Open Carry California

[Sefner]

Try open carry around Bush, either one, or Clinton and let me know how that works out for ya. Same deal if you try it around Obama. The detail responsible for their safety is going to draw the line there, guaranteed. That's using common sense to understand that it isn't going to go over well.

Someone did just that. A group of them in fact. And one of them had an AR 15. No one was arrested or harmed. Here is a video of the guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLVkmBTith4

It gives you the opportunity to tell the cop what you are doing in friendly and non confrontational terms. I might say, "you know I don't have to show you ID, but sure, there's no harm in it".

Here in MI, due to many OCers making it clear that they have no duty to provide ID, many LEOs will open the interaction with "I know you don't have to talk to me or provide ID, I just want to ask some questions." These interactions go much smoother.

By the way, equating a specific issue like good form for open carry to other everyday things like being stopped for holding a little girl's hand is silly, nothing good gets done because everything is a slippery slope.

No, it's not silly. It's randomly stopping someone to ensure a crime is not being committed when there is no evidence to suggest that one is being committed. If OCing is not reasonable suspicion (and in MI it's not), an OCer cannot be Terry stopped solely because they are OCing.

[Hook686]

For the purposes of Penal Code section 12023 (commission or attempted commission of a
felony while armed with a loaded firearm), a firearm is deemed loaded when both the
firearm and the unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged from the firearm are
in the immediate possession of the same person.

http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/forms/pdf/cfl.pdf

Is this provision no longer valid ?

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Hook686

http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/forms/pdf/cfl.pdf

Is this provision no longer valid ?

No, I'd say it's still valid.

Note that it applies when committing, or attempting to commit, a felony. So if you're unloaded open carrying, and doing nothing wrong, you're okay. But if you're unloaded open carrying with a loaded magazine or ammunition on your person, and you commit, or attempt to commit, a felony, you get the "loaded gun" enhancement.

[HoraceHogsnort]

woodguru wrote: "Sorry but the Starbucks dork patrol isn't making me feel safe and warm and fuzzy. They are simply waving a red flag in areas where it can and will be made illegal to do this."

The "Starbucks dork patrol" is not out to make you feel warm and fuzzy. I find it amazing/sad that somebody in this forum would characterize the legal exercise of a gun owner's right as "waving a red flag". Can we back off on the name calling?

[javabum]

I find it rather dissapointing that some people step on thoes who exersize their 2nd ammendment rights.
If you dont agree with it then your up there with the anti's.Here in california not everyone has the opportunity to obtain a ccw and open carry is their only option.What else should they do when no other option is viable.Atleast their doing it with in the confines of the law

I agree with HoraceHogsnort,the name calling needs to stop.

[Dana C]

First let me state that I am not encouraging anyone to break the law. Having said that, back when in the olden days, LOL, I lived many years in CA.
I had occasion to work in South Central LA. I carried a Light Weight Commander on my person at all times.
I knew of few of the South Central Officers and a few Sheriff Deputies as well, all of whom knew I carried without a permit to do so. All of the ones that knew thought it was a good idea. At the time I was a branch manager of the biggest S&L in the area and had 35 employees. We were robbed frequently. I never displayed or used the pistol during those times as it was in my desk and no amount of money is worth another persons life. However on a couple of occasions I had the need to let bad guys know that I had it while in the parking lot by lifting my suit coat just enough so they could see it. I had my life threatened many many times, which for the most part I ignored but a few were serious.

Yes, I could have been in big trouble if something would have occured and concealed weapon would have been found. My philosopy was this:
Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by javabum

...If you dont agree with it then your up there with the anti's...

That's hogwash. We can disagree with a tactic without joining up with the Brady Bunch. There has been considerable criticism of the methods of the California open carry folks by well established defenders to the RKBA.

Originally Posted by javabum

...Here in california not everyone has the opportunity to obtain a ccw and open carry is their only option.What else should they do when no other option is viable....

And I certainly don't agree that unloaded open carry is a viable alternative for self defense. Aside from the practical difficulties of keeping 1,000 feet from a school, the time needed to load may put one too far behind the curve in a dynamic self defense situation.

It appears that most folks in California who have been openly carrying unloaded guns do not routinely do so as they go about their normal lives. It is being done for political purposes. And considering some of the public reactions I have seen, and considering how close we came to losing even the right to openly carry unloaded guns, it's sure questionable whether it's done the RKBA in California any good.

[BOBA FETT]

open carry with an unloaded gun is stupid,why bother...

[Sefner]

Originally Posted by fiddletown

We can disagree with a tactic without joining up with the Brady Bunch.

I agree. OC versus CC does seem to be a huge thing of contention amongst gun owners, and it makes fight our own. And it's from both sides.

open carry with an unloaded gun is stupid,why bother...

Some people take what they can get.

[woodguru]

You know Boba, that depends on whether you are carrying for the nebulous bad guy incident that's possible or if you have something very real in your life that is more than likely, it is probable. I have had businesses in my home that take in substantial amounts of cash and have had gang type extortionists make attempts to intimidate me into "giving" them money and goods.

I have had the probables happen, leaving the grocery store one day with an unloaded Beretta on my belt I actually had a potentially probable waiting for me at the car thinking I would not be armed. That gun was in my hand and ready to rock and roll way before he could get to me. Job accomplished, empty gun won. After he and his coharts making multiple attempts I simply told the leader that I was through with his lame attempts, the police had been contacted multiple times, it was their advice to me to shoot him, and that the next time I saw him I was going to eliminate him. Apparently he believed me because it's been a year and a half since seeing him. I had him sitting on the pavement with his hands in the air asking me not to shoot, and I told him I was giving him one last chance to disappear. Many will criticize letting him go but I personally have seen the police and legal systems fail to hold the bad guys and you are way way worse off than you ever were before because you have a ****** off guy looking for revenge, not payoffs. I made the choice to actually go so far as to eliminate this guy like the vermin he is if I saw him again. Fortunately it hasn't happened, I've even moved to another home to lower the chances.

In my life I have a serious appreciation for being able to carry that empty gun, besides who says it's empty all the time? It's only empty when exposed to public situations where someone in a store might call the law. I walk out of a store and it's not nearly as empty as it's "supposed" to be.

It's easy enough to load and unload that Beretta 86 with a tip up barrel, it's one of the reasons it's my favorite carry weapon.

I'm far less worried about unknown assailants than I am the known ones, it's a little different being on guard and ready in the potentially exposed times than all the time.

It's really hard to argue this with those who are on point all the time.

[Dana C]

Back in the day, in LA, I carried loaded, condtion one. Yep, like I said, I would likely been in big trouble if I was arrested. However, I don't speed, look like a potential criminal or do criminal things so the likelihood of that was minimal. My philosophy was, staying alive is my #1 priority and if arrested after I, used a weapon in self defense, was in trouble, so be it. I least I was alive and would see my family again. The bad guy wouldn't.
Like I said, I would much rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

[FiveFeezy]

I consider a firearm as a tool. Its no different than a Skilsaw. I sure wouldn't carry my Skilsaw around just because I can or to show people that I have one. I carry it when I need it or expect to need it. To carry it at any other time is senseless.


On another note, Woodguru, you sure get into a lot of situations where you have to point firearms at people. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=426898
Are you some kind of secret agent?

[dean1818]

Maybe a different perspective.

Look at the non-gun owners, the very important, VOTING non-gun owners.


Whether you like it or not, the average VOTING, non-gun owner feels a bit
nervous around an openly armed, non LE person. I have heard many folks say
"NO ONE IS NERVOUS AROUND ME WITH MY OC" ..... I wish I could read minds that well.

The average public person seems more comfortable and happier with
out of sight, out of mind approach.

I see a lot of arguements about OC vs CC, and in my humble opinion, (Just mine) efforts to make OC the rule seem like an uphill battle.

I seems like that you would want to fight for CC rights (WITH a LOADED gun) than fight to continue a OC fight that you will have a tough time getting enough votes to support.

Maybe legislation of CC in the city, OC in the country makes sense.

Just my opinion. I am completely happy to have CC here in the GREAT state of Texas. It works. I STILL get to excersize my rights.

[cougar gt-e]

The open carry is an under the radar thing in California or at least was, which pretty much has to be the most anti gun state in the country. The idea of a few clowns trying to prove this point that you can is waving a red flag in front of a proven majority of anti gunners.

Would you feel the same way if it was the 1A that was only allowed covertly?

Would you support newspapers only being allowed to print government approved news and only allowing "1A speech" if buried in the classified section disguised as an ad?


Failure to exercise a right is the path to loosing that right. People that get upset by seeing a citizen armed need to wake up. Gun owners that don't support all aspects of gun ownership need to also take a look at history. Creeping loss of gun rights follows predictable patterns and we ARE on that path and have been for decades. Just recently have we started to slowly backtrack.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by cougar gt-e

Failure to exercise a right is the path to loosing that right....

I keep seeing that said, but I haven't seen any evidence to support it.

Historically, there seems to be evidence that exercising a right in manner found obnoxious by the body politic is likely to lead to losing that right.

Over the years, in many communities, we have seen many zoning and other laws adopted restricting how you can use your own property. In some places you may not work on your car in your own driveway in view of the public street. In some places you must get design approval of remodeling or landscaping visible to the public. In some communities, you may not park or store large vehicles like boats on trailers or RVs on your property so as to be visible to the public. These sorts of restrictions have in large part been the result of strong enough public sentiment that some things previously lawfully done by private parties on their own land were unseemly or unattractive.

The point is not whether these sorts of restrictions are right. The point is that they do exist. And the fact of their existence illustrates that if enough voters find some form of otherwise lawful conduct in public to be obnoxious, politicians will be only too happy to pass laws against it.

It has happened in California in the case of the law prohibiting open carry of a loaded gun. And it came within one voting of happening to unloaded open carry as well.

[woodguru]

I guess I'll trump the open carry if it gets challenged.

I've been meaning to get a concealed permit for some time now. We are in one of the counties that issues them so it makes sense. If the political climate changes in such a way that this tightens up I'll hopefully be grand fathered into one at a later time when it isn't happening.

The police documented threats I've had make it pretty much a done deal.

[jaydubya]

It seems like that you would want to fight for CC rights (WITH a LOADED gun) than fight to continue a OC fight that you will have a tough time getting enough votes to support. Maybe legislation of CC in the city, OC in the country makes sense.

Thank you for that post, Dean. I have attempted to say something like that on this thread several times (and much worse as well), and deleted my efforts each time. First, I'm a Californian. When I saw what those, um, fellow Californians were doing IN SAN FRANCISCO!! , I realized they were challenging our legislature to make a law unmaking a law that made it legal to carry openly provided the gun was not loaded, and could not be easily loaded. And within minutes an assemblywoman from my town (San Diego) proposed a law doing just that. It came within a butterfly wingflap of appearing on our governor's desk for signature (he would have signed it!), but due to technicalities failed to do so. But almost certainly it will reappear next session.

I was bent out of shape because there are legal efforts underway in state and federal courts that could switch the entire state from "may issue" to "shall issue" -- a far more important right. I saw this open carry fandango in San Francisco as being the kiss of death.

I was wrong. Those guys with big ol' Glocks on their hips in that San Francisco coffee shop may be deeper thinkers than I am (or not, but let's go with that thought). We will get nothing useful from our legislature regarding gun rights until they are forced by the courts to do it. This will take time. We could use this time to eliminate a potential road block: a state law that has existed since the 1960s, which allows us to openly wear sidearms, so long as they are useless. Who needs such a travesty? What we need is responsible concealed carry in urban areas, and open carry in rural areas.

Whew!
Jack

[dean1818]

Who thought of the UNLOADED thing???????

Sheeze....is that STUPID, or What?



I have visions of Barney Fife... "Let me get my Bullet"

Comedy on the Andy Griffin Show,Absolutely LUDICROUS in REAL life....

[JohnKSa]

The "unloaded thing" was due to a law passed because the populace of California became unhappy with a group of people exercising their right to open carry loaded several decades ago.

We could use this time to eliminate a potential road block: a state law that has existed since the 1960s, which allows us to openly wear sidearms, so long as they are useless.

Except that so far the efforts of the "guys with big ol' Glocks on their hips", to use your words, haven't done anything toward eliminating the road block. Instead they have caused at least one business that formerly had no policy on open carry to adopt an anti-open carry policy and they also generated enough negative publicity that the CA legislature came within 1 vote of banning OC altogether.

To be perfectly clear I'm NOT saying that OC can't be used constructively, just pointing out that it doesn't always work out that way. The biggest problem I see is that many people who back this particular flavor of activism absolutely refuse to accept the idea that it could possibly have a negative outcome.

If you simply can't conceive of the idea that what you're doing could have a negative outcome it follows that you won't plan to try to avoid a negative outcome nor to deal with a negative outcome in the most constructive way possible.

[danez71]

fiddletown and the like are spot on in regards to this issue in my opinion.

They thumbed their nose at the politicians and remainder of the public (some of which were on the fence voters) while excercising what little right they have left as a way to demonstrate they are resposible enough to have more.

Not the most effective tactic.

[jaydubya]

John, I don't think we are far apart on this topic. I don't remember whether the "open carry but useless" law passed back in the sixties was a proposition or a legislative act. I'm not fond of either process as they have developed in California. As far as the San Francisco display of useless handguns is concerned, it probably will result in that law's abolition during some future legislative session. It was my realization that this would be good, because it will clear the air, that caused my outburst above.

My basic point is that, while we howl and demonstrate, the courts are sorting out how we may "keep and bear Arms". Our system works, and it works at all levels of governance. My county sheriff is currently being sued in federal court for the allegedly arbitrary way he disapproves concealed carry permit applications. His case is not proceding too well. Heh heh.

Cordially, Jack

[JohnKSa]

As far as the San Francisco display of useless handguns is concerned, it probably will result in that law's abolition during some future legislative session.

We can all hope, but it's important that we understand and acknowledge that while that is the goal the result obtained was very nearly the opposite of the one desired. That is, instead of the law being abolished, it was very nearly strengthened to ban all open carry. The attempt failed by a single vote.

Our system works, and it works at all levels of governance.

Yes, but again, it's important that we understand and acknowledge that the system works for the other guys too. If there are more of them than us or if they are better or smarter at working the system than we are then they will get what they want and we won't.

[HDDeluxe]

I am certainly glad I live in the Gold State of Arizona. As people are aware we recently passed legislation making it legal to carry concealed without a permit in addition to our long standing open carry laws. Mind you these are loaded weapons. This was done through the legislative process.

It would seem to me that those of you in California should use the power of the vote and legislative action to achieve less strict gun/ammo laws. (Ooops--that's right-- you are the ones who have Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein etc.) So maybe the Starbucks group was a little flashy, but at least they were doing something.

[dean1818]

To me, (IMHO) (Please dont take this wrong)

Doing something, something that is unplanned, something that HURTS the overall cause, is not correct.

As a nation, many of the past gun owners, usually the man, have stopped teaching our children about how to safely enjoy firearms.

Into this vacuum, a liberal media and a school system regularly teaches our youth about how "bad" and "hillbilly" owning guns is.

Think about how many times you have heard the "gun nut" phrase the last 5 years. Do you remember that phrase in the 70s or 80s?

A generation passes, and a son or daughter has a negative opinion on guns.
HOW DO YOU THINK THAT PERSON WILL VOTE ON GUN OWNERSHIP IN THE FUTURE?

We "shoot ourselves in the foot" (pun intended) when we do actions like what happens in San Fransico. The non-gun owning VOTING populace that may be on the fence, now thinks the hillbilly, redneck, and GUN NUT title FITS.


A few thoughts from a Texan (about doing SOMETHING):

1) As gun owners, we need to go shoot with our kids.... GO TODAY
I take my kids friends as well

2) REALIZE that as a gun owner, your actions are on display to all.

3) If you do a face to face sale, if something doesnt seem right about the
buyer. (I know we cant see inside someone, and not an exact science)
DONT SELL THEM THE GUN !!

4) Shoot responsibly, the anti's are actively looking for ANYTHING to use
against us

5) Put locks on your guns around very young children, and if you have a
child with emotional difficulties, make them even more safe. (buy a safe)

6) Use your resources and time to fight the battles that you know that you can win (CC has a chance as more and more states are allowing it)

6) Join the NRA

7) Vote, Vote, Vote

Remember, the fight is NOT against the other gun owners. We may disagree, but we do need to come together.

The ANTI's are GROWING, ORGANIZED, and WELL-FUNDED..........

We need to be clear that we have a battle ahead it just needs to be done legally and with some forethought

[woodguru]

When you start talking about taking on issues and out voting you don't even want to talk about taking on anti gun nuts in San Francisco, Sausalito, Walnut Creek, etc. There's just plain areas in this state it's best to leave well enough alone. That was my original point.

There's guys who honestly want to carry for their peace of mind and they can now do it. Those who want to make an issue of it can and will wave a red flag and lose.

I am one who has quietly carried without having to make a big deal about it and feel that anyone else who feels the need should just do it in a low key way.

Two choices, quietly exercise and enjoy something that's already legal, or ignorantly make a big deal out of it and screw it up. That isn't the way it should be but that's the way it is. Fighting to make a point for an issue you already have is pretty stupid.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the anti gunners are just smart enough to have guys like this running around in the most conspicuous manner in the least "acceptable" places just to fire anti's up, it would be about as effective as any way to get open carry off the books.