|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 2, 2009, 12:52 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
Quote:
I was focused on the fact that 12025 mostly addresses carrying in vehicle (subsections (1) and (3)), but subsection (2) (which I had not focused on) also addresses carrying on the person. And carrying a handgun in a hand-held container could well be considered concealed on the person. Therefore 12026.1 could be read to mean that subsection (1) of 12026.1 allows concealed carrying in a vehicle (otherwise prohibited by subsection (1) of 12025) and that subsection (2) of 12026.1 allows concealed carrying on the person (otherwise prohibited by subsection (2) of 12025) as long as the concealed carrying on the person is limited to "to or from" the vehicle in a locked box. I like that reading better. Thanks. |
|
May 3, 2009, 10:50 AM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 1999
Location: Concord, CA, USA
Posts: 726
|
While Califiornia law is your main concern, don't forget Federal law. The Federal Gun Free Schools Act requires that all firearms, rifles and shotguns included, must be in a locked container or rack when traveling within 1000 ft of a school.
|
May 3, 2009, 01:08 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
Last edited by maestro pistolero; May 3, 2009 at 09:53 PM. |
|
May 3, 2009, 01:48 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
Long guns and school zones and federal law
The cite is 18 USC §922(q).
Here is the text (as of 2007). I have added some formatting to make it easier to read: (1) The Congress finds and declares that - (A) crime, particularly crime involving drugs and guns, is a pervasive, nationwide problem;(2) (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.(3) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), it shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the person knows is a school zone.(4) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as preempting or preventing a State or local government from enacting a statute establishing gun free school zones as provided in this subsection. 18 USC §921(a) provides: (25) The term "school zone" means - (A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or (B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school. (26) The term "school" means a school which provides elementary or secondary education, as determined under State law. More in a follow up post. Last edited by Ricky B; May 3, 2009 at 01:49 PM. Reason: Add bolding |
May 3, 2009, 01:54 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
US v. Lopez
In a rare limitation on congress's power, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1995 declared the federal gun-free school zone law unconstitutional in U.S. v. Lopez.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez California's law, clearly modeled on the federal law, was passed in 1995. All is not clear, however, because the statute as invalidated by the court did not contain the limitation that now appears in the statute, namely, that the firearm have "moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce." I doubt that the current court would change its opinion based on the amendment, particularly in light of its decision in United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000), but technically speaking the current statute is not the one that the court invalidated in Lopez. And new justices appointed by Pres. Obama might not see things the same way as the majority did in 1995. Therefore I think that complying with the federal law by keeping it in a locked container is advisable. State law already requires it to be unloaded. |
May 3, 2009, 02:13 PM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
California's Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995
Formatting is mine. ((f)(2)(B) should be indented further)
Penal Code §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 (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written permission of the school district superintendent, his or her designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as specified in subdivision (f). (c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm under any of the following circumstances: (1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private(d) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful for any person, with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to discharge, or attempt to discharge, a firearm in a school zone, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (e). The prohibition contained in this subdivision does not apply to the discharge of a firearm to the extent that the conditions of paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) are satisfied. (e) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply: (1) "School zone" means an area in, or on the grounds of, a public(f) (1) Any person who violates subdivision (b) by possessing a (A) By imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five(B) By imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year or (3) Any person who violates subdivision (d) shall be punished by(g) (1) Every person convicted under this section for a(h) Notwithstanding Section 12026, 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 in the state prison 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 12026, 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 in the state prison 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. (j) For purposes of this section, a firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell, consisting of a case that holds a charge of powder and a bullet or shot, in, or attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm. A muzzle-loader firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder. (k) This section does not require that notice be posted regarding the proscribed conduct. (l) This section does not apply to a duly appointed peace officer as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, a full-time paid peace officer of another state or the federal government who is carrying out official duties while in California, any person summoned by any of these officers to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace while he or she is actually engaged in assisting the officer, a member of the military forces of this state or of the United States who is engaged in the performance of his or her duties, a person holding a valid license to carry the firearm pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4, or an armored vehicle guard, engaged in the performance of his or her duties, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 7521 of the Business and Professions Code. (m) This section does not apply to a security guard authorized to carry a loaded firearm pursuant to Section 12031. (n) This section does not apply to an existing shooting range at a public or private school or university or college campus. (o) This section does not apply to an honorably retired peace officer authorized to carry a concealed or loaded firearm pursuant to subdivision (a) or (i) of Section 12027 or paragraph (1) or (8) of subdivision (b) of Section 12031. Last edited by Ricky B; May 3, 2009 at 02:14 PM. Reason: Add b |
May 3, 2009, 02:16 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Thanks Ricky B, that's what I thought.
|
May 3, 2009, 08:23 PM | #33 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 1999
Location: Concord, CA, USA
Posts: 726
|
Quote:
I really doubt that anyone would be cited for transporting an unloaded rifle, not in a locked container, through a school zone unless it was an add on to another federal violation such as drug dealing within the school zone. |
|
May 3, 2009, 09:52 PM | #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
|
|
May 3, 2009, 10:33 PM | #35 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
For your convenience, I highlight part of the text of the federal law that I previously quoted:
Quote:
In a footnote, The Supreme Court in Lopez said: Quote:
Notwithstanding that, I still think it's a good idea to comply with the law until it is held unconstitutional or repealed. Last edited by Ricky B; May 3, 2009 at 10:33 PM. Reason: correct typo |
||
May 3, 2009, 11:04 PM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Thanks, but I thought that was what the SCOTUS struck in 'Lopez', saying that the connection to interstate commerce was tenuous, at best. I'm I confusing another issue? Is this ringing a bell for anyone?
I appreciate the reference. |
May 4, 2009, 04:38 AM | #37 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 30, 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 400
|
Quote:
|
|
May 5, 2009, 09:31 AM | #38 |
Junior Member
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Posts: 11
|
Cal Gun Laws
Transportation of Firearms FAQ's for CA, USA
http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/...-firearms.html |
May 5, 2009, 12:16 PM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2007
Location: Lago Vista TX
Posts: 2,425
|
All this is one of the reasons why I don't live in California any more, and sympathize with those that do, for many reasons ...
__________________
"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants." Albert Camus |
May 6, 2009, 04:32 AM | #40 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2006
Location: San Diego, Calif.
Posts: 717
|
Quote:
------------------------------ Can I continually carry a handgun in my car in a locked container other than the utility or glove compartment for self-defense? I do not have a concealed weapons permit. Written by Administrator Monday, 29 November 1999 16:00 No. The legal authorization to transport a concealed handgun without a permit unloaded and in a motor vehicle's trunk or a separate locked container in Penal Code Section 12026.1 applies only while going to or from the specific places, and for the specific purposes, identified in Penal Code Section 12026.2 (going hunting, to or from a range, etc.). It is illegal to carry a concealed handgun without a permit for general purposes, such as self defense, even though the firearm is transported in the trunk of a motor vehicle or in a separate locked container. Section 12026.1 is not very clear on this point, but Section 12026.2 is, so it is prudent to read them together. Again, handguns being lawfully transported concealed in a motor vehicle's trunk or in a separate locked container cannot be loaded nor can ammunition be attached to them in any manner. Last Updated ( Tuesday, 28 April 2009 10:35 ) ------------------------------ There is nothing that says that 12026.1 "applies only while going to or from the specific places, and for the specific purposes, identified in Penal Code Section 12026.2." I don't know where they got that. 12026.2 and 12027 are blanket limitations on 12025. They both start out with "Section 12025 does not apply to, or affect, any of the following:" They have nothing to do with 12026.1, they are just poorly numbered. In fact all those sections are rather poorly drafted, but I'm not understanding where people think that 12026.2 somehow limits 12026.1. There's nothing in either that references the other, and there's nothing in the code other than the numbering that indicates that they have any bearing on one another. Unless there's a case actually addressing this issue, and I'd love it if someone could point me to it. |
|
May 6, 2009, 04:50 AM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2006
Location: San Diego, Calif.
Posts: 717
|
In fact, from further reading it seems that 12026.2 refers to instances where YOU'RE NOT USING A CAR AT ALL. If all you had was 12026.1, and you wanted to take your gun over to your friend's house across the street, you'd have to walk it to your car, then from your car to your friend's house.
Because 12026.1 only addresses carrying to/from the car and while in the car (or other motor vehicle), people need the exemptions of 12026.2 when they're transporting a gun NOT in a car. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|