AB 1527 Open carry of long guns & AB 1559 passed by the Governor

[Wrangler John]

Doesn't effect me in the slightest.

When I travel to the shooting range my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are in turn locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

When I go hunting my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

The cases are locked to prevent the latches from springing open and dumping out the rifle and cleaning rod.

When I ship a rifle or barreled action for modification or repair it is packaged securely on the way to UPS. When I take one to a local dealer it's in a hard case. When I pick a new one up at the dealer, it's in it's packing box, designed to encase a firearm and securely taped, it gets locked under the tonneau cover. I can easily bring a hard case if need be.

I will not be inconvenienced in the slightest by the passage of this law.

[knucklehead]

Originally Posted by Wrangler John

Doesn't effect me in the slightest.

When I travel to the shooting range my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are in turn locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

When I go hunting my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

The cases are locked to prevent the latches from springing open and dumping out the rifle and cleaning rod.

When I ship a rifle or barreled action for modification or repair it is packaged securely on the way to UPS. When I take one to a local dealer it's in a hard case. When I pick a new one up at the dealer, it's in it's packing box, designed to encase a firearm and securely taped, it gets locked under the tonneau cover. I can easily bring a hard case if need be.

I will not be inconvenienced in the slightest by the passage of this law.

That's the mind set of people that don't get it. Its more Than just being inconvenienced. It's the part about them
Taking away our gun rights.

It's people that think like you. It doesn't affect them so who cares about them
Passing the law. Right??

[Cnynrat]

I'm furious that 1527 was signed. It will make it illegal for me to openly carry a rifle from my front door to my garage (a separate building, not within a fenced area of my property) for cleaning or service.

[cmaynes]

the Amicus brief that JB filed on behalf of Heller was substantial in a manner FAR overshadowing these things.

when we allude to the notion "uprising" we have to understand that it will be seen by the govt. as an illegal action- no matter what the Constitution says. It is a challenge to the the sovereign.

the other thing that is pretty f*&%ing sad is hearing stuff like "it wont happen in lifetime"... well, you might be right- he GCA of 34, and 68 happened a long time ago- it will take some time and effort to reverse them- but just because it wont get done tomorrow doesnt make it a waste of effort. How long did the Civil Rights mvt take? How many people got killed in the process?

take a breath, and get a grip.

[TheBerryMan]

Soooo am what are they going to do with all us Farmers and Ranchers that everyone knows carry rifles and shotguns in their trucks 24/7? For varmints and for self defense because we run into some pretty crazy people out there.

[AaronT]

Originally Posted by Cnynrat

I'm furious that 1527 was signed. It will make it illegal for me to openly carry a rifle from my front door to my garage (a separate building, not within a fenced area of my property) for cleaning or service.

It's still on your property.

[AaronT]

Originally Posted by TheBerryMan

Soooo am what are they going to do with all us Farmers and Ranchers that everyone knows carry rifles and shotguns in their trucks 24/7? For varmints and for self defense because we run into some pretty crazy people out there.

Your're fuc***. Welcome to Kalifornia

[Dreaded Claymore]

Originally Posted by aklover_91

I remember being told that he'd probably be better than the alternative.

I have no idea why anyone seems to have thought a CA elected governor would be an out and out gun toting libertarian, but it seems to me we are far better off than we could be.

I agreed, and still agree.

[meaty-btz]

Originally Posted by TheBerryMan

Soooo am what are they going to do with all us Farmers and Ranchers that everyone knows carry rifles and shotguns in their trucks 24/7? For varmints and for self defense because we run into some pretty crazy people out there.

90% of the time you are in "unincorporated land where the discharge of a firearm is not prohibited" and when you are not the preceding you are on private property which again is an exemption.

[Bruce]

Originally Posted by Librarian

Lawsuits.

Lu v Baca

Rossow v Merced County

Scocca v Smith

Richards v Prieto

Peruta v County of San Diego

Woollard v Sheridan

Ezell v Chicago

Originally Posted by glockman19

I'll be dead before any of these are decided in the favor of firearms owners.

Your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandchildren's great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandchildren will be dead before these are decided in favor of gun owners.

But fear not 'cause we're "winning".

[Maestro Pistolero]

Originally Posted by Wrangler John

Doesn't effect me in the slightest.

When I travel to the shooting range my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are in turn locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

When I go hunting my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

The cases are locked to prevent the latches from springing open and dumping out the rifle and cleaning rod.

When I ship a rifle or barreled action for modification or repair it is packaged securely on the way to UPS. When I take one to a local dealer it's in a hard case. When I pick a new one up at the dealer, it's in it's packing box, designed to encase a firearm and securely taped, it gets locked under the tonneau cover. I can easily bring a hard case if need be.

I will not be inconvenienced in the slightest by the passage of this law.

That's nice. Your circumstances aren't where the constitutional problem exists. You are not apparently carrying a firearm for the purposes of immediate use in case of confrontation, per Heller versus DC. The problem is quite obviously that there is now no path whatsoever to carry even and unloaded firearm in California without a discretionary license that's automatically denied for most people. Are you also fine and dandy with that?

[Yugo]

Originally Posted by Wrangler John

Doesn't effect me in the slightest.

When I travel to the shooting range my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are in turn locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

When I go hunting my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

The cases are locked to prevent the latches from springing open and dumping out the rifle and cleaning rod.

When I ship a rifle or barreled action for modification or repair it is packaged securely on the way to UPS. When I take one to a local dealer it's in a hard case. When I pick a new one up at the dealer, it's in it's packing box, designed to encase a firearm and securely taped, it gets locked under the tonneau cover. I can easily bring a hard case if need be.

I will not be inconvenienced in the slightest by the passage of this law.

People like you make me (and im sure many others) sick!!!
___________

[Dreaded Claymore]

Originally Posted by Bruce

Your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandchildren's great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, grandchildren will be dead before these are decided in favor of gun owners.

But fear not 'cause we're "winning".

And, how many cases have you won lately? Do you actually have any criticism of the job CGF is doing? Or are you just going do the equivalent of calling them "a big stupid doo-doo head?"

[chknlyps2]

Originally Posted by pdq_wizzard

can some one put this in English ??? the way these laws are worded it seems like they want you go to jail.

I think we are gonna need a flow chart

[Cali-Shooter]

Originally Posted by glockman19

I'll be dead before any of these are decided in the favor of firearms owners.

Sad but true.

For those that can't take it anymore and have the means to leave, that's your only alternative to do something about this hellhole. Otherwise, you're destined to suffer as long as you're here in Commieland.

[Bruce]

Originally Posted by Dreaded Claymore

And, how many cases have you won lately? Do you actually have any criticism of the job CGF is doing? Or are you just going do the equivalent of calling them "a big stupid doo-doo head?"

Since all the cases cited are "pending", just exactly how many have you won? For months we were told once Nordyke was decided, the pro-gun decsions would flow like Naigra. Nordyke is decided and....... NOTHING.

CGF is great at announcing lawsuits filed. What follows is weeks, months, and years of threads asking "what's the status ?" But beyond that, NOTHING.

The only people "winning" are the lawyers.

[lilro]

Originally Posted by Bruce

The only people "winning" are the lawyers.

Pretty much.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by Bruce

CGF is great at announcing lawsuits filed. What follows is weeks, months, and years of threads asking "what's the status ?" But beyond that, NOTHING.

What influence to YOU have on the calendars of the courts?

I keep reminding people - the appeals courts run on 'horse and buggy' time - your impatience is noted, but no one but the judges at the various levels has a say in that matter.

[elx144]

Can someone please clear up what the law actually says. If I put my guns in the truck on the driveway will I be required to do so in the attached garage now? If I live in an apartment will I be required to purchase a long gun case to walk out to the car? If my condo has a detached garage in the complex am I required to walk from the front door to me vehicle using a locked case? If there are any situations I'm missing please include them too.

Once in the vehicle do the guns need to be in a locked case? If I have a truck or a hatch back car, do I need to have a locked case?

These facts are important, any one of us could lose our rights if we make a mistake.

Thanks in advance,
Elix

[speleogist]

Originally Posted by Librarian

What influence to YOU have on the calendars of the courts?

I keep reminding people - the appeals courts run on 'horse and buggy' time - your impatience is noted, but no one but the judges at the various levels has a say in that matter.

Exactly. I don't get why people are blaming the CGF.

[speleogist]

Originally Posted by elx144

Can someone please clear up what the law actually says. If I put my guns in the truck on the driveway will I be required to do so in the attached garage now? If I live in an apartment will I be required to purchase a long gun case to walk out to the car? If my condo has a detached garage in the complex am I required to walk from the front door to me vehicle using a locked case? If there are any situations I'm missing please include them too.

Once in the vehicle do the guns need to be in a locked case? If I have a truck or a hatch back car, do I need to have a locked case?

These facts are important, any one of us could lose our rights if we make a mistake.

Thanks in advance,
Elix

From what I understand, your property is your property and you can carry your guns to your truck without issue.

And another poster said the language in the bill describes a case as something that encases the firearm completely and snaps, buttons, fastens, or zips without any of the firearm showing.

[Apec]

Originally Posted by tenpercentfirearms

1559 reduces the amount of money that business has to pay to buy guns you can't have and enables the movie industry to make money on guns you can't have. It actually is a pro-business deal, but a little hypocritical since we can't be trusted with guns, but the movie prop guys can.

And I'd have thought the anti-gun lobby would have pushed for forcing the movie industry to stick to airsoft/replica guns.

[elx144]

Originally Posted by speleogist

From what I understand, your property is your property and you can carry your guns to your truck without issue.

And another poster said the language in the bill describes a case as something that encases the firearm completely and snaps, buttons, fastens, or zips without any of the firearm showing.

So if I throw parts of my Remington trap gun behind the seat while I'm on the way to the trap club in wine country I'm good to go, or do I need to lock my action in a case that's going to be more visible and increase my chances of theft while I'm sampling cheese?

I'm just trying to clear this up so I don't get into trouble.

[Wrangler John]

Originally Posted by knucklehead

That's the mind set of people that don't get it. Its more Than just being inconvenienced. It's the part about them
Taking away our gun rights.

It's people that think like you. It doesn't affect them so who cares about them
Passing the law. Right??

No, it's people who immediately resort to calling elected officials names and expounding ridiculous questions regarding a law that, misguided or not, was legitimately passed. My point is that many of us do not openly carry long guns in public now and never did. Once we get past the hyperbole of infantile indignation and complaints, we arrive at the conclusion that California's legislature, as currently constituted, can and will not, recognize our right under the 2nd Amendment, nor will they recognize Heller and McDonald as having effect in California. Given the political landscape there is little we can do about it.

Resorting to court challenges is a long difficult and expensive road, one that must be continued. Yet so far the courts have largely upheld the state, with a few notable exceptions. Meanwhile there are three choices: Change the political landscape by electing more supportive politicians to the legislature. Change the California Constitution through the initiative process, or leave the state altogether. Merely typing invective and woe-is-me posts to a forum is about as helpful as holding one's breath until one turns blue. As California slides toward bankruptcy, there may come an opening to effect some change, yet my personal opinion is that it is too late, leaving emigration the only immediately viable answer.

[Wrangler John]

Originally Posted by Maestro Pistolero

That's nice. Your circumstances aren't where the constitutional problem exists. You are not apparently carrying a firearm for the purposes of immediate use in case of confrontation, per Heller versus DC. The problem is quite obviously that there is now no path whatsoever to carry even and unloaded firearm in California without a discretionary license that's automatically denied for most people. Are you also fine and dandy with that?

I've never felt the need to privately carry a firearm for immediate use in case of a confrontation, not once in six decades of life. Maybe it's because I don't place myself in situations where confrontations may arise, maybe it's because people generally find me intimidating just by my presence, I have no idea. Heller doesn't exist in California, it is entirely disregarded by the legislature, and they have been and will be, supported by the lower courts. Plain fact is that the passage of this law will be ruled not to substantially curtail the 2nd Amendment right by lower courts. Until such time as SCOTUS, rules otherwise, we are stuck with it. Whether or not I'm fine and dandy with that circumstance is irrelevant.

[Wrangler John]

Originally Posted by knucklehead

That's the mind set of people that don't get it. Its more Than just being inconvenienced. It's the part about them
Taking away our gun rights.

It's people that think like you. It doesn't affect them so who cares about them
Passing the law. Right??

No, it's people who immediately resort to calling elected officials names and expounding ridiculous questions regarding a law that, misguided or not, was legitimately passed. My point is that many of us do not openly carry long guns in public now and never did. Once we get past the hyperbole of infantile indignation and complaints, we arrive at the conclusion that California's legislature, as currently constituted, can and will not, recognize our right under the 2nd Amendment, nor will they recognize Heller and McDonald as having effect in California. Given the political landscape there is little we can do about it.

Resorting to court challenges is a long difficult and expensive road, one that must be continued. Yet so far the courts have largely upheld the state, with a few notable exceptions. Meanwhile there are three choices: Change the political landscape by electing more supportive politicians to the legislature. Change the California Constitution through the initiative process, or leave the state altogether. Merely typing invective and woe-is-me posts to a forum is about as helpful as holding one's breath until one turns blue. As California slides toward bankruptcy, there may come an opening to effect some change, yet my personal opinion is that it is too late, leaving emigration the only immediately viable answer.

[socalbud]

This is more about the difficulty to obtain a CCW than it is the ability open carry in the big scheme of things. Seriously no one wants to go around open carrying a long gun...wasn't the "open carry movement" a protest by people who want to be able to reasonably acquire a CCW permit?

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by taperxz

Hunters are exempted again.

(j) By a licensed hunter while engaged in hunting or while transporting that firearm when going to or returning from that hunting expedition.

BUT as soon as you say your hunting you give up your 4th amendment rights.

They will completely get rid of that outdated document this country was founded on soon enough.

[Cnynrat]

Originally Posted by speleogist

From what I understand, your property is your property and you can carry your guns to your truck without issue.

I'd be careful with that interpretation. As I understand it, there is case law that makes it questionable whether or not portions of your front yard not enclosed by a fence would be treated as private property with respect to this law. I'd like to hear some of the CG legal types chime in on that question.

[AyatollahGondola]

Originally Posted by socalbud

This is more about the difficulty to obtain a CCW than it is the ability open carry in the big scheme of things. Seriously no one wants to go around open carrying a long gun...wasn't the "open carry movement" a protest by people who want to be able to reasonably acquire a CCW permit?

No! There was a movement to that end, but it did not encompass everyone's wishes or desires. And where longuns are concened, there's no concealed permit for those that I'm aware of. So when the OC of handguns was restricted, the OC of long guns was no longer about forcing a law enforcement org into more liberal issuance

And for the record again, I do want to carry my long gun in public. And I will

[AyatollahGondola]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

BUT as soon as you say your hunting you give up your 4th amendment rights.

They will completely get rid of that outdated document this country was founded on soon enough.

You have a reduced expectation of privacy...maybe even quite a bit reduced, but you still have some 4th amendment protections. But what's the issue anyway? If you're hunting, why would you fear any disclosure?

[bill_k_lopez]

Originally Posted by Wrangler John

Doesn't effect me in the slightest.

When I travel to the shooting range my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are in turn locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

When I go hunting my rifles are locked in hard cases, which are locked under the tonneau cover of my pickup truck.

The cases are locked to prevent the latches from springing open and dumping out the rifle and cleaning rod.

When I ship a rifle or barreled action for modification or repair it is packaged securely on the way to UPS. When I take one to a local dealer it's in a hard case. When I pick a new one up at the dealer, it's in it's packing box, designed to encase a firearm and securely taped, it gets locked under the tonneau cover. I can easily bring a hard case if need be.

I will not be inconvenienced in the slightest by the passage of this law.

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

-Martin Niemöller

Its just a matter of time - and when its your time it will be too late. But feel good that it doesn't affect you...

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

BUT as soon as you say your hunting you give up your 4th amendment rights.

They will completely get rid of that outdated document this country was founded on soon enough.

You don't give up your 4th, you only give up or surrender yourself to items involved in the take of sport hunting. A game wardens inspection is limited to those items within the area of hunting. Additionally, most non warden LEO's are not going to put you through a warden type search other than perhaps asking to see a hunting license to validate your open carry claim to comply with the new law.

Personally, with all the new laws, gun owners should get a hunting license to protect themselves from all the BS open carry laws we have. It's good insurance against getting arrested for a mishap. JMO

[VaderSpade]

Can I come live in that fantasy world you're living in Taper? They will push the limits of the law EVERY time up here, and it's been documented that regular LEO's have taken F&G with then just to have the right to violate the 4th.
The wardens were photographing the serial numbers on our guns last under an E-check and they wanted to do MUCH more.

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

Can I come live in that fantasy world you're living in Taper? They will push the limits of the law EVERY time up here, and it's been documented that regular LEO's have taken F&G with then just to have the right to violate the 4th.
The wardens were photographing the serial numbers on our guns last under an E-check and they wanted to do MUCH more.

We don't seem to have the same problem you guys do FWIW. The law is the law as I have pointed out. If you guys have crooked LE up there then.... I guess you guys have a different legal problem up there or just crooked LE with nothing better to do.

[VaderSpade]

I also just got the real information straight from SPI that there are NO hunting restrictions on a piece of land that the wardens have been writing trespassing tickets on for years.

All to help a very rich ranch owner. Laws are for little people.

[AyatollahGondola]

Originally Posted by taperxz

We don't seem to have the same problem you guys do FWIW. The law is the law as I have pointed out. If you guys have crooked LE up there then.... I guess you guys have a different legal problem up there or just crooked LE with nothing better to do.

I believe I remember some court cases where the searches were upheld as proper after a local leo called in a game warden for a more thorough search.
I don't like it, but I think that's the way it is. Also, there's a movement or idea afoot to merge CHP with DFG. It's not happened yet, but budget woes are the cited reason. In addition, DFG is undergoing a name change to department of something else to supposedly reflect their evolving mission in preserving natural resources, and that may also give rise to a different set of search circumstances soon.

[AyatollahGondola]

Originally Posted by VaderSpade

I also just got the real information straight from SPI that there are NO hunting restrictions on a piece of land that the wardens have been writing trespassing tickets on for years.

All to help a very rich ranch owner. Laws are for little people.

Where is this info available at?

[taperxz]

Originally Posted by AyatollahGondola

I believe I remember some court cases where the searches were upheld as proper after a local leo called in a game warden for a more thorough search.
I don't like it, but I think that's the way it is. Also, there's a movement or idea afoot to merge CHP with DFG. It's not happened yet, but budget woes are the cited reason. In addition, DFG is undergoing a name change to department of something else to supposedly reflect their evolving mission in preserving natural resources, and that may also give rise to a different set of search circumstances soon.

I doubt this anywhere in the near future. CHP are the state police, game wardens are funded directly by the F&G dept./ commission. Two completely different budgets with different missions.

Fish and wildlife? Ehhh, they ARE the responsible agency for wildlife any way. Other states use the same term as does the federal government. (US fish and wildlife)

[VaderSpade]

Originally Posted by AyatollahGondola

Where is this info available at?

Not easy information to get. First you need the parcel # of the piece of land in question, THEN you need to find out who the SPI land manger for that piece is. Find out how to contact said manger with ALL the right information and sit back and wait (hope) for him to get back to you.