Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
|
|
|
|
|
|
CCW in SFO
Collapse
X
-
? "If you want nice fresh oats, you have to pay a fair price. If you are satisfied with oats that have already been through the horse, well, that comes a little cheaper."
-
So ignoring SB2, there is nothing in the regs for SFO or the city/county of SF that prohibits CCW outside the sterile areas. The firearms rules as they apply to SF owned properties is limited to properties within the boundaries of SF (that took me hours to find a few years ago). SFO is not within the limit of SF. I have carried in both the domestic and international ticketing/waiting areas of the airport prior to SB2.
But SB2 killed that ability.Comment
-
So ignoring SB2, there is nothing in the regs for SFO or the city/county of SF that prohibits CCW outside the sterile areas. The firearms rules as they apply to SF owned properties is limited to properties within the boundaries of SF (that took me hours to find a few years ago). SFO is not within the limit of SF. I have carried in both the domestic and international ticketing/waiting areas of the airport prior to SB2.
But SB2 killed that ability.Comment
-
SFO airport is located in South San Fransisco. Check their regs.
The airport restriction was listed on my permit issued by Tuolumne County in 2022; a full year before SB2 was signed by Gruesome.
The bottom line is violation of any of the restrictions listed on your permit will cause revocation of your permit and possible criminal charges in the jurisdiction where the violation occurred.
Why risk those repercussions by attempting to find some kind of loophole?
Don't get me wrong here. I am just as angry about the draconian and unconstitutional CA gun laws as any other law-abiding gun owner. We should not have to have the State's permission to exercise a constitutional right, but until we can win in the courts and overturn this crap, we are stuck with it, or we can leave.
-P
ETA: @CenterX: Here's a lengthy thread about SB2 court case.
-pLast edited by Preston-CLB; 06-09-2024, 9:25 AM.? "If you want nice fresh oats, you have to pay a fair price. If you are satisfied with oats that have already been through the horse, well, that comes a little cheaper."
Comment
-
No, it's not. It is on unincorporated land bordered by the cities of San Bruno, Millbrae, and very little of South City at the northern end of UAL's maintenance building. It is patrolled jointly by SFPD's airport bureau, and the San Mateo county Sheriff's office.Comment
-
I stand corrected! Thank you for the clarification.
-P? "If you want nice fresh oats, you have to pay a fair price. If you are satisfied with oats that have already been through the horse, well, that comes a little cheaper."
Comment
-
FYI or maybe you already knew this but no hollow point bullets are allowed in SFO😀 1Comment
-
So much FUD. I'll restrict my response to a narrow scope.
Inside the buildings, San Francisco PD. The City owns the land.
Outside the buildings, San Mateo County Sheriff. As note by others, this land is within San Mateo County.
The airport is a jurisdiction nightmare. City police from a non-adjacent community, representing the property owned by San Francisco. County agency, FAA, customs, private security, international forces, even the CHP has the right to govern, etc. Don't ask me how I know.Sometimes a gun is just a gun.Comment
-
SEC. 618. PROHIBITED AMMUNITION.
(a) Definition. For purposes of this Section, "Prohibited Ammunition" shall mean:
(1) Ammunition sold under the brand name "Winchester Black Talon," or that has physical properties resulting in ballistics performance identical to ammunition presently or formerly sold under the brand name Winchester Black Talon; or,
(2) Ammunition designated by its manufacturer for purchase by law enforcement or military agencies only, unless other ammunition is available to the general public that has physical properties resulting in ballistics performance identical to such ammunition.
...
So, NO, the claim that SF bans hollow point projectiles in general is not correct. Whether an individual officer or deputy might believe that is true is a different discussion.ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page
Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!Comment
-
Just to tie a bow on this, SF restricts ammunition at section 618 in the city codes
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/san_francisco/latest/sf_police/0-0-0-9864
So, NO, the claim that SF bans hollow point projectiles in general is not correct. Whether an individual officer or deputy might believe that is true is a different discussion.
?
Sigh... image.pngAttached FilessigpicComment
Calguns.net Statistics
Collapse
Topics: 1,856,235
Posts: 25,016,994
Members: 354,026
Active Members: 5,897
Welcome to our newest member, Hadesloridan.
What's Going On
Collapse
There are currently 2818 users online. 35 members and 2783 guests.
Most users ever online was 65,177 at 7:20 PM on 09-21-2024.
Comment