#81
|
|||
|
|||
the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
|
#82
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
In any event, it's only applicable to L.A. County and other Courts of Appeal could decide differently. It's not binding anywhere else. And its a case from 1976 and no other Court of Appeal has ever cited it as controlling case law. FWIW. Further edit: The dissent in that case (a 2 to 1 decision) by Judge Marshall completely disagreed with the other two judges. "It is the height of irony that, to accept the sheriff's view of the law, the defendant can only possess a weapon (section omitted) and that he may only carry a weapon while immured behind the doors of his home but cannot use it an inch past his threshold." Just Marshall also called it an "unjust judgment." Maybe that's why it's never been cited by any other court in 43 years? In any event, this is a GREAT discussion of a very timely topic. Thanks for bringing the Overton case up, it was a good read. Last edited by p7m8jg; 04-29-2019 at 10:36 AM.. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Churches are open and available to the public. If you had a gate-keeper who invited some in and kept others out it would considered private.
|
#85
|
||||
|
||||
So my church decided to go with hiring a couple of armed guards for our services. While my team and I are still responsible for keeping an eye out for weirdos and talking anyone down that becomes a distraction during worship and service, we'll let private security handle things in an active shooter scenario.
My team and I are in the process of getting our guard cards so we can actually put hands on people to escort them out of the sanctuary. I heard of churches getting sued because their "security" team wasn't guard carded. We're also changing our team name and dropping the "security" label since we are just there to assist and cover our leaders and help people find the exits in case of a violent person or a natural disaster. I will however be keeping a flashlight on my person at all times. Yippee. Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk Last edited by haza12d; 04-30-2019 at 8:18 PM.. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Man I can't believe what the general consensus is here. What we do at my church is first off all have expressed permission by the pastor and the ownership of the property to carry concealed. Second, we can carry concealed in Idaho without permits in the state so it really doesn't matter about the concealed aspect, just carrying on somebody else's property. we do have a security team however it consists of a bunch of men who are all willing to take the financial burden on 100% on their own rather than deal with the church having to pay for things. If an active shooter were to come into my church we probably have 15 guys who all carry concealed every Sunday and are willing to do what we have to do to make things safer around us. We all coordinate so if I'm not going to be in one service, another person can be in that service instead and we swap things out every so many months. truthfully though, we probably have 15 or more people in any one day within the three services that we hold at our church.
|
#87
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It simply states "property" which would include any property owned by the educational entity. You can legally carry at a school concert held at the community theater. You can not legally carry at personal improvement seminar held in the local school gym on Saturday evening.
__________________
- Rich |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
So is carrying on the property determined by "ownership" (definitely the church) of the property, or does the simple presence of a school on the property disallow carrying? |
#89
|
||||
|
||||
I did read the linked CRPA PDF. This appears to be the pertinent part:
Quote:
How does this stand up, if there ever is a case of an active shooter? It seems he will be exposing himself legally. (Edit: Sorry OP, this is a different question, I guess, but I found this thread while looking for info on this very thing.) |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#92
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." Last edited by Dvrjon; 04-30-2019 at 10:26 AM.. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#94
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You will need a really good shoot, huge public outcry and support, and all your “better angels”, to make charging you for something too onerous for a politician to bear. And, you’ll need a lawyer. That’s just for the “criminal” charges.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." |
#95
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah, for years, my grandkids played soccer with most games on Sat/Sun on local school grounds. I used to spend 90% of the time scanning and wondering what kind of defense I could mount using a knife with a 2.5” blade (restricted length for CA school grounds.).
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." |
#96
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#97
|
||||
|
||||
Church grounds are private property, church schools are also private and non-public. It is a dual use property. During the week it is a school, on weekends it is a religious practice zone.
If the owner of private property gives their permission to be armed, everyone who has permission is legally able to be armed as they see fit whether CCW or OC. In CA, even if the church is renting or leasing the property they are the owners of the property until they terminate the rental or lease the same as someone renting a house or apartment. If giving permission to be armed was an issue, then even a shooting range would be in question since most are public on private property and some don’t even have a fence up. I would suggest anyone who does get permission, get it in writing signed by the leader of the church with a witness signature and signed by you. |
#98
|
||||||
|
||||||
Quote:
Let’s try this, again: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The following added by edit: You may also want to review this wiki and especially this part Quote:
Last edited by Chewy65; 04-30-2019 at 1:24 PM.. Reason: To include link to the wiki |
#100
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I'll check them out. GREAT discussion, folks! Last edited by p7m8jg; 04-30-2019 at 4:06 PM.. |
#101
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Today I wonder, is that really valid? Get involved and ruin your family finances after being sued / convicted / etc? I don't know the answer and don't pretend to know. |
#102
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Firearm in a backpack while being pursued by a police officer. Or did I miss something here? Convict that guy. Interesting to see how Westlaw, one of the premiere paid law resources, doesn't cite Overturf in regards to the Wade decision although I agree with you, Wade tries to use it as "legal authority" even thought it is a "supp" case and non-binding on any other jurisdiction. People v. Melton (1988) - doesn't come up on my search. Is a better citation available? Or was that from the Wade case? People v. Marotta (1981) - another L.A. County Superior Court appellate division case not citable nor binding on any other county in California. Or did I miss something? Marotta possessed a loaded .25 caliber automatic pistol on the floorboard of his taxicab, had no license to carry it. His mistake thinking it was his home or place of business. Shepardizing his case shows it's distinguished by Garber v. Superior Court (most negative ) 109 Cal.Rptr.3d 278 - a trailer attached to the defendant's van was not defendant's place of residence. Hardly like the Overton case. As I've said before, great conversation! Keep it up! California laws are confusing, applied inconsistently from county to county, and should be declared unconstitutional under due process grounds. But, hey, who am I to judge? |
#104
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
As for how it would stand up in the event of a defensive shooting? That will depend on whichever of the state's 58 DAs or deputy DAs you happen to fall under. In some counties, it would likely result in no charges due to the defensive nature. In other counties, like LA, you can count on the DA filing charges for at the very least violation of the GFSZ.
__________________
- Rich |
#105
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Keep in mind that the GFSZ laws governing college/university are even tougher. While you may transport on K-12 property in a locked container (ammo must also be locked), you can not transport upon college/university property under any conditions.
__________________
- Rich |
#106
|
||||
|
||||
Concealed Carry Church Security
Quote:
Hey reasonable response. The big picture of where you live will/could have huge implications on life after an event. My initial take is just: “judged by 12 than carried by 6”, but this definitely broadens my thinking. Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Will share this with my friend.
__________________
this is a signature Last edited by 357manny; 04-30-2019 at 7:14 PM.. |
#107
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The specific situation and location make a world of difference. Honestly, I was extremely surprised that the synagogue security guard who shot "Furry Potato" in the leg was not charged.
__________________
- Rich |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
This points to a few more Cal. App. decisions citing Overturf. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?c...odt=2006&hl=en IIRC legal authority isn't limited to binding precedence, but includes persuasive decisions. Last edited by Chewy65; 05-01-2019 at 12:35 PM.. |
#111
|
||||
|
||||
Faris, you've had a CCW long enough to have read PEN 626.9(h) and (i). If you haven't read them, you need to, soon.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." |
#112
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, You right but not very clear to me because they were written in a difficult way
|
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Chewy65; 05-01-2019 at 5:14 PM.. |
#114
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Locked transport is NOT exempted while on college/university property. And it can be touchy... large universities such as UC Irvine, and even smaller universities such as LaVerne have *apparently* public roads passing through the buildings. I honestly do not know whether these streets are prohibited or not... I simply avoid them. Quote:
626.9 specifies K-12, and another section specifies college/university. That would not prohibit carry upon property not owned by a school or district that is merely used to teach one specific class.
__________________
- Rich |
#115
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Here’s a trick; start by carving out all of the conditions. Try this: Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.” "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool." "The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first." Last edited by Dvrjon; 05-01-2019 at 8:30 PM.. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|