Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > FIREARMS DISCUSSIONS > Curio & Relic/Black Powder
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Curio & Relic/Black Powder Curio & Relics and Black Powder Firearms, Old School shooting fun!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-08-2018, 6:59 AM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Lightbulb C&R handguns

EDIT; So what happens to the guys who acquire a handgun their C&R in the state. Most of us know you need to go through a dealer but it inevitably happens knowing or not. Then what. So they just never report it and have a unregistered handgun (illegally in CA) or are they running it in a c&R report and itís just hopping itís accepted?

I know of people doing firearm ownership reports on firearms they got a long time ago in odd situations like uncle gave it to them 10 years ago so they ran the FOR and it seemed like the DOJ was just happy it was registered and accepted it anyways.

I know it isnít right, but i know itís done. I donít travel much and Iím a dealer as well so itís never been a thing for me personally, I was just pondering the situation.

Anyone with positive or negative experiences with this type of situation?

(shower thoughts)
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380

Last edited by shootsocal_dave; 09-08-2018 at 11:34 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-08-2018, 7:17 AM
morrcarr67's Avatar
morrcarr67 morrcarr67 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario, CA
Posts: 9,811
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shootsocal_dave View Post
(First, I understand how C&R handguns are supposed to be transferred, Iím asking about the ones that werenít. )

So what happens to the guys who acquire a handgun out of state on their C&R. Most of us know you need to ship it to a dealer but it inevitably happens knowing or not. Then what. So they just never report it and have a unregistered handgun (illegally in CA) or are they running it in a c&R report and itís just hopping itís accepted?

I know of people doing firearm ownership reports on firearms they got a long time ago in odd situations like uncle gave it to them 10 years ago so they ran the FOR and it seemed like the DOJ was just happy it was registered and accepted it anyways.

I know it isnít right, but i know itís done. I donít travel much and Iím a dealer as well so itís never been a thing for me personally, I was just pondering the situation.


Anyone with positive or negative experiences with this type of situation?
It's a little hard to read but I think you are asking about an 03 C&R holder acquiring a C&R firearm while physically out of the state.

Well if you have an 03 C&R and aquire a C&R firearm while physically out of state all you need to do is file this form and pay you fee for registration.

https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/a...s/curioapp.pdf

Sent from my P00C using Tapatalk
__________________
Yes you can have 2 C&R 03 FFL's; 1 in California and 1 in a different state.

For great pizza @ LA Farmer's Markets click on picture

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-08-2018, 7:54 AM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by morrcarr67 View Post
It's a little hard to read but I think you are asking about an 03 C&R holder acquiring a C&R firearm while physically out of the state.

Well if you have an 03 C&R and aquire a C&R firearm while physically out of state all you need to do is file this form and pay you fee for registration.

https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/a...s/curioapp.pdf

Sent from my P00C using Tapatalk
Right, I snowballed my thought process, I mean in state transfers, where the handgun must go through a dealer. BUT we know that doens't always happen, what happens to those guys.
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-08-2018, 8:04 AM
81turbota's Avatar
81turbota 81turbota is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: The desert, Калифорния
Posts: 2,763
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

Buying a C&R hand gun out of state and physically transporting it into CA is totally fine. Fill out the correct form and register it with the gestapo...uh DOJ. Thereís a separate form for in state and out of state acquisitions.
__________________
James

A few of those....A couple of that....but just enough to have fun :D
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-08-2018, 8:07 AM
emcon5's Avatar
emcon5 emcon5 is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Reno
Posts: 3,250
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shootsocal_dave View Post
Right, I snowballed my thought process, I mean in state transfers, where the handgun must go through a dealer. BUT we know that doens't always happen, what happens to those guys.
They commit a crime. Pretty sure it is a misdemeanor, but you would have to look at the relevant penal code chapter to confirm.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-08-2018, 8:33 AM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I know its not legal, but I also know it happens. Then what. If someone has a gun they transferred illegally knowingly or not, what, the gun becomes contraband? Is there a way to fix it?
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:28 AM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 702
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

This sounds like a situation where you are asking for someoneís particular situation. Whoever it is should go see a lawyer to find out what their options are.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:34 AM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I get asked questions about stuff like this all the time. My customers tend to be Older C&R holders who either don't know the law, or just don't care lol. Old school fellas that don't keep up with the ever changing state stuff. They end up asking questions AFTER the fact rather than asking if it ok first.

Like I said, shower thoughts, not a "asking for a friend" situation. Im a dealer lol, you can come sit at MY desk and do paperwork, too easy to follow the law to want to cut corners.
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:58 AM
SamGoldstein SamGoldstein is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Agoura CA
Posts: 876
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shootsocal_dave View Post
I know its not legal, but I also know it happens. Then what. If someone has a gun they transferred illegally knowingly or not, what, the gun becomes contraband? Is there a way to fix it?
A person cannot be convicted of a crime without the fact that the person knew it was a crime. If the accused tried to follow the law and violated it unintentionally there is no crime. Itís called ďmens reaĒ in legalese. Prosecutors would have a difficult if impossible task to prove one intentionally meant to violate law. But that doesnít mean they wouldnít try. A personís previous conduct would certainly be examined.

NOTE: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-08-2018, 12:04 PM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

That is along the lines with what I am talking about. That makes sense. I know of DA's dropping cases because of things like that. It is weird that you can get put in a scenario of "you did it wrong, now what" and there's no clear way to fix it.
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-08-2018, 4:41 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shootsocal_dave View Post
I get asked questions about stuff like this all the time. My customers tend to be Older C&R holders who either don't know the law, or just don't care lol. Old school fellas that don't keep up with the ever changing state stuff. They end up asking questions AFTER the fact rather than asking if it ok first.

Like I said, shower thoughts, not a "asking for a friend" situation. Im a dealer lol, you can come sit at MY desk and do paperwork, too easy to follow the law to want to cut corners.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
A person cannot be convicted of a crime without the fact that the person knew it was a crime. If the accused tried to follow the law and violated it unintentionally there is no crime. Itís called ďmens reaĒ in legalese. Prosecutors would have a difficult if impossible task to prove one intentionally meant to violate law. But that doesnít mean they wouldnít try. A personís previous conduct would certainly be examined.

NOTE: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
If said person was a Federally licensed collector they would be hard pressed to plead ignorance.

As a licensed collector he is legally expected to know AND follow ALL state laws related to ANY C&R firearm acquisition or disposition. It's a condition of being licensed.

It could also be a Federal law violation to violate state laws regarding the transfer of C&R firearms.

Here is the specific Federal code.

478.58 State or other law.
A license issued under this part confers no right or privilege to conduct business or activity contrary to State or other law. The holder of such a license is not by reason of the rights and privileges granted by that license immune from punishment for operating a firearm or ammunition business or activity in violation of the provisions of any State or other law. Similarly, compliance with the provisions of any State or other law affords no immunity under Federal law or regulations.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-08-2018, 4:52 PM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So you guys are missing the point. What would you do at that point?
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-08-2018, 7:09 PM
SamGoldstein SamGoldstein is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Agoura CA
Posts: 876
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
If said person was a Federally licensed collector they would be hard pressed to plead ignorance.

As a licensed collector he is legally expected to know AND follow ALL state laws related to ANY C&R firearm acquisition or disposition. It's a condition of being licensed.

It could also be a Federal law violation to violate state laws regarding the transfer of C&R firearms.

Here is the specific Federal code.

478.58 State or other law.
A license issued under this part confers no right or privilege to conduct business or activity contrary to State or other law. The holder of such a license is not by reason of the rights and privileges granted by that license immune from punishment for operating a firearm or ammunition business or activity in violation of the provisions of any State or other law. Similarly, compliance with the provisions of any State or other law affords no immunity under Federal law or regulations.
Are you a lawyer? Again: Mens Rea. Look it up.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-08-2018, 7:18 PM
kcheung2's Avatar
kcheung2 kcheung2 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,774
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
A person cannot be convicted of a crime without the fact that the person knew it was a crime. If the accused tried to follow the law and violated it unintentionally there is no crime. Itís called ďmens reaĒ in legalese. Prosecutors would have a difficult if impossible task to prove one intentionally meant to violate law. But that doesnít mean they wouldnít try. A personís previous conduct would certainly be examined.

NOTE: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
This is the stupidest thing I've read in a long, long time.
__________________
---------------------
"There is no "best." If there was, everyone here would own that one, and no other." - DSB
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-08-2018, 7:21 PM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcheung2 View Post
This is the stupidest thing I've read in a long, long time.
Google it. It can be and is used in court of law. Specially in gun laws that are almost unfollowable sometimes.
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-09-2018, 5:58 AM
GM4spd's Avatar
GM4spd GM4spd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: I-5 and Lake Forest
Posts: 5,352
iTrader: 104 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shootsocal_dave View Post
Google it. It can be and is used in court of law. Specially in gun laws that are almost unfollowable sometimes.
This may sound good but Iíd rather not use it as a my only defense against
a violation.
__________________
NRA LIFE (1974)
I had a commission/USNR from 71-77 but never consider myself a Vet MyDad+4uncles/USMC/WW2/Korea/Vietnam. My Grandfather US Army WW1. No heroes,just regular folks--they were Veterans.

The election of Donald Trump has caused California
to go ďFULL STUPID ď
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:29 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
A person cannot be convicted of a crime without the fact that the person knew it was a crime. If the accused tried to follow the law and violated it unintentionally there is no crime. Itís called ďmens reaĒ in legalese. Prosecutors would have a difficult if impossible task to prove one intentionally meant to violate law. But that doesnít mean they wouldnít try. A personís previous conduct would certainly be examined.

NOTE: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
Not true at all.

Many statutes are what is called "strict liability" statutes. They do not require a suspect to "knowingly" be in violation of the law. All they require is that a crime occurred.

Most firearms statutes are just such crimes. They require no "guilty mind" or Mens Rea.

If you look at the specific section if there isn't the wording "knowingly" or some similar wording inserted into the section it's a "strict liability" statute.


Additionally "Mens Rea" is a defense used during trial.

So this would not prevent an arrest or the service of a search warrant and seizure of evidence either by the Police or the Feds.

A search warrant would include seizure of all firearms as well as all papers related to the sale or possession of firearms. All computers and other digital storage medium where sales information could be stored would be seized.

It would not prevent the Police or the Feds from interrogating you.

It would not prevent the DA or Fed's from filing charges against you and having a trial to determine your innocence.

During the trial the defendant would specifically have to testify to try and establish the "Mens Rea" defense. That would open him up to cross examination and expose him to have to testify about the crime as well as any other information which was found during the investigation.

Additionally any other crimes which were discovered during the investigation could also be charged and the defendant would be exposed to cross examination during trial.

Even if he were to be found not guilty since a actual crime did occur the defendant would probably not be entitled to the return of his firearms, and would not be able to sue in civil court.

So probably about $40,000 K in lawyer fees...

Yeah, I would not rely on a "Mens Rea" defense to bail you out. Especially in California. Nor would I rely on a Ca. jury to come to a not guilty determination related to a firearms offense.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:35 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
Says the law school graduate. Lol! Simpletons like you of course donít understand criminal law and therefore, since you canít understand it, it must be stupid. Do you understand fire? Itís pretty stupid if you donít. Fool.

Oh and just for laughs Einstein, google Shaneen Allen. You might learn something. But I doubt it.
Yeah "Shaneen Allen" Ö Not something one wants to happen to them...

She was arrested and spent 40 days in jail before she was bonded out...

Plus all sorts of other bad and costly things...
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:43 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shootsocal_dave View Post
So you guys are missing the point. What would you do at that point?
Maybe the best course of action would be to sell them to, or through a 01 FFL dealer...

They would be no longer in their possession and would have been legally transferred to, or through the dealer.

Remember there are millions of "unregistered" guns in California. Possession of a "unregistered" gun isn't a crime.

Selling a "unregistered gun" using a legal means isn't a crime.

They could then show in their bound book the legal transfer using the FFL... Listing "private collection" as the acquisition source. Just like any other C&R they might have owned before they were licensed as a 03 C&R collector.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-09-2018, 1:06 PM
SamGoldstein SamGoldstein is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Agoura CA
Posts: 876
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
Not true at all.

Many statutes are what is called "strict liability" statutes. They do not require a suspect to "knowingly" be in violation of the law. All they require is that a crime occurred.

Most firearms statutes are just such crimes. They require no "guilty mind" or Mens Rea.

If you look at the specific section if there isn't the wording "knowingly" or some similar wording inserted into the section it's a "strict liability" statute.


Additionally "Mens Rea" is a defense used during trial.

So this would not prevent an arrest or the service of a search warrant and seizure of evidence either by the Police or the Feds.

A search warrant would include seizure of all firearms as well as all papers related to the sale or possession of firearms. All computers and other digital storage medium where sales information could be stored would be seized.

It would not prevent the Police or the Feds from interrogating you.

It would not prevent the DA or Fed's from filing charges against you and having a trial to determine your innocence.

During the trial the defendant would specifically have to testify to try and establish the "Mens Rea" defense. That would open him up to cross examination and expose him to have to testify about the crime as well as any other information which was found during the investigation.

Additionally any other crimes which were discovered during the investigation could also be charged and the defendant would be exposed to cross examination during trial.

Even if he were to be found not guilty since a actual crime did occur the defendant would probably not be entitled to the return of his firearms, and would not be able to sue in civil court.

So probably about $40,000 K in lawyer fees...

Yeah, I would not rely on a "Mens Rea" defense to bail you out. Especially in California. Nor would I rely on a Ca. jury to come to a not guilty determination related to a firearms offense.
None of this is accurate. Again I ask, are you a lawyer, or do you like to play one on Calguns.net?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-09-2018, 1:12 PM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 702
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Mens rea does not mean that the defendant knew the act was a crime. Mens rea means that the defendant intended to commit the act. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. Then the topic branches into strict liability, specific intent, general intent, and void for vagueness issues.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-09-2018, 1:16 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
None of this is accurate. Again I ask, are you a lawyer, or do you like to play one on Calguns.net?
Not a lawyer..

I just over my 29 year Law Enforcement career put countless numbers of foolish criminals in prison or jail.

Never once did anyone successfully use a "Mens Rea" defense..

The old "these aren't my pants" defense and "I didn't know it was there " or "I didn't know it was illegal" defenses just don't work.


LOL... So what happened to "Shaneen Allen".

You posted about her, as if somehow "mens Rea" was like kryptonite to firearms charges......

So what happened to her?
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-09-2018, 1:53 PM
SamGoldstein SamGoldstein is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Agoura CA
Posts: 876
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
Not a lawyer..

I just over my 29 year Law Enforcement career put countless numbers of foolish criminals in prison or jail.

Never once did anyone successfully use a "Mens Rea" defense..

The old "these aren't my pants" defense and "I didn't know it was there " or "I didn't know it was illegal" defenses just don't work.


LOL... So what happened to "Shaneen Allen".

You posted about her, as if somehow "mens Rea" was like kryptonite to firearms charges......

So what happened to her?
Your ďstrict liabilityĒ argument is completely irrelevant since it applies to injury and damages. That is not what was asked by the OP.

Secondly, thank you for your service as an LEO, but I respectfully suggest you are a fish out of water here.

Finally, i have experience in trial law, and I never said itís kryptonite. It is however, part of proving a crime occurred. Remember, as a cop, you should know an arrest does not mean youíre guilty. But, one thing you got right, states like California or New Jersey do not respect Mens Rea arguments, but with the right case, they could be forced to. Even during Kavanaughís hearing this past week, he touched on the need for Mens Rea reform from Congress.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-09-2018, 3:41 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
None of this is accurate. Again I ask, are you a lawyer, or do you like to play one on Calguns.net?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
But, one thing you got right, states like California or New Jersey do not respect Mens Rea arguments.
So, my opinion is correct after all...

What exact "experience" in "criminal law" do you have? Please don't say you have watched many law shows on TV or have been a defendant...

Neither of those count...


Once again I'll ask?

So what happened to "Shaneen Allen", and how did "Mens Rea" help her?

You posted about her, as if somehow "Mens Rea" was like kryptonite to her firearms charges......


Was she barred from being arrested?

Were Officers barred from recovering evidence?

Was she barred from being booked?

Was she barred from being held pending jail?

Was the DA barred from filing charges against her?

Was the DA barred from making a plea deal with her to avoid jail time?




She was scheduled for trial, however she before trial she entered into a "Pretrial Intervention" or "PTI". She was sentenced to time served and additional hours of community service.

She did not get her gun back, and in fact had to surrender her carry permit...

Furtunately for her Gov. Chris Christy issued her a pardon a few years later...

From the NRA/ILA.. Related to her case...

"While we certainly welcome these developments, the enduring lessons of Shaneen Allenís case (and the anguish and upheaval it has already caused her and her family) should not be forgotten. Even under the new guidance -- which is merely advice on the law, not binding law itself -- the simple act of carrying a firearm for purposes of self-defense is still presumptively criminal and still presumptively leads to mandatory imprisonment. Those lucky enough to be shown leniency in the disposition of their cases also still face arrest and search, an interruption of their journeys and normal lives, potentially lengthy periods of detention, the forfeiture of their lawfully-possessed firearms, fines, legal fees, stigma, and stress. Ms. Allen herself lost her employment and her residence and will face a lengthy period of rebuilding her life.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-09-2018, 3:51 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,022
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
Your ďstrict liabilityĒ argument is completely irrelevant since it applies to injury and damages. That is not what was asked by the OP.
See the fourth paragraph of this article... It specifically mentions "strict liability" and criminal acts....

You need to study up a bit....

Cornell Law School disagrees with you.. and agrees with me...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/mens_rea


"Some have expanded the MPC classification to include a fifth state of mind: "strict liability." Strict liability crimes do not require a guilty state of mind. The mere fact that a defendant committed the crime is sufficient to satisfy any inquiry into the defendant's mental state. This lack of a guilty mind would act as the fifth, and least blameworthy, of the possible mental states. For a strict liability crime, it is sufficient for the prosecution to prove that the defendant committed the wrongful act, regardless of the defendant's mental state. Therefore, a guilty state of mind is irrelevant to a strict liability offense. Examples of strict liability offenses in criminal law often include possession and statutory rape. Many commentators criticize convicting defendants under strict liability because of the lack of mens rea.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-09-2018, 6:24 PM
kcheung2's Avatar
kcheung2 kcheung2 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,774
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
Says the law school graduate. Lol! Simpletons like you of course don’t understand criminal law and therefore, since you can’t understand it, it must be stupid. Do you understand fire? It’s pretty stupid if you don’t. Fool.

Oh and just for laughs Einstein, google Shaneen Allen. You might learn something. But I doubt it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
See the fourth paragraph of this article... It specifically mentions "strict liability" and criminal acts....

You need to study up a bit....

Cornell Law School disagrees with you.. and agrees with me...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/mens_rea


"Some have expanded the MPC classification to include a fifth state of mind: "strict liability." Strict liability crimes do not require a guilty state of mind. The mere fact that a defendant committed the crime is sufficient to satisfy any inquiry into the defendant's mental state. This lack of a guilty mind would act as the fifth, and least blameworthy, of the possible mental states. For a strict liability crime, it is sufficient for the prosecution to prove that the defendant committed the wrongful act, regardless of the defendant's mental state. Therefore, a guilty state of mind is irrelevant to a strict liability offense. Examples of strict liability offenses in criminal law often include possession and statutory rape. Many commentators criticize convicting defendants under strict liability because of the lack of mens rea.
So yeah...I'll stick with my post that your comment was the stupidest thing I've read in a while. Oh by the way you legal eagle, you should know that the difference between my post & yours was that I criticized your post, while you made a personal attack... As someone who should be quite familiar with requirements, I'll refer you to the Calguns terms of use...Do you understand playing with fire?
__________________
---------------------
"There is no "best." If there was, everyone here would own that one, and no other." - DSB
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-09-2018, 6:39 PM
shootsocal_dave's Avatar
shootsocal_dave shootsocal_dave is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Orange County
Posts: 558
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcheung2 View Post
So yeah...I'll stick with my post that your comment was the stupidest thing I've read in a while. Oh by the way you legal eagle, you should know that the difference between my post & yours was that I criticized your post, while you made a personal attack... As someone who should be quite familiar with requirements, I'll refer you to the Calguns terms of use...Do you understand playing with fire?


Hahahaha watch out!
__________________
shootsocal.com
California 01 Dealer / 03 C&R Collector

WTB Walther PPK /Colt Mustang or Government .380
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-09-2018, 6:45 PM
81turbota's Avatar
81turbota 81turbota is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: The desert, Калифорния
Posts: 2,763
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

__________________
James

A few of those....A couple of that....but just enough to have fun :D
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-10-2018, 4:00 AM
GM4spd's Avatar
GM4spd GM4spd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: I-5 and Lake Forest
Posts: 5,352
iTrader: 104 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcheung2 View Post
So yeah...I'll stick with my post that your comment was the stupidest thing I've read in a while. Oh by the way you legal eagle, you should know that the difference between my post & yours was that I criticized your post, while you made a personal attack.
Iíll go with this for the win.
__________________
NRA LIFE (1974)
I had a commission/USNR from 71-77 but never consider myself a Vet MyDad+4uncles/USMC/WW2/Korea/Vietnam. My Grandfather US Army WW1. No heroes,just regular folks--they were Veterans.

The election of Donald Trump has caused California
to go ďFULL STUPID ď
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-10-2018, 7:22 AM
Garv's Avatar
Garv Garv is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: SoCal South Bay
Posts: 5,655
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcheung2 View Post
I'll refer you to the Calguns terms of use...Do you understand playing with fire?
Apparently somebody got burned.
__________________
Originally posted by Kestryll:
It never fails to amuse me how people get outraged but fail to tell the whole story in their rants....
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-10-2018, 10:09 AM
Bobby Ricigliano's Avatar
Bobby Ricigliano Bobby Ricigliano is offline
Mit Gott und Mauser
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The People's Glorious Republik of Southern Kalifornistan
Posts: 16,341
iTrader: 319 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamGoldstein View Post
A person cannot be convicted of a crime without the fact that the person knew it was a crime.

NOTE: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
You are completely wrong in your assertion.

It definitely is legal advice alright, just really bad legal advice.

Doubling down with insults toward those who correctly disagreed with you is usually the last ditch effort of an undefendable argument that has ran out of gas.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-10-2018, 4:33 PM
retired retired is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Riverside County
Posts: 9,564
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Per his profile, Sam is a software engineer, tho of course that doesn't negate the fact that he may be an attorney on the side. Also, he seems to be taking a vacation from Calguns (not my doing, tho I would have done the same). When he returns, he hopefully learned his lesson. Personal attacks aren't allowed.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-10-2018, 5:12 PM
huntingsocal's Avatar
huntingsocal huntingsocal is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,031
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

The C&R Hammer Has Fallen
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-10-2018, 7:46 PM
aghauler's Avatar
aghauler aghauler is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NM
Posts: 4,298
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 81turbota View Post
Ouch that's gotta hurt! A 2-4-0 through the wall!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:41 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.