed to practice their craft stateside because of posse comitatus (I'll Admit I know too little about posse comitatus to speak intelligently about it).

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite...es_Coast_Guard
It operates under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime, and can be transferred to the Department of the Navy by the President at any time, or by Congress during time of war.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Here, this is taken from the U.S.C.G.website, attention to bold type. Link to full site below:

For more than 210 years, the Coast Guard has served the nation as one of the five armed forces. Throughout its distinguished history, the Coast Guard has enjoyed a unique relationship with the Navy. By statute, the Coast Guard is an armed force, operating in the joint arena at any time and functioning as a specialized service under the Navy in time of war or when directed by the President. It also has command responsibilities for the U.S. Maritime Defense Zone, countering potential threats to American's coasts, ports, and inland waterways through numerous port-security, harbor-defense, and coastal-warfare operations and exercises.

http://www.uscg.mil/top/missions/Defense.asp

And this, also from the U.S.C.G. website, attention to bold type with link to full page below:

The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. Since 1790 the Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation's maritime interests and environment around the world. The Coast Guard is an adaptable, responsive military force of maritime professionals whose broad legal authorities, capable assets, geographic diversity and expansive partnerships provide a persistent presence along our rivers, in the ports, littoral regions and on the high seas. Coast Guard presence and impact is local, regional, national and international. These attributes make the Coast Guard a unique instrument of maritime safety, security and environmental stewardship.

http://www.uscg.mil/top/about/

So you think Wikipedia is a legitmate source to quote in contradiction to websites maintained by the Federal Government ???? ROFL. Where did you go to school?

[iddie]

Originally Posted by mrrabbit

The United States Coast guard is a federal military branch, gets federal funding and paychecks, follows the same E- and O- ratings, and of course, take the same enlistment exams at the same MEPS stations as any other branch of the military. It also functions in support of border, customs and coastal maritime security operations under DHS. That's a no-brainer.

=8-)

Agreed.. but it is not a MEPS station.. its just called MEPS.. its like saying CAC Card.

[kauaibuilt]

Originally Posted by Ronin2

Here, this is taken from the U.S.C.G.website, attention to bold type. Link to full site below:

For more than 210 years, the Coast Guard has served the nation as one of the five armed forces. Throughout its distinguished history, the Coast Guard has enjoyed a unique relationship with the Navy. By statute, the Coast Guard is an armed force, operating in the joint arena at any time and functioning as a specialized service under the Navy in time of war or when directed by the President. It also has command responsibilities for the U.S. Maritime Defense Zone, countering potential threats to American's coasts, ports, and inland waterways through numerous port-security, harbor-defense, and coastal-warfare operations and exercises.

http://www.uscg.mil/top/missions/Defense.asp

And this, also from the U.S.C.G. website, attention to bold type with link to full page below:

The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. Since 1790 the Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation's maritime interests and environment around the world. The Coast Guard is an adaptable, responsive military force of maritime professionals whose broad legal authorities, capable assets, geographic diversity and expansive partnerships provide a persistent presence along our rivers, in the ports, littoral regions and on the high seas. Coast Guard presence and impact is local, regional, national and international. These attributes make the Coast Guard a unique instrument of maritime safety, security and environmental stewardship.

http://www.uscg.mil/top/about/

So you think Wikipedia is a legitmate source to quote in contradiction to websites maintained by the Federal Government ???? ROFL. Where did you go to school?

Actually i was on my phone and i was happy to even get the wikipedia page and type with minimal problems because of my fat fingers. My undergrad was a private lutheran school on the west coast, my masters is with a private christian school on the east (ranked in the top 100 of US News great school/great price list). My specific masters program is currently listed in the top 15 in US News report.

The USCG Admiral reports to the president through DHS and not the Joint Chiefs. USCG funding has their own bill, it is not included in the military (read DOD) spending bill.

I think we're having an issue with semantics here. I am not arguing that the USCG is an "Armed Service". I admit that. However, unless they fall under the DON they are not "military". This semantics affects whether a law pertains to us or not. If a bill is passed that states military, to my knowledge, it means the DOD specifically. However, if the bill states "Armed Services" it means the DOD and USCG (regardless of whether they're attached to the DON or not). If the bill states "Uniformed Services" then it covers DOD, USCG, USPHS, and NOAA. I will concede defeat if you can point out a single bill that states "military" and automatically covers all USCG personnel and not just those that are attached to the DON - Id do it myself but Im really not that interested since the outcome would have no effect on me at all.

Does the USCG have a "military" mission - yes, when attached to the DON. Are they allowed to use weapons in their peacetime LE mission - yes, because they're an armed service.

BTW, heres the USPHS history (http://www.usphs.gov/aboutus/history.aspx) and the NOAA history (http://www.history.noaa.gov/).

Originally Posted by mrrabbit

The United States Coast guard is a federal military branch, gets federal funding and paychecks, follows the same E- and O- ratings, and of course, take the same enlistment exams at the same MEPS stations as any other branch of the military. It also functions in support of border, customs and coastal maritime security operations under DHS. That's a no-brainer.

=8-)

LE in the SOCAL area assist with the greater support of the border, customs, and coastal maritime security operations. That doesnt make them "military", USCG, DHS, ICE, CBP, etc. Hell, NYC cops apparently were trained, equipped, and directed to some degree by FBI or CIA or some other alphabet agency and they were never federal. The USPHS and NOAA also have federal funding, paychecks, the same "O" ratings, benefits, and (similar) requirements as DOD - that doesnt make them military. I know for a fact one of them (USPHS/NOAA) can be assigned to DOD, USCG, DHS, DOJ, USMS, and even sent to conflict zones. That doesnt make them military (because they're not an "armed" service). This "Armed" makes the USCG special in regards to the "Uniformed" services but it doesnt make them military. However, the "Armed" and being attached to the DON for wartime operations does.


Again, I stand by my assertion that the USCG is "military" during wartime and attached to the DON. They're Uniformed Services during peacetime or when not attached to the DON.

http://www.defense.gov/ lists USCG on their website for news and links. But their own organizational chart doesnt show the USCG (or its Commandant) - http://odam.defense.gov/omp/Function...Guidebook.html

Even the DON doesnt list the USCG on their organizational chart - http://www.navy.mil/navydata/organization/org-over.asp

Edit 1:
"The spouse of a member of the Military Services or the United States Coast Guard is eligible for the program if he or she meets the following conditions:" (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...41524429,d.cGE)

(same link) "NAUS is the only military affiliated association whose membership is open to the entire military/veteran family — Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, United States Public Health Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Guard and Reserve." - Now I KNOW that USPHS and NOAA are not military but....

[kauaibuilt]

Screw it, it was driving me nuts.. (all emphasis are mine)


Title 10, USC

-HEAD-
Sec. 101. Definitions

-STATUTE-
(a) In General. - The following definitions apply in this title:
(1) The term "United States", in a geographic sense, means the
States and the District of Columbia.
[(2) Repealed. Pub. L. 109-163, div. A, title X, Sec.
1057(a)(1), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3440.]
(3) The term "possessions" includes the Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, and the Guano Islands, so long as they remain
possessions, but does not include any Commonwealth.
(4) The term "armed forces" means the Army, Navy, Air Force,
Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.
(5) The term "uniformed services" means -
(A) the armed forces;
(B) the commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration; and
(C) the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service.

(6) The term "department", when used with respect to a military
department, means the executive part of the department and all
field headquarters, forces, reserve components, installations,
activities, and functions under the control or supervision of the
Secretary of the department. When used with respect to the
Department of Defense, such term means the executive part of the
department, including the executive parts of the military
departments, and all field headquarters, forces, reserve
components, installations, activities, and functions under the
control or supervision of the Secretary of Defense, including
those of the military departments.
(7) The term "executive part of the department" means the
executive part of the Department of Defense, Department of the
Army, Department of the Navy, or Department of the Air Force, as
the case may be, at the seat of government.
(8) The term "military departments" means the Department of the
Army, the Department of the Navy, and the Department of the Air
Force.
(9) The term "Secretary concerned" means -
(A) the Secretary of the Army, with respect to matters
concerning the Army;
(B) the Secretary of the Navy, with respect to matters
concerning the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard when
it is operating as a service in the Department of the Navy;
(C) the Secretary of the Air Force, with respect to matters
concerning the Air Force; and
(D) the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to
matters concerning the Coast Guard when it is not operating as
a service in the Department of the Navy.


So the term "military departments" (military) is reserved for DOD entities. The term "armed services" is DOD + USCG. USCG is non military, but is armed service, and falls under DHS with the exception of wartime AND being attached to the DON.

[kauaibuilt]

Aw hell, Im wrong... I concede ignorance!!!!

Title 14, USC

-STATUTE-
The Coast Guard as established January 28, 1915, shall be a military service and a branch of the armed forces of the United States at all times. The Coast Guard shall be a service in the Department of Homeland Security, except when operating as a service in the Navy.

So they're military thats "detailed" to DHS, not DHS that gets detailed to DON.

[Scuba Steve33]

You guys really don't have anything better to argue about?

[kauaibuilt]

Originally Posted by Scuba Steve33

You guys really don't have anything better to argue about?

Im getting PTSD from all the new laws coming out. And its much more fun arguing with knowledgeable folks - helps me learn something new several times a day.

[VintageDUG]

Originally Posted by kauaibuilt

Aw hell, Im wrong... I concede ignorance!!!!

Title 14, USC

-STATUTE-
The Coast Guard as established January 28, 1915, shall be a military service and a branch of the armed forces of the United States at all times. The Coast Guard shall be a service in the Department of Homeland Security, except when operating as a service in the Navy.

So they're military thats "detailed" to DHS, not DHS that gets detailed to DON.

Glad I read all they way through before I posted. The good news is your the most highly edjamactaed "Ignorant" dude I've ever seen. (PC disclaimer - that was an attempt at a joke)

LOL, glad we got this all straightened out. Now where's the guy who says anything bigger than ten rounds is illegal in CA? Once we get him thinking right, we can get this whole thread back on track.

[Ronin2]

Originally Posted by kauaibuilt

Aw hell, Im wrong... I concede ignorance!!!!

Title 14, USC

-STATUTE-
The Coast Guard as established January 28, 1915, shall be a military service and a branch of the armed forces of the United States at all times. The Coast Guard shall be a service in the Department of Homeland Security, except when operating as a service in the Navy.

So they're military thats "detailed" to DHS, not DHS that gets detailed to DON.

Fair enough.... one of the true signs of intelligence is the ability to admit being wrong and that you dont knwo everything. Good to see you doing soem good research beyond Wikipedia...

Cheers!

[D.M.C.]

Originally Posted by Seaweed02

He is right if you don't have a CCW with that weapon listed. Had you been pulled over and your vehicle searched you would have likely been placed under arrest. You must travel with the weapon and magazines (empty) in a locked container. The ammo should not be stored in the same place as the container with the firearm. So if you have the ammo in the trunk, then your handgun should be in the back seat.

I have a CCW with three handguns listed. With those weapons I don't sweat it because I have permission to have them concealed and loaded. For all of my other weapons I travel with them in my back seat floor board of my truck, and the ammo I put in the bed of my truck. The handguns that are not listed on my CCW are always in locked containers/boxes, while the rifles just have to be unloaded.

I do this because I believe that to be the legal requirement. If I am wrong someone please let me know.

You are wrong. :-)

[kauaibuilt]

Originally Posted by VintageDUG

Glad I read all they way through before I posted. The good news is your the most highly edjamactaed "Ignorant" dude I've ever seen. (PC disclaimer - that was an attempt at a joke)

LOL, glad we got this all straightened out. Now where's the guy who says anything bigger than ten rounds is illegal in CA? Once we get him thinking right, we can get this whole thread back on track.

Thats why I made the "Im wrong" bigger - so people would see it before chewing my okole. Naw, english is my second language. Pidgin was my first so my edjumacation took a lot longer then it should have.

Originally Posted by Ronin2

Fair enough.... one of the true signs of intelligence is the ability to admit being wrong and that you dont knwo everything. Good to see you doing soem good research beyond Wikipedia...

Cheers!

Yeah, I would've done more research sooner if I weren't on my phone. As with wiki I take most things I read with a grain of salt and try to find original items (ie the USC) or well conducted and peer reviewed studies.

[Bearakracy]

I definitely feel your pain the same thing happened to me at the beginning of this month. I usually only get one to two Mondays a month and go in the mornings. Was it an elder Asian man? I remember waiting in line it was packed due to well we all know why. I go through the same routine the guy even remembered me this time, I let him inspect my ammo as he always does. Its weird that day he asks me if I'm law enforcement, I reply "no, you know that I'm not". Then he states he wants to HELP me because I'm not following proper procedure. It really did bother me because it was packed and there quite a few people who were "new" to firearms. I wasn't making an attempt to play the race card but he sure did try to make it look that way be that way with repeated statements such as" i don't want any trouble". I almost died of laughter its 2013 people are a lot more realistic these days, including myself, not only was he misinforming but basically tried to make me look like some somewhat young so and so whose never owned a firearm rippin and runnin around with no regard for the law. I tried for a good 10 minutes or so to explain to this man but he just kept repeating how he wanted to HELP me. I kept asking him how are you helping me if? Not once did he state how what I was doing was wrong no penal code nuthin. i provided the standard info as one should. I've come to this range (which is out of my way) many times and follow the same routine.

I can deal with a lot of things, I even would have let it slide if he really didn't want me there because I was the only one by myself (waiting) and there were many groups, I even stated that (to counter his, "oh let's play the race card"). But don't insult the minute intelligence I may or may not have. I left but I made sure I plugged the CHP website, the CA DOJ, and of course CALGUNS, who I owe more than any of your will ever know.

I sincerely agologize to the lengthy misguided rant of once such as myself on a dead horse at this point but important thread. So no your not the only one...... Good Day!

[Safety1st]

Originally Posted by 211275

Having said that, you have to be pretty ballsy to have a loaded magazine in the same container with your gun. Why risk it? You will most likely be arrested and arguing with the wrong cop could result in resisting arrest. Be on the safe side. They are more forgiving with long guns though. Keeping ammo and the gun together isn't a big deal.

Risk what? We're following the letter of the law. While I understand not wanting to be inconvenienced by ignorant and careless LEO's, it is our right to act within the law.

Imagine if people had the "why risk it?" attitude about the 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments?? Its a sad day when we live in fear of acting within the law.

[Safety1st]

BTW, I recommend printing out and highlighting the relevant sections on the CHP website and Calguns Wiki and keeping them in your range bag at all times during transport. It may not make much difference but you never know.

[Seaweed02]

Originally Posted by iddie

Agreed.. but it is not a MEPS station.. its just called MEPS.. its like saying CAC Card.

I used to work at the MEPS in Los Angeles and the USCG does process their enlistments right there with the other four branches of service. And they get treated at VA clinics just like the vets from the other four branches.

[-hanko]

Originally Posted by 211275

I was just at a birthday party for a former LEO friend with about 20 cops just last week, all were OC area. This was one of the questions I asked, how to transport my handgun and shotgun. They all said handguns should be in a locked container in the trunk or rear in my case as I have hatchback. Ammo should be on the opposite side of the car with mags UNLOADED. A few said some cops won't make a big deal about gun in the back and ammo in the glove but it just depends on the cop. Having said that, you have to be pretty ballsy to have a loaded magazine in the same container with your gun. Why risk it? You will most likely be arrested and arguing with the wrong cop could result in resisting arrest. Be on the safe side. They are more forgiving with long guns though. Keeping ammo and the gun together isn't a big deal.

Sounds like about 21 ignorant cops who can't comprehend simple English.

Sounds like they convinced you.

"Be on the safe side" is now the California mantra.

-hanko

[Charlie50]

Originally Posted by HOGDOG1955

wow guys, i have 2 neighbors who are chp. they both told me if they pull you over with a locked box with a pistol and loaded mags in that locked case. they will arrest you. also they would cite you or possibly arrest you if you have a un loaded handgun in a locked case and the ammo is in the same compartment/ cab of pickup or inside a car. and they both told me this includes ammo locked in one box and pistol locked in totally sperate box/case.

There have been countless threads on this... these CHP officers are misinformed about the laws regarding carring unloaded firearms in a locked container. CHP s own website makes clear this condition... It seems that many LEOs not well informed.

[Ronin2]

Well I have just made a couple copy's of the CHG web page to keep in my range bag!

[ElDub1950]

Originally Posted by Seaweed02

Don't get angry at me, but it seems you are so pissed off that you didn't read the CHP FAQ. It clearly says that the magazines are to be unloaded.

It doesn't say that at all. Here's the statement:
"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."

It doesn't say no loaded magazines. It says loaded magazines can't be inserted in the magazine well.

[delta9]

Originally Posted by 211275

I was just at a birthday party for a former LEO friend with about 20 cops just last week, all were OC area. This was one of the questions I asked, how to transport my handgun and shotgun. They all said handguns should be in a locked container in the trunk or rear in my case as I have hatchback. Ammo should be on the opposite side of the car

That's interesting because I was at a party with 40 cops, 20 lawyers, and 5 judges who all agreed that California Penal Code 16840 is pretty clear about the definition of a loaded gun

(1) A firearm shall be deemed to be "loaded" 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.

[ElDub1950]

^^^ "Attached" is the key word.

[iddie]

Originally Posted by Seaweed02

I used to work at the MEPS in Los Angeles and the USCG does process their enlistments right there with the other four branches of service. And they get treated at VA clinics just like the vets from the other four branches.

You did not read my post CORRECTLY. I said it is not called a MEPS Station and is just called MEPS.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by delta9

That's interesting because I was at a party with 40 cops, 20 lawyers, and 5 judges who all agreed that California Penal Code 16840 is pretty clear about the definition of a loaded gun

And not one of them brought up People v Clark from 1996? That's sad.

[JeremyS]

Originally Posted by Safety1st

Risk what? We're following the letter of the law. ........Its a sad day when we live in fear of acting within the law.

Love it when "Safety1st" tells somebody to grow a pair and stop "playing it safe" to a fault

[Jb36]

When they say locked trunk, does it mean the lever near the drivers seat has to be locked too?

[Metal Fiend]

Same thing happened to me except it was the owner that gave me the "heads up" on my possible felony. I took his advice with a grain of salt and made sure on the next time I didn't show up with loaded mags in the same case
I like shooting there, so whateva...

Originally Posted by AndRenner

Same thing happened to me at the gun range in Sacramento off watt and orange grove. Glock with lock through the slide in my case, had a magazine loaded in pouches behind it, fat dude(idk name) flipped out on me and told me never to bring a firearm in like that again or I wouldn't be welcomed because it is considered loaded. I just apologized and went on. THEN that same night we had 3 shooting lanes and 2 friends who had never shot before accidentally shot the strings with shotguns down before we left LOL. Now I don't give that place my business. Karma is a *****. Place sucks. "End rant here"

[b.thomas]

Originally Posted by HOGDOG1955

wow guys, i have 2 neighbors who are chp. they both told me if they pull you over with a locked box with a pistol and loaded mags in that locked case. they will arrest you. also they would cite you or possibly arrest you if you have a un loaded handgun in a locked case and the ammo is in the same compartment/ cab of pickup or inside a car. and they both told me this includes ammo locked in one box and pistol locked in totally sperate box/case.

so just where do I carry my ammo???
Been carry guns plus ammo in the trunk of a car (in separate containers) for fifty years and never had a problem?
Either this is BS or you know a couple of confused cops!

[intradubio]

I should have reread before posting, I have this case mixed up with another one.

[Oceanbob]

Originally Posted by intradubio

Clark has nothing to do with a gun in a locked case. I haven't read it in a while but basically it says if you have a concealed gun they can also get you for loaded if the mag is nearby and loaded but not inserted.

Oh Really...? Wanna show us that information?

[MaHoTex]

Originally Posted by Seaweed02

He is right if you don't have a CCW with that weapon listed. Had you been pulled over and your vehicle searched you would have likely been placed under arrest. You must travel with the weapon and magazines (empty) in a locked container. The ammo should not be stored in the same place as the container with the firearm. So if you have the ammo in the trunk, then your handgun should be in the back seat.

I have a CCW with three handguns listed. With those weapons I don't sweat it because I have permission to have them concealed and loaded. For all of my other weapons I travel with them in my back seat floor board of my truck, and the ammo I put in the bed of my truck. The handguns that are not listed on my CCW are always in locked containers/boxes, while the rifles just have to be unloaded.

I do this because I believe that to be the legal requirement. If I am wrong someone please let me know.

So wrong an so many accounts...

[tbc]

Originally Posted by intradubio

Clark has nothing to do with a gun in a locked case. I haven't read it in a while but basically it says if you have a concealed gun they can also get you for loaded if the mag is nearby and loaded but not inserted.

Hmm. Here we go again...


Sent from iPhone through Tapatalk

[m98]

So much fud in this thread and so sad a theres a ccw holder that is poorly misinformed.

[delta9]

Originally Posted by intradubio

Clark has nothing to do with a gun in a locked case. I haven't read it in a while but basically it says if you have a concealed gun they can also get you for loaded if the mag is nearby and loaded but not inserted.

That's not what it says and actually the ruling was quite the opposite of what you claim

[epilepticninja]

Don't consent to a search of your vehicle, and none of this applies?