|
Concealed Carry Discussion General discussion regarding CCW/LTC in California |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
||||
|
||||
I spoke to a Sheriff's deputy at the OC court house this morning and out of curiosity asked if a CCW allowed one to carry a handgun inside the court house. He pointed me to a sign near the entrance that said weapons of any kind were prohibited (it cited penal code 171b).
I said that a CCW was specifically one of the exemptions to that section and he very quickly told me that I was wrong. I looked up 171b when I got home and it *does* say that CCW holders are exempt... Was the deputy simply misinformed or has something been changed? |
#162
|
||||
|
||||
/\ There is an CCW exemption in the penal code, but most courts have a local rule that guns are not permitted in court buildings except by LEOs. It's not even worth asking and all OC courts have metal detectors, so best to leave it in the car.
Sent from my iPhone; please pardon typos, edits & stupid comments. .
__________________
Sent from Free America Last edited by Doheny; 03-28-2014 at 6:25 AM.. |
#163
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yes, ... and maybe not. Yes he probably was misinformed with respect to this specific code section but there are additional code sections that govern courthouses which give the head judge the authority to make those kind of restrictions. I am not a lawyer, so you know............
__________________
F@$% Joe Biden Quote:
|
#164
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Locally, even on-duty LEO, if they are parties to a case being heard, aren't allowed to carry into the Family Law Courthouse...they have lockboxes at the entrance
__________________
...because the journey is the worthier part...The Shepherd's Tale |
#165
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#166
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This is what I said. Even a judge is not permitted to violate law therefor, it is my understanding, there is a section within the CA Government Code (law) which grants the judge the authority to make that restriction. No one, LEO, judge, DA, or any of us are permitted to have any weapon at all if we are a party to a case in any court in this state.
__________________
F@$% Joe Biden Quote:
|
#167
|
||||
|
||||
Definitive "Where can I carry in CA?" list (Legalities)
Quote:
Yep, you got me there. That restriction applies to all licenses, regardless of issuing agency. Interesting that SSD types it on the license, unnecessarily since it's already a restriction. Their wording is "remaining at any establishment..."
__________________
Like granular silica through an equatorially constricted chronographic vessel, so are the circadian georotations of our metabolic persistences. |
#168
|
||||
|
||||
Definitive "Where can I carry in CA?" list (Legalities)
Quote:
If you look at your post that's not really what you said, outlaw. Just to be clear, it's unlikely a CCW'er will be able to carry in any court house, regardless if they are a party to an action or not. Sent from my iPhone; please pardon typos, edits & stupid comments.
__________________
Sent from Free America Last edited by Doheny; 03-28-2014 at 5:47 PM.. |
#169
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The Application is not a 'contract', and any implication that it may be is, IMO, entirely gutted by the plain language of the Penal Code at 26200 Quote:
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: โBegin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.โ Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#170
|
||||
|
||||
The bigger point is interesting, but personally moot since I don't go to bars anyway.
__________________
Like granular silica through an equatorially constricted chronographic vessel, so are the circadian georotations of our metabolic persistences. |
#171
|
||||
|
||||
Definitive "Where can I carry in CA?" list (Legalities)
Quote:
So if it's not on the license we can drink in a bar, regardless of the admonishment on the application? A hypothetical, obviously. Sent from my iPhone; please pardon typos, edits & stupid comments.
__________________
Sent from Free America |
#172
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
There is a court case in Sacramento which may rule the other way. We shall see. 'Legality', of course, is distinct from 'wise'.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: โBegin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.โ Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#174
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Othewise had no concern about ccw in non sterile area of LAX. Same thing at Oakland. |
#175
|
||||
|
||||
The shuttle is a "common carrier" i.e. bus. Therefore, it's illegal to carry on one without written consent. See the OP.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there. www.BlackRiverTraining.com |
#176
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#177
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
. |
#178
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, but such sinage doesn't carry the weight of law in CA. At the worst they can ask you to leave and if you don't tag you with trespassing.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there. www.BlackRiverTraining.com |
#179
|
||||
|
||||
When it's backed by city or county ordinance it surely does. You may beat the charge, but you will not beat the ride.
|
#180
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What you describe is clearly intimidation to get the general populace to behave the way the bullies want them to.
__________________
F@$% Joe Biden Quote:
|
#181
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
. |
#182
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Armed civil disobedience at an airport is not going to curry favor with a CA judge or Joe jury member. |
#183
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Please describe what not tolerating it specifically entails, in your opinion. Ignoring the local codes and carrying anyway? If so, what's your personal risk/benefit analysis consist of? Personally speaking, mine leads me to conclude the the risk inherent in carrying illegally in an airport outside the sterile area in a city or county that has codified prohibitions against it is greater than the risk of being unarmed in that location. To conclude otherwise, based on the available data, is illogical. Is your stance based more on a refusal to submit framework? Everyone has to evaluate that for himself or herself. I'm not going to jeopardize my family's well being to make that particular statement in that situation. If you choose to, that's your decision.
__________________
Like granular silica through an equatorially constricted chronographic vessel, so are the circadian georotations of our metabolic persistences. |
#184
|
|||
|
|||
I don't see any thing in the OCCO which actually criminalizes breaking any of the 'Sec. 2-1-53. Rules of conduct. '
|
#185
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#187
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks for that clarification.
So, basically, any city can pass any ordinance and we are subject to it? How are we supposed to survive without breaking some obscure law? I'm not arguing the validity of what you said. I'm just trying to understand my tenuous position as a CCW holder. For the record, I don't test these waters. If a place posts a sign that they don't want me carrying my gun in there, then I don't go there. Just like carrying in a bar may be legal, I choose not to test that theory.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there. www.BlackRiverTraining.com |
#188
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah! Turns out voting matters.
|
#189
|
||||
|
||||
This is extremely common. Counties, cities, park districts, etc. Look up the city and county codes in your region. Most of 'em are online.
__________________
Like granular silica through an equatorially constricted chronographic vessel, so are the circadian georotations of our metabolic persistences. |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I don't know the exact details of how it works, but basically the State has declared that it, and it alone, shall govern the area of firearm laws. (With some very specific exceptions) This was very deliberate to avoid a patchwork of confusing and contradictory laws. The general consensus would probably be that a city or county (including Orange County) cannot pass an ordinance prohibiting CCW within their borders. Yet we see ordinances all over the place regarding parks, arenas and airport grounds. What is the legal theory that allows one but not the other? Or is it a situation where a narrow prohibition leaves us nodding and saying either "I'm OK with that" or "It's not worth the fight". Whereas a more broad prohibition would bring down the wrath of the entire firearm lobby. As Rastoff notes, one lives in constant fear of running afoul of some law one had no practical way of knowing about. |
#191
|
||||
|
||||
See the wiki on the pre-emption in Government Code -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/St...Gun_Regulation
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: โBegin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.โ Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#192
|
||||
|
||||
This is the problem when laws try to be specific. Just like the bullet button, there are always ways around laws. So, specific cities can dodge state law by writing ordinances. It's very frustrating living in this modern world.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there. www.BlackRiverTraining.com |
#193
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Glancing through the referenced decision in "Fiscal v. City and County of San Francisco", I took away the understanding that the ordinance was stuck down in it's entirety because some aspects interfered with state preemption. Technically, the court could have decided to sever the conflicting elements out of the ordinance, though that is not usual. By the same token, SF could, at any time, simply pass another ordinance that does not conflict and outright bans possession. Signs at the border and everything. Sorry...don't mean to get a discussion rolling here. If I decide to pursue this thinking I'll start a thread in the appropriate forum. |
#194
|
||||
|
||||
So... if someone with a valid CCW is picking up another person at the Orange County Airport ... they cannot have a firearm in the vehicle even if it's in a locked case? I'm confused as to what the CCW person is supposed to do under these circumstances since I thought locking the firearm in a box was the "fix" for places where CCW permit holders cannot go... Guess the same thing applies to Post Offices but a little easier to park and walk to a post office than to park and walk to most airport terminals (and I'm guessing an argument could be made that off-site long-term parking is still "on airport"... since it's part of the standard airport maps etc.
///Quote: OCCO 2-1-53(i) No person, except peace officers, an authorized post office or Airport employee or a member of the armed forces of the United States on official duty, shall carry any weapon, explosive or flammable material on or about his person, openly or concealed, on the Airport without the written permission of the Airport Director. This Section shall not apply to persons carrying firearms in cases, broken down or unloaded when said firearms are being transported by air. For the purposes of this section, a weapon includes all those listed in California Penal Code Sections 12000-12654.
__________________
. "It's not the odds that guide me, it's the stakes." - Calguns Member Quote Last edited by RunsWithGuns; 04-16-2014 at 2:04 PM.. |
#195
|
|||
|
|||
I'm looking at the Common Carrier prohibition, and from reading the section it sounds like Federal Law only makes it illegal if the common carrier is going interstate or international, so Alcatraz Ferry would not count. Is my reading correct? I'm not a lawyer, but was trying to sort this out for times I take public transit.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922 Quote:
|
#196
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#197
|
|||
|
|||
Actually no, I'll be using the local light rail to get to work. And I had a recent trip where I took the Amtrak train into SF without knowing about the Common Carriers, but didn't think they were restricted after reading the section and reading this thread: https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/...d.php?t=479831
Last edited by gidjin; 04-23-2014 at 4:27 PM.. Reason: Adding additional info |
#198
|
|||
|
|||
I searched but didn't find anything about this but I just went to a sacramento rivercats game you there is no metal detectors or signs so you can carry there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
#199
|
||||
|
||||
I used the search but didn't find anything. I ride the metrolink from OC to la and back regularly. Can I CCW on metrolink? Their site is silent about it.
__________________
Do not give in to evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it. |
#200
|
||||
|
||||
The thread has wandered a bit from its original intent, I started it for state/federal level laws. There has been some local regulation discussed, but metrolink has not been discussed to my knowledge. You would need to refer to the responsible agency regulations for that.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|