Latest UOC LEA Memo

[dustoff31]

Got to give the deputy chief credit for being honest and upfront about the situation, and insisting the department abide by the law and constitution.

You cannot ask for a whole lot more than that from any LEA.

Yes. And if he does this, it really doesn't matter whether he is personally pro or anti-gun.

[MudCamper]

Despite all of my legitimate concerns over LOC, memos like this make any assertion that the movement is not achieving it's goals absurd.

Biting my tongue! Biting my tongue!

But seriously, while I do not necessarily agree with the CGF request to stand down on UOC in urban areas at this time, I do respect it. Their concern is more about new/bad legislation pre-re-incorporation.

But this is the kind of progress (educating LE) that UOC can achieve. This again reminds me of the fact that if nothing else, just educating LE about People v Clark was worth it, not to mention all the other gems in this memo.

[MudCamper]

Wow, that is a good memo! Thanks MudCamper!

Thanks go to bad_ace over on OCDO. He did the PRAR request that uncovered this.

[dfletcher]

I always used to get Sunnyvale and Sunnydale a bit mixed up, but now I can remember a little better. Unloaded open carry = Sunnyvale, loaded concealed carry (and a little gunplay) = Sunnydale.

[pullnshoot25]

Good friggin memo, the best I have seen yet. I find it funny that cops have had over 30 years to figure this out (both weapons carry and the whole "stop and ID" thing) and it still needs to be drilled in. Crikey.

Room for improvement: Writing that the check is NON-OBLIGATORY and ultimately UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Perhaps quoting Dudley and Ubiles would be appropriate. Can't say you uphold the Constitution while breaking it.

It is funny they say that it is a constitutional right to UOC, when the right is for LOC and no such right exists here (at least just yet)

Oh well, there is always the NEXT police department to finally come around to actually enforcing the law, right?

[wash]

I noticed that bit about constitutional.

It made me think about when we actually get incorporation. LOC may be declared a constitutionally protected right. Then they won't have anything to check in their e-stop or whatever. They won't have cause to say more than "hello" to you.

The writer might be more friendly than it sounds, just adding the serial # check so that he doesn't sound like a "gun nut" at work...

[MP301]

I think that if I had to guess, the author has to be a cautious pro-gun. The constitutional statement says to me that the author thinks that having/possessing/carrying guns is a 2a issue. Sure, there were a few twinges in his statements, but im sure he didnt want to look like a sell out to his anti-gun brethren. He could have easily made the memo in a less friendly way.

In any case, like Bwiese said. How he personally feels is not as important as what his accomplished by this memo. Its a good thing...

[Decoligny]

Yes if you cover your serial number then you have broken a law.

I am going to write to BeeMiller Inc, who made my Hi-Point, explaining the Open Carry movement. I will try to get a letter giving me "specific authorization" to cover the serial number with a piece of electrical tape. This will allow me to be exempt from 537(e).

537e. (a) Any person who knowingly buys, sells, receives, disposes of, conceals, or has in his or her possession any personal property from which the manufacturer's serial number, identification number, electronic serial number, or any other distinguishing number or identification mark has been removed, defaced, covered, altered, or destroyed, is guilty of a public offense, punishable as follows:
(1) If the value of the property does not exceed four hundred dollars ($400), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months.
(2) If the value of the property exceeds four hundred dollars ($400), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
(3) If the property is an integrated computer chip or panel of a value of four hundred dollars ($400) or more, by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, or 2 or 3 years or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
For purposes of this subdivision, "personal property" includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Any television, radio, recorder, phonograph, telephone, piano, or any other musical instrument or sound equipment.
(2) Any washing machine, sewing machine, vacuum cleaner, or other household appliance or furnishings.
(3) Any typewriter, adding machine, dictaphone, or any other office equipment or furnishings.
(4) Any computer, printed circuit, integrated chip or panel, or other part of a computer.
(5) Any tool or similar device, including any technical or scientific equipment.
(6) Any bicycle, exercise equipment, or any other entertainment or recreational equipment.
(7) Any electrical or mechanical equipment, contrivance, material, or piece of apparatus or equipment.
(8) Any clock, watch, watch case, or watch movement.
(9) Any vehicle or vessel, or any component part thereof.
(b) When property described in subdivision (a) comes into the custody of a peace officer it shall become subject to the provision of Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 1407) of Title 10 of Part 2, relating to the disposal of stolen or embezzled property. Property subject to this section shall be considered stolen or embezzled property for the purposes of that chapter, and prior to being disposed of, shall have an identification mark imbedded or engraved in, or permanently affixed to it.
(c) This section does not apply to those cases or instances where any of the changes or alterations enumerated in subdivision (a) have been customarily made or done as an established practice in the ordinary and regular conduct of business, by the original manufacturer, or by his or her duly appointed direct representative, or under specific authorization from the original manufacturer.


The memo is also WRONG when it says "PC 12090 Tampering with marks on firearms. It is illegal to possess a firearm in which the serial number has been altered, COVERED, or obliterated. (FEL)

Nowhere is 12090 do you see the term "covered". You do see the following terms used:
Changes
Alters
Removes
Obliterates

The one thing all these terms have in common is that they are all permanent attempts to keep the firearm from being identified.

Taping Over the serial number does not change the number.
Taping Over the serial number does not alter the number.
Taping Over the serial number does not remove the number.
Taping Over the serial number does not obliterate the number.

12090. Any person who changes, alters, removes or obliterates the name of the maker, model, manufacturer's number, or other mark of identification, including any distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice on any pistol, revolver, or any other firearm, without first having secured written permission from the department to make such change, alteration or removal shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison.

[Whiskey_Sauer]

Would someone please explain to me, in a non-inflammatory or rhetorical manner, why there is such resistance to allowing a LEO to do a serial number check on a weapon?

Save/spare me the constitutional/4th Amendment argument standing alone. I'm asking what's the practical effect that concerns you all?

[putput]

Sweet, page 3, the J Drive of Justice!

[jdberger]

I seem to recall that some aftermarket revolver grips "cover" the serial number on guns with the number stamped on the heel of the grip.

[MudCamper]

Would someone please explain to me, in a non-inflammatory or rhetorical manner, why there is such resistance to allowing a LEO to do a serial number check on a weapon?

Save/spare me the constitutional/4th Amendment argument standing alone. I'm asking what's the practical effect that concerns you all?

It's mostly a 4A issue. Seriously. Some of us don't like to have any of our rights violated, no matter how insignificant. Also, like the ID issue, it could land you in Theseus' situation, facing criminal charges (BS unconstitutional charges, but costly non-the-less).

I seem to recall that some aftermarket revolver grips "cover" the serial number on guns with the number stamped on the heel of the grip.

Yes. See Decoligny's post.

[Dr Rockso]

Would someone please explain to me, in a non-inflammatory or rhetorical manner, why there is such resistance to allowing a LEO to do a serial number check on a weapon?

Save/spare me the constitutional/4th Amendment argument standing alone. I'm asking what's the practical effect that concerns you all?

The only argument I can think of from a practical standpoint (aside from the legitimate 4th amendment claims) is that sometimes SN databases are screwed up. I have heard of a couple cases where people have been arrested for supposedly possessing stolen guns, and upon further investigation it has been a typo in the database or an identical serial number of a different manufacturer.

[DTOM CA!]

This is the item I do not like in this memo "The Citizens Perceive themselves as law abiding people exercising their rights." Perceive my *****. Why does it seem that it is always an us versus them with the police.

[Decoligny]

Would someone please explain to me, in a non-inflammatory or rhetorical manner, why there is such resistance to allowing a LEO to do a serial number check on a weapon?

Save/spare me the constitutional/4th Amendment argument standing alone. I'm asking what's the practical effect that concerns you all?

The practical effect can be seen in a case like Theseus's.

He had his ID taken without permission or probably cause so it is only a close analogy but here goes.

Let's say you are on private property, the parking lot of a laundrymat.
Let's say that the laundrymat is within 1,000 feet of a school, but you are exempt from 626.9 because you are on private property and you walked there entering the parking lot from the side farthest from the school (over 1,000 feet from the school).
You are carrying without ID.
The LEO performs an e-check and then runs your serial number. There is now a record of an e-check being done on your firearm in the system.
The LEO a few days later reads 626.9 and realizes that you may have been within 1,000.
The LEO goes back and measure and sure enough 878 feet from school property.
The LEO reviews the log and sees that you, Mr. XXXXXX who lives at 123 MyHouse Lane was the registered owner of the handgun.
The LEO drives to 123 MyHouse Lane, rings your doorbell and you answer.
The LEO tells you that you are under arrest for violating PC 626.9.
You have to put out over $10,000 in lawyers fees to try to keep you butt out of Prison.

The police have no need to know any information about a law abiding citizen.