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 > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-13-2018, 6:30 AM
POLICESTATE's Avatar
POLICESTATE POLICESTATE is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wylie, TEXAS
Posts: 18,030
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Personally, especially in a litigious state like California, I would contract with a security firm that is properly licensed and insured.

It may cost a little more but not as much as you might think. Overhead for employees is significant, particularly when you get into positions that have benefits, and in this case with the potential for lawsuits from the perp or the perp's family the umbrella insurance required would be costly.

Factor in that bullets often go through people, or bullets that miss might hit other people, that's more lawsuits coming directly at the church.

Here's another factor to consider: the church itself.

Are we talking a medium-sized congregation? Is it a mega church? How many show up on a Sunday for each service (if there is more than one) and are there any mid-week services or activities for which an armed guard might be necessary?

The safest course for just about any organization is to contract with the appropriate firm for appropriate security services to best protect itself from the fallout if there ever is an incident that resulted in an armed security guard having to discharge their weapon.


There is a church I know of that had their local police department come and do a security assessment. The PD had offered to the local churches to do this following a certain mass shooting in the state this year. I would see if the local PD is willing to do an assessment and make some recommendations.
__________________
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.


Government Official Lies
. F r e e d o m . D i e s .
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-13-2018, 7:47 AM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 4,901
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by POLICESTATE View Post
Personally, especially in a litigious state like California, I would contract with a security firm that is properly licensed and insured.

It may cost a little more but not as much as you might think. Overhead for employees is significant, particularly when you get into positions that have benefits, and in this case with the potential for lawsuits from the perp or the perp's family the umbrella insurance required would be costly.

Factor in that bullets often go through people, or bullets that miss might hit other people, that's more lawsuits coming directly at the church.

Here's another factor to consider: the church itself.

Are we talking a medium-sized congregation? Is it a mega church? How many show up on a Sunday for each service (if there is more than one) and are there any mid-week services or activities for which an armed guard might be necessary?

The safest course for just about any organization is to contract with the appropriate firm for appropriate security services to best protect itself from the fallout if there ever is an incident that resulted in an armed security guard having to discharge their weapon.


There is a church I know of that had their local police department come and do a security assessment. The PD had offered to the local churches to do this following a certain mass shooting in the state this year. I would see if the local PD is willing to do an assessment and make some recommendations.
Don't forget worker's comp insurance. Just the cost of that should be enough to discourage anyone from attempting to have in-house security.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-13-2018, 11:31 AM
POLICESTATE's Avatar
POLICESTATE POLICESTATE is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wylie, TEXAS
Posts: 18,030
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Something else that came up for the security assessment a local PD did for a local church: LTC holders. They recommended not to put up a 30.06 sign, that could make the church look like an easy target as a GFZ.

However they recommended the church think about how to address LTC in other ways, mainly because even though some members might be packing heat at church, during an incident you don't only have to worry about the bullets coming from the perp, but also the bullets going *towards* the perp from LTC holders. The fact is, bullets often go through people, or might miss, potentially hitting the innocent.

No solutions or suggestions from PD, just something to think about.

It certainly gives any LTC holder food for though in a crowded situation. On the other hand, likely a shooter like that is going to kill every person he possibly can, so an LTC unintentionally hitting a bystander may still result in many lives saved if the threat gets neutralized BUT that is something an LTC holder will have to live with for the rest of their lives.

This is why people who are *******s really suck, they destroy so many more lives than just the targets, it's all the collateral emotional damage to family, friends, and more.
__________________
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.


Government Official Lies
. F r e e d o m . D i e s .
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-13-2018, 1:26 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,152
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by POLICESTATE View Post
Something else that came up for the security assessment a local PD did for a local church: LTC holders. They recommended not to put up a 30.06 sign, that could make the church look like an easy target as a GFZ.

However they recommended the church think about how to address LTC in other ways, mainly because even though some members might be packing heat at church, during an incident you don't only have to worry about the bullets coming from the perp, but also the bullets going *towards* the perp from LTC holders. The fact is, bullets often go through people, or might miss, potentially hitting the innocent.
No solutions or suggestions from PD, just something to think about.

It certainly gives any LTC holder food for though in a crowded situation. On the other hand, likely a shooter like that is going to kill every person he possibly can, so an LTC unintentionally hitting a bystander may still result in many lives saved if the threat gets neutralized BUT that is something an LTC holder will have to live with for the rest of their lives.

This is why people who are *******s really suck, they destroy so many more lives than just the targets, it's all the collateral emotional damage to family, friends, and more.
"Know your target and beyond"... something some cops apparently don't think about when they fire their weapons.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-13-2018, 6:45 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,617
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by POLICESTATE View Post
Something else that came up for the security assessment a local PD did for a local church: LTC holders. They recommended not to put up a 30.06 sign, that could make the church look like an easy target as a GFZ..
As you probably know, CA does not have the equivalent of the TX PC 30.06; signs here do not have the force of law.

But I certainly support not putting up 'no guns' signs.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-13-2018, 8:23 PM
socal m1 shooter's Avatar
socal m1 shooter socal m1 shooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 241
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
As you probably know, CA does not have the equivalent of the TX PC 30.06; signs here do not have the force of law.
But I certainly support not putting up 'no guns' signs.
Not only that, but a wise SOP is that your security is split between a good number of unarmed guys in uniform who are actively roving and visible, and a much smaller number of trained CCW permit holders in ordinary clothes, scattered discretely here and there like Federal Air Marshals.

Also, at the church I attend, there is a crew of folks who pray before events, including regular services, for many things, one of which is safety.
__________________
WTB extractor for S&W 659. Please PM if you have one to sell.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-13-2018, 9:39 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,152
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

In my congregation of about 300 there are no fewer than three LEOs a few more first responders with CCW and an unknown number of ordinary guys that are probably carrying as well. Who knows but I suspect a couple of women carry also.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-14-2018, 9:53 AM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,499
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
As you probably know, CA does not have the equivalent of the TX PC 30.06; signs here do not have the force of law.

But I certainly support not putting up 'no guns' signs.
Yes and no.
Violating the sign itself does not carry a specific criminal penalty, but you may then be trespassed.
At my last renewal, the deputy hosting the class stated that the presence of the sign WAS our "one warning" that the business does not want us to carry and violation of the sign alone was sufficient for a trespass charge to stick without warning.
Of course, there were MANY other issues that he stated that were in conflict with the law (including the claim that ammo would need to be individually serialized under the new ammo law and he was NOT referring to microstamping).
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-14-2018, 9:59 AM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,152
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
Yes and no.
(including the claim that ammo would need to be individually serialized under the new ammo law and he was NOT referring to microstamping).
WTF where do people get this stuff... oh yea we're on Calguns
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-14-2018, 10:02 AM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,499
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
WTF where do people get this stuff... oh yea we're on Calguns
The problem is, this was a deputy hosting the CCW class.
The same deputy that would be arresting you, or revoking your CCW if you are issued from his county, for violating his FUD rules.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 12-15-2018, 12:39 PM
socal m1 shooter's Avatar
socal m1 shooter socal m1 shooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 241
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

OP, I just noticed that Mike the Cop (of YouTube fame) is also offering something along these lines.
__________________
WTB extractor for S&W 659. Please PM if you have one to sell.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 12-15-2018, 12:43 PM
Highlander21 Highlander21 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: SoCal
Posts: 85
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
Yes and no.
Violating the sign itself does not carry a specific criminal penalty, but you may then be trespassed.
At my last renewal, the deputy hosting the class stated that the presence of the sign WAS our "one warning" that the business does not want us to carry and violation of the sign alone was sufficient for a trespass charge to stick without warning.
Of course, there were MANY other issues that he stated that were in conflict with the law (including the claim that ammo would need to be individually serialized under the new ammo law and he was NOT referring to microstamping).
Yea, I found something similar with my CCW instructor/LEO as well. He said at least 3 things that were in conflict with the law. But this supports some of John Lott's research that shows CCW holders are even more law abiding than LEO.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-15-2018, 1:33 PM
71MUSTY's Avatar
71MUSTY 71MUSTY is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 5,597
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
In my congregation of about 300 there are no fewer than three LEOs a few more first responders with CCW and an unknown number of ordinary guys that are probably carrying as well. Who knows but I suspect a couple of women carry also.
At my church there are about 8 LEO's and the same number of CCW (male and female) that we know about. This group goes camping together so we all know who we are and we talk regularly. In addition there are a few non permitted old guys we are pretty sure carry and an unknown number of other good guys who we don't know about likely carrying.

This probably works out to an average of 6-8 people at every weekend service and anywhere between 2-4 at any weekday event.

Our Church has no formal security, but the 16 people maintain high situational awareness and are typically who gets asked to check out that suspicious car in the parking lot during kids bible study etc.

The congregation for the most part does not know who carries in fact very few even know who the LEO's are. They just know who to talk to if they see something unusual and those people know who to ask to go check it out with our visible abs. (hey mine might be mixed with visible fat but it's still impressive lol)
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by epilepticninja View Post
Americans vs. Democrats
IF WE EVER FORGET WE ARE ONE NATION UNDER GOD.
THEN WE WILL BE A NATION GONE UNDER.
Ronald Reagan

We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross


We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-26-2018, 5:50 AM
RestrictedColt RestrictedColt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hacienda Heights
Posts: 749
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

PC section 25850 prohibits the carrying of a loaded weapon in public places. Please note that the private ownership of a property has no bearing on it being a "Public" place. The test is one of access, not ownership.

I didn't know about the "access" part so I did some reading up. Apparently I've been carrying illegally at my own house. Ca. blows even harder than I thought.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 12-26-2018, 10:58 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,617
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RestrictedColt View Post
PC section 25850 prohibits the carrying of a loaded weapon in public places. Please note that the private ownership of a property has no bearing on it being a "Public" place. The test is one of access, not ownership.

I didn't know about the "access" part so I did some reading up. Apparently I've been carrying illegally at my own house. Ca. blows even harder than I thought.
You need to read some more - pleased see the wiki - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...oncealed_Carry

In particular, 25605 addresses your immediate concern:
Quote:
25605.

(a) Section 25400 and Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 26350) of Division 5

shall not apply to or affect any citizen of the United States or legal resident over the age of 18 years

who resides or is temporarily within this state, and who is not within the excepted classes prescribed by Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 29800) or Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 29900) of Division 9 of this title, or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code,

who carries, either openly or concealed, anywhere within the citizen’s or legal resident’s place of residence, place of business, or on private property owned or lawfully possessed by the citizen or legal resident, any handgun.
Your doors have locks, right? Then the interior space is not 'public access'. But the front yard, unless fenced, very likely is.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 12-26-2018 at 11:01 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 12-26-2018, 1:01 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This is an interesting issue. Not only does it involve the constitutionality of restrictions on the right to keep and bear, but freedom of religion is directly impacted. If a small congregation, albeit it be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or other cannot protect itself without incurring the cost of professional security then the membership could effectively be denied their right to worship.

Generally, religious groups are required to follow laws designed for non religious groups when the religious folk become involved with secular activities. Eg. Raising funds via a car wash. But the religious service itself is anything but a secular activity as it is at the heart of religion.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 12-26-2018, 1:08 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Librarian. I don't know the answer and I used to thing along the same lines as RickD regarding the Overturf decision, but I believe there is some doubt as to whether the area of a gun store normally open to customers is a "public place" as long at the store retains the ability to exclude the public by simply locking the entrance door. This is similar to the inside of a dwelling being non public, even if the front yard is not gated making the yard a privately owned public place, as long as the door could be locked.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 12-26-2018, 1:20 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,617
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
Librarian. I don't know the answer and I used to thing along the same lines as RickD regarding the Overturf decision, but I believe there is some doubt as to whether the area of a gun store normally open to customers is a "public place" as long at the store retains the ability to exclude the public by simply locking the entrance door. This is similar to the inside of a dwelling being non public, even if the front yard is not gated making the yard a privately owned public place, as long as the door could be locked.
I know of no court rulings on that circumstance, so I dunno. I've been to just 2 LGS set up that way, IIRC.

From what I've heard and read, seems like local PD sometimes suggests gun store employees arm-up, and then studiously ignore the armed people on the sales floor. Aside from the apocryphal nature of that memory, strikes me as a a bit of a week reed upon which to base a store policy, as such 'rational tolerance' is subject to disappearing should a new command staff or elected LE leader choose to do that.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 12-26-2018, 2:07 PM
RestrictedColt RestrictedColt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hacienda Heights
Posts: 749
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
You need to read some more - pleased see the wiki - http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...oncealed_Carry

In particular, 25605 addresses your immediate concern:

Your doors have locks, right? Then the interior space is not 'public access'. But the front yard, unless fenced, very likely is.
If my front door is open, as it almost always is in good weather, it would appear that the house could be deemed accessible to the public. If my front fence isn't tall enough or isn't locked so that it's very easy to enter then it would also appear that the yard could be considered accessible. A 3' high fence would stop some people from entering without it being a hindrance, but another person could easily step right over it. Like most things, it appears that the law is somewhat grey as far as how effective a barrier needs to be to qualify the yard as not 'publicly accessible'. But at least I now know that I need to put up a gate, disarm, or be a criminal in my own yard.

I'd always thought I was legal before learning from this thread, as did my friends. The couple cops I've asked, including one that came here while I was armed in the yard, thought that I was legal too, luckily.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 12-26-2018, 3:47 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RestrictedColt View Post
If my front door is open, as it almost always is in good weather, it would appear that the house could be deemed accessible to the public. If my front fence isn't tall enough or isn't locked so that it's very easy to enter then it would also appear that the yard could be considered accessible. A 3' high fence would stop some people from entering without it being a hindrance, but another person could easily step right over it. Like most things, it appears that the law is somewhat grey as far as how effective a barrier needs to be to qualify the yard as not 'publicly accessible'. But at least I now know that I need to put up a gate, disarm, or be a criminal in my own yard.

I'd always thought I was legal before learning from this thread, as did my friends. The couple cops I've asked, including one that came here while I was armed in the yard, thought that I was legal too, luckily.
My take on it is that your fence, gate, or door need not be able to prevent the public from gaining access, but it enough that the fencing is enough that a reasonable person would realize that it was not open to the public. I know of no case law, but consider a typical 4" high scalloped reddish concrete divider that some might put around a flower bed. Were that placed along side the sidewalk would that suffice? How about a single strand of barbed wire about 2 feet from the ground. One can scale a 6 foot wall, but what is important is not that it is impassible but it gives notice that one is entering upon an area not open to the public.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 12-26-2018, 4:22 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,617
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Long discussion of 'effectiveness' and other factors in Strider, http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/B204571.pdf

'Unlocked door' or gate, propped open gate, etc do not make the space on the other side 'public'. If that door were to open to a business, it might be public space - at least, during normal business hours.

But, we're drifting rather far from the topic in the OP ...
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-26-2018, 6:13 PM
Ishooter's Avatar
Ishooter Ishooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 577
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doheny View Post
OCSD doesn't put restrictions on their cards. Those who have been issued for work can carry anytime.
YMMV.
This is true. OCSD even accepts work in a potentially dangerous environment as a good cause. If it's illegal, then OCSD wouldn't accept that.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-26-2018, 6:39 PM
Alan Block Alan Block is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,873
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I am the safety coordinator at my wife's church. I have a CCW but to the congregation, I am not armed. (concealed is concealed) I am a volunteer in this position though.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-29-2018, 12:48 PM
rodsvet rodsvet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Tustin
Posts: 158
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If the church has a school on the same property, how do you stay 1,000 feet from it?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-29-2018, 12:55 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,499
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodsvet View Post
If the church has a school on the same property, how do you stay 1,000 feet from it?
CCW exempts you from the 1,000ft perimeter, but it does NOT exempt you from the restrictions on having a gun *or* ammo outside of a locked container on school property.

This is a big issue that always seems to be overlooked.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 03-02-2019, 9:52 AM
socal m1 shooter's Avatar
socal m1 shooter socal m1 shooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 241
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

CRPA is advertising a Sheepdog Seminar on Monday 3/4 in Manteca.
__________________
WTB extractor for S&W 659. Please PM if you have one to sell.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 04-27-2019, 1:11 PM
socal m1 shooter's Avatar
socal m1 shooter socal m1 shooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 241
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

CRPA is advertising a Sheepdog Seminar on Monday 5/20 in Ukiah.

In addition, the CRPA has posted a PDF file titled "CARRYING AND POSSESSING FIREARMS IN PLACES OF WORSHIP" which is dated 4/17/2019, by C.D. Michel. Worth reading.
__________________
WTB extractor for S&W 659. Please PM if you have one to sell.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 04-27-2019, 6:47 PM
haza12d's Avatar
haza12d haza12d is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 672
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by socal m1 shooter View Post
CRPA is advertising a Sheepdog Seminar on Monday 5/20 in Ukiah.

In addition, the CRPA has posted a PDF file titled "CARRYING AND POSSESSING FIREARMS IN PLACES OF WORSHIP" which is dated 4/17/2019, by C.D. Michel. Worth reading.
Thanks for the info! I appreciate it.


Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 04-28-2019, 6:22 AM
FresnoRob's Avatar
FresnoRob FresnoRob is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Fresno
Posts: 2,119
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by socal m1 shooter View Post
CRPA is advertising a Sheepdog Seminar on Monday 5/20 in Ukiah.

In addition, the CRPA has posted a PDF file titled "CARRYING AND POSSESSING FIREARMS IN PLACES OF WORSHIP" which is dated 4/17/2019, by C.D. Michel. Worth reading.
Thanks for the PDF link. Worth reading IMHO.
__________________
“No Kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave.”
- James Burgh
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 04-28-2019, 10:34 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Even though the application of firearms restriction laws are arguably secular in nature, I am not comfortable with their application to places of worship. We talk about the need for protection in the home being at the core of the 2A, but what about the right to freedom of religion? Even if a temple, mosque, or church meets the definition of a public place, don't those worshipers have a right to protect their right to worship and at what point does governmental regulation amount to the establishment of religion?
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 04-28-2019, 11:33 AM
haza12d's Avatar
haza12d haza12d is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 672
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
Even though the application of firearms restriction laws are arguably secular in nature, I am not comfortable with their application to places of worship. We talk about the need for protection in the home being at the core of the 2A, but what about the right to freedom of religion? Even if a temple, mosque, or church meets the definition of a public place, don't those worshipers have a right to protect their right to worship and at what point does governmental regulation amount to the establishment of religion?
I hear ya man!

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 04-28-2019, 6:06 PM
socal m1 shooter's Avatar
socal m1 shooter socal m1 shooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 241
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
[...]Even if a temple, mosque, or church meets the definition of a public place, don't those worshipers have a right to protect their right to worship and at what point does governmental regulation amount to the establishment of religion?
I don't want to take the thread sideways, but I think that ship partially sailed when the feds and the states gave churches certain exemptions from various tax laws. Churches are exempt from paying property taxes on land used for religious purposes, ministers get favorable tax treatment in the form of a housing allowance, and charitable giving can be written off on both the state and federal returns. While I'm sure we can look forward to many of our so-called representatives doing their best to whittle away at this in the years to come, reality is, there has been governmental regulation that has assisted organized religion in various ways, and there will continue to be that kind of regulation in various forms, and I'm pretty sure we can expect that regulation adverse to Christianity will continue to increase. For example, it would not shock me at all if the LGTBQ crowd succeeds in removing 503(c) status for churches that won't marry homosexuals, sometime in the next 10-20 years.
__________________
WTB extractor for S&W 659. Please PM if you have one to sell.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 04-28-2019, 11:02 PM
Ishooter's Avatar
Ishooter Ishooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 577
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Due to the recent shooting at the church in Poway San Diego, that means the risk can be happened anytime. So if you have ccw permit, then carry on. When the coward mass shooters get shot back, most of them curl their tails and run away.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 04-29-2019, 7:48 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 13,366
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Pass the plate and hire a guard.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 04-29-2019, 8:46 AM
omgwtfbbq's Avatar
omgwtfbbq omgwtfbbq is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North Sac Valley
Posts: 3,229
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Most church security teams that I've had contact with have CCWs at the minimum. Some of the larger churches actually get their teams more intensive training and carry more insurance.

Unfortunately, not that many churches are aware of the liability involved of having armed personnel "guarding" their facilities and don't do these things. I would be hesitant to carry a firearm without proper licensing without getting some of these basic questions answered by the administration at the church.
__________________
CERTIFIED GLOCK ARMORER

"Far and away the best prize life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." - Theodore Roosevelt

Quote:
Originally Posted by rmorris7556 View Post
They teach you secret stuff I can't mention on line.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 04-29-2019, 8:52 AM
estrom estrom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 461
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

It appears that operating a school on the same property really throws a wrench in carrying at church. Why does that restriction apply if it's on a Sunday, when school is not in session?
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 04-29-2019, 9:08 AM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Modesto
Posts: 1,517
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
<snip> But the Overturf decision makes clear that they are not. Here is the key text quoted from Overturf:

"That language is a clear indication that "owning, possessing, or
keeping" a firearm at one's place of residence or business does not
equate with "carrying" such a weapon."
Isn't Overturf an LA County Superior Court decision and not controlling appellate case law for other Counties? I mean, it's not a California Appellate Court decision, just a local one.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 04-29-2019, 9:12 AM
Alan Block Alan Block is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,873
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I am the safety coordinator at a church in OC. My policy has been don't ask, don't tell regarding being armed. This shields the church from some liability although may tend to push me under the bus if things go sideways.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 04-29-2019, 9:37 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,140
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by p7m8jg View Post
Isn't Overturf an LA County Superior Court decision and not controlling appellate case law for other Counties? I mean, it's not a California Appellate Court decision, just a local one.
It appears to be a California Appellate Court decision. Please refer to 64 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 6 where it was published. I don't believe that decisions of the former Superior Court, Appellate Division were published in the Court of Appeals reporter.
,
But even if it was a Superior Court Appellate case, its still binding on the discussion in this thread. The involved shooting occurred in L.A. County.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Last edited by RickD427; 04-29-2019 at 9:45 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 04-29-2019, 9:43 AM
faris1984's Avatar
faris1984 faris1984 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,120
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
But the answer to the question



is "No".

Without CCW, concealed carry 'in public' is generally illegal.
I agree on the no if there is a school but isn't churches in California considered private land? there are only a few states that consider church a public place
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 6:52 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.