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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 04-29-2019, 9:52 AM
Mike350GT Mike350GT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 269
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Block View Post
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.
the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  #82  
Old 04-29-2019, 10:05 AM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Almost heaven, West Virginia
Posts: 1,914
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
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.
No, it is an L.A. Superior Court Appellate decision, not from the Court of Appeal. Sometimes decisions like that are published if the Court of Appeal thinks its important, that's why it gets a supp number, not a regular Ct of Appeal number. But it is not a Court of Appeal decision by justices from the Court of appeal.

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  
Old 04-29-2019, 10:54 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by p7m8jg View Post
No, it is an L.A. Superior Court Appellate decision, not from the Court of Appeal. Sometimes decisions like that are published if the Court of Appeal thinks its important, that's why it gets a supp number, not a regular Ct of Appeal number. But it is not a Court of Appeal decision by justices from the Court of appeal.

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.
See People V Wade (2105), People v Melton (1988) for California Court of Appeal decisions and, if you include the superior court appellate department, People v. Marotta (1981)
  #84  
Old 04-29-2019, 11:10 AM
Alan Block Alan Block is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,999
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
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
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  
Old 04-29-2019, 12:08 PM
haza12d's Avatar
haza12d haza12d is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 656
iTrader: 36 / 100%
Default

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  
Old 04-29-2019, 2:01 PM
bombadillo bombadillo is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: central valley
Posts: 14,810
iTrader: 80 / 100%
Default

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  
Old 04-29-2019, 6:54 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estrom View Post
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?
Because the law does not specify whether or not classes are in session or "children are present"
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

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.
  #88  
Old 04-30-2019, 5:51 AM
estrom estrom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 486
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
Because the law does not specify whether or not classes are in session or "children are present"
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.
Thanks for that. It raises a question of "ownership" of the property. What if the church is the legal entity that owns the property? The private school, using a different name, in essence a DBA name, is operated by the church as a ministry of the church and is under the church federal tax ID#. In fact, all employees of the school are technically employees of the church. Payroll checks, payroll taxes, etc... all have the church name on them. There is no "educational entity" technically.

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  
Old 04-30-2019, 6:37 AM
357manny's Avatar
357manny 357manny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: PRK
Posts: 1,677
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

I did read the linked CRPA PDF. This appears to be the pertinent part:
Quote:
When the place of worship is located in a K-12 school zone, the applicable exceptions are significantly
narrowed because both federal and state restrictions come into play. As a threshold matter, there is no lawful
means for a member of the general public (outside of honorably retired law enforcement) to “carry” a firearm
on the grounds a K-12 school in California. This is because California recently amended its GFSZA to no
longer allow individuals with a CCW to carry a firearm on the grounds of a K-12 school, even with written
permission of an appropriate school authority.
There is no clear rule for when a particular location is considered to be on the “grounds” of a school.
Some places of worship share the same city block as the school, while others may be across the street.
Similarly, some schools may have a direct business or professional relationship with the place of worship, while
others may not. Because the distinction between on or off the grounds of a school is unclear, CCW holders
seeking to carry at a place of worship in a K-12 school zone should consult with an experienced attorney before
attempting to do so.
So, in the case of my friend, who has his CCW, he wants to keep his family safe while they worship. He is considering carrying in church, for the protection of his family, not necessarily for the protection of others in his congregation.
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  
Old 04-30-2019, 7:24 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 357manny View Post
I did read the linked CRPA PDF. This appears to be the pertinent part:

So, in the case of my friend, who has his CCW, he wants to keep his family safe while they worship. He is considering carrying in church, for the protection of his family, not necessarily for the protection of others in his congregation.
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.)
If there is an active shooter, being charged is the least of my concerns.
  #91  
Old 04-30-2019, 7:26 AM
357manny's Avatar
357manny 357manny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: PRK
Posts: 1,677
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
If there is an active shooter, being charged is the least of my concerns.
Yeah, that is exactly what I told him. Rather be judged by 12...
  #92  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:21 AM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estrom View Post
Thanks for that. It raises a question of "ownership" of the property. What if the church is the legal entity that owns the property? The private school, using a different name, in essence a DBA name, is operated by the church as a ministry of the church and is under the church federal tax ID#. In fact, all employees of the school are technically employees of the church. Payroll checks, payroll taxes, etc... all have the church name on them. There is no "educational entity" technically.

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?
Property ownership is irrelevant. Usage is the driver. CA PC 626.9:
Quote:
626.9. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (e), shall be punished as specified in subdivision (f)]
[...]
(e) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(4) “School zone” means an area in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of the public or private school.
Exemptions from the 1,000 foot perimeter, but not from “the grounds” for CCW licensees are in place.
__________________
"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  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:41 AM
estrom estrom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 486
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Property ownership is irrelevant. Usage is the driver. CA PC 626.9:
Exemptions from the 1,000 foot perimeter, but not from “the grounds” for CCW licensees are in place.
Thanks. Bummer.
  #94  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:45 AM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 357manny View Post
How does this stand up, if there ever is a case of an active shooter? It seems he will be exposing himself legally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
If there is an active shooter, being charged is the least of my concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 357manny View Post
Yeah, that is exactly what I told him. Rather be judged by 12...
But, since you asked the question....Even if it is a valid shooting, carrying against the statute technically voids your LTC. That means the DA has to look at carrying concealed (misdemeanor) and carrying loaded (misdemeanor) as well as the GFSZ (felony) transgression.

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  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:49 AM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estrom View Post
Thanks. Bummer.
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  
Old 04-30-2019, 11:04 AM
B.J.F.'s Avatar
B.J.F. B.J.F. is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Prescott Valley, Arizona
Posts: 652
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by P5Ret View Post
Rick, I hate to disagree with you but I do not believe you are correct here. There is a newer class of security for directly employed guards, proprietary private security officer, and it does require a license. They are also not allowed to carry any type of defensive weapons under that classification, think concert or bar security.

B&P
7574. This chapter may be cited as the Proprietary Security Services Act.
(Repealed (in Sec. 1) and added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 361, Sec. 2. (SB 741) Effective January 1, 2010. Section operative January 1, 2011, pursuant to Section 7574.08.)

7574.01. For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
(a) “Bureau” means the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services.
(b) “Chief” means the Chief of the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services.
(c) “Director” means the Director of Consumer Affairs, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(d) “Person” includes any individual, firm, company, association, organization, partnership, and corporation.
(e) “Proprietary private security employer” means a person who has one or more employees who provide security services for the employer and only for the employer. A person who employs proprietary private security officers pursuant to this chapter at more than one location shall be considered a single employer.
(f) “Proprietary private security officer” means an unarmed individual who is employed exclusively by any one employer whose primary duty is to provide security services for his or her employer, whose services are not contracted to any other entity or person, and who is not exempt pursuant to Section 7582.2, and who meets both of the following criteria:
(1) Is required to wear a distinctive uniform clearly identifying the individual as a security officer.
(2) Is likely to interact with the public while performing his or her duties.
(g) “Registrant” means an individual registered with the bureau under this chapter.
(Added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 361, Sec. 2. (SB 741) Effective January 1, 2010. Section operative January 1, 2011, pursuant to Section 7574.08.)
Private security is required to be licensed as a security guard through the BSIS as a proprietary security guard (in house security) example: bouncers for a night club, hired directly and employed by the club to perform security duties.
  #97  
Old 04-30-2019, 11:20 AM
B.J.F.'s Avatar
B.J.F. B.J.F. is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Prescott Valley, Arizona
Posts: 652
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

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  
Old 04-30-2019, 12:19 PM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
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.
A “religious practice zone”? What statute defines that?

Let’s try this, again:
Quote:
626.9. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (e), shall be punished as specified in subdivision (f)][...]
(e) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(4) “School zone” means an area in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of the public or private school.
Private schools are covered (no exemption for the church affiliation.). No mention of hours, like, “8-5, M-F”, or “when students are present”, (unlike the traffic signs on the street).
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
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.
That’s been disproven a number of times throughout this thread. PEN 25605 doesn’t contain any provisions for delegation of its authorities granted specifically to owners or those lawfully possessing property.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
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.
”Renters” aren’t “owners”, that’s why they use different words. If I rent a house from you, I can’t paint it or tear it down without your permission because, although I lawfully possess it, I don’t own it. As noted in another post, the ownership or lawful possession of the property isn’t the issue...the USE of the property is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
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.
Good point, except for the law.....PEN 26005.
Quote:
26005.
Section 25850 does not apply to either of the following:
(a) Persons who are using target ranges for the purpose of practice shooting with a firearm.
(b) Members of shooting clubs while hunting on the premises of those clubs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
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.
Why would the person receiving the permission sign the document granting permission? Unless there are specific requirements constraining the permission to which the “permittee” must agree. That sounds an awful lot like a contract, making the carrier the agent of the church and exposing the church to all manner of liability.
__________________
"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  
Old 04-30-2019, 12:31 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B.J.F. View Post
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.
Please cite authority for the assertion emphasized in bold. I believe you have confused private property with property not open to the public. E.g. the case of the typical gun store. Employees may carry behind the counter without a CCW, but may not carry in the public areas of the store even with the owner's permission.

The following added by edit:

You may also want to review this wiki and especially this part

Quote:
there is a distinction between "carrying" and "having" which has the effect of not letting one carry a loaded firearm in one's place of business or home where the area is quasi-public

Last edited by Chewy65; 04-30-2019 at 1:24 PM.. Reason: To include link to the wiki
  #100  
Old 04-30-2019, 4:04 PM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Almost heaven, West Virginia
Posts: 1,914
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
See People V Wade (2105), People v Melton (1988) for California Court of Appeal decisions and, if you include the superior court appellate department, People v. Marotta (1981)
Did any of them quote / cite to the Overton decision? Or just use the same logic as Overton?

I'll check them out. GREAT discussion, folks!

Last edited by p7m8jg; 04-30-2019 at 4:06 PM..
  #101  
Old 04-30-2019, 4:06 PM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Almost heaven, West Virginia
Posts: 1,914
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
If there is an active shooter, being charged is the least of my concerns.
Well, that takes me back 41 years to my police academy class saying: " better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6."

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  
Old 04-30-2019, 4:20 PM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Almost heaven, West Virginia
Posts: 1,914
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
See People V Wade (2105), People v Melton (1988) for California Court of Appeal decisions and, if you include the superior court appellate department, People v. Marotta (1981)
People v. Wade (2015) -183 Cal.Rptr.3d 714
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?
  #103  
Old 04-30-2019, 5:21 PM
faris1984's Avatar
faris1984 faris1984 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,381
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

so is one class and not a permanent class considered a school? it's for Arabic, not K12.
  #104  
Old 04-30-2019, 6:47 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 357manny View Post
So, in the case of my friend, who has his CCW, he wants to keep his family safe while they worship. He is considering carrying in church, for the protection of his family, not necessarily for the protection of others in his congregation.
How does this stand up, if there ever is a case of an active shooter? It seems he will be exposing himself legally.
I would suggest that he find a place of worship that he is comfortable with that does not host a K-12 school or college co-located on the property.


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

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.
  #105  
Old 04-30-2019, 6:52 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
so is one class and not a permanent class considered a school? it's for Arabic, not K12.
Is this something like an adult school or trade school? It sounds like it might be, but to be sure, I would research the school's accreditation. They MAY be a fully accredited "college" that only offers one class and no degree path, I'm not sure what accredited schools are actually required to do on an ongoing basis.
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

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.
  #106  
Old 04-30-2019, 6:58 PM
357manny's Avatar
357manny 357manny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: PRK
Posts: 1,677
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default Concealed Carry Church Security

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
I would suggest that he find a place of worship that he is comfortable with that does not host a K-12 school or college co-located on the property.


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.


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  
Old 04-30-2019, 7:02 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 357manny View Post
Hey reasonable response. The big picture of where you live will/could have huge implications on life after an event.
And that goes for any self defense event, whether you were carrying legally, questionably, or flat out without a permit.
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

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.
  #108  
Old 05-01-2019, 10:00 AM
faris1984's Avatar
faris1984 faris1984 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,381
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

So If someone drops their kids to college cant have ccw weapon on them , in the car only
  #109  
Old 05-01-2019, 10:09 AM
faris1984's Avatar
faris1984 faris1984 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,381
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

So the class at the worship place is only to teach Arabic, not identified or certified by the county. CCW is good I think, I'm I right?
  #110  
Old 05-01-2019, 12:32 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by p7m8jg View Post
People v. Wade (2015) -183 Cal.Rptr.3d 714
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?
Try People v. Melton, 206 Cal. App. 3d 580, a 1988 Court of Appeal, 5th Appellate District decision.

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  
Old 05-01-2019, 2:40 PM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
So If someone drops their kids to college cant have ccw weapon on them , in the car only
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  
Old 05-01-2019, 3:41 PM
faris1984's Avatar
faris1984 faris1984 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,381
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
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.
Yes, You right but not very clear to me because they were written in a difficult way
  #113  
Old 05-01-2019, 5:08 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,017
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
Yes, You right but not very clear to me because they were written in a difficult way
Faris. What Cokebottle wrote in post 106 is pretty clear.

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.
That means not only the campus but property off campus such as student housing.

Last edited by Chewy65; 05-01-2019 at 5:14 PM..
  #114  
Old 05-01-2019, 5:36 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
So If someone drops their kids to college cant have ccw weapon on them , in the car only
Not even in the car.
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:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
So the class at the worship place is only to teach Arabic, not identified or certified by the county. CCW is good I think, I'm I right?
Sounds like you're OK there.
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

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.
  #115  
Old 05-01-2019, 7:24 PM
Dvrjon's Avatar
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,045
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by faris1984 View Post
Yes, You right but not very clear to me because they were written in a difficult way
I understand that these issues are difficult to understand, (more so with ESL) but, your responsibility is to understand. Law enforcement won’t care that you don’t understand. If you understand you’re not clear on an issue, contact the activity which provided your CCW training, because they failed and either need to clarify the issue or give you your money back.

Here’s a trick; start by carving out all of the conditions. Try this:
Quote:
(h) Notwithstanding Section 25605, any person who brings or possesses a loaded firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or administration by, a public or private university or college, that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it is with the written permission of the university or college president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college authority, shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.
(i) Notwithstanding Section 25605, any person who brings or possesses a firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or administration by, a public or private university or college, that are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it is with the written permission of the university or college president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college authority, shall be punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for one, two, or three years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.
That leaves you with:
Quote:
(h) [...]any person who brings or possesses a loaded firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, [...] a public or private university or college, [...] unless it is with the written permission of the university or college president [...] shall be punished [...]
(i) [...]any person who brings or possesses a firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, [...] a public or private university or college, [...] unless it is with the written permission of the university or college president, shall be punished [...]
See?
__________________
"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..
Closed Thread

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 5:04 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy