• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Loaded Open Carry in Unincorporated Areas, Dirt Road

Felid`Maximus

Felid`Maximus

Activist Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
1,714
Location
Reno, Nevada, USA
So, where I live, in Nevada, I have discovered that if I follow a short short dirt path up a hill right into unincorporated Sierra County, California, it would be a shorter trip than the nearest trip to a place within NV where I could shoot. In Sierra County California, their local ordinance requires 150 yards distance from dwellings to shoot.
It seems to me, since I'd be further than 150 feet from a dwelling the whole time and would only be on dirt paths and not labeled roads, I'd be legal to loaded open carry on the way to go shooting there, even in a vehicle, even with my unregistered handgun, so long as I only bring my 10 round magazines.

But then, I wonder, would a dirt path trigger the definition of "street" thereby making discharge of firearm unlawful, and further making loaded carry unlawful under state law?
 
Last edited:
R

Robin47

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
545
Location
Susanville, California, USA
Felid`Maximus said:
So, where I live, in Nevada, I have discovered that if I follow a short short dirt path up a hill right into unincorporated Sierra County, California, it would be a shorter trip than the nearest trip to a place within NV where I could shoot. In Sierra County California, their local ordinance requires 150 yards distance from dwellings to shoot.
It seems to me, since I'd be further than 150 feet from a dwelling the whole time and would only be on dirt paths and not labeled roads, I'd be legal to loaded open carry on the way to go shooting there, even in a vehicle, even with my unregistered handgun, so long as I only bring my 10 round magazines.

But then, I wonder, would a dirt path trigger the definition of "street" thereby making discharge of firearm unlawful, and further making loaded carry unlawful under state law?
Click to expand...

HI FM,

I believe there are so many confusing laws in California, that even LEO's don't know what is what now.
I think if you could drive on it, it "might" be considered a road and illegal, to LOC.
As far as walking on a true "path" a walking trail on BLM or National Forest, you "should" be O.K.
But in some cases that to can be tricky.
I think the only thing that might help if you run into LE, would be telling them your
"Going to or from a shooting area".
Which you are ! :)

Good luck ! Robin47
 
Last edited:
M

markm

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
487
Location
, ,
Robin47 said:
HI FM,

I believe there are so many confusing laws in California, that even LEO's don't know what is what now.
I think if you could drive on it, it "might" be considered a road and illegal, to LOC.
As far as walking on a true "path" a walking trail on BLM or National Forest, you "should" be O.K.
But in some cases that to can be tricky.
I think the only thing that might help if you run into LE, would be telling them your
"Going to or from a shooting area".
Which you are ! :)

Good luck ! Robin47
Click to expand...

Hey OP and Robin47,

Pleasee read this decision by J. Robie:

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=200540218CalRptr3d384_1364.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006

Note that PC 12031, is now PC 25400; PC 12025 is now PC 25850.

You may OC in unicorporated territory if a discharge ban is not in place. You may not dishcharge on private property without permission from the landowner (preferably written permission from landowner).

By reading the judgement above, you will understand that LEO does not know the law. And, as in the Dorner case, they can shoot you with impunity. The surfer, and two newspaper delivery ladies were given new vehicles, but the LEOs involved have not been arrested for attempted murder.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/09/local/la-me-torrance-shooting-20130210


http://ktla.com/2013/03/14/dorner-c...nt-have-truck-promised-by-lapd/#axzz2O2CNaYY1

thanks,

markm
 
R

Robin47

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
545
Location
Susanville, California, USA
MarkBofRAdvocate said:
Hey OP and Robin47,

Pleasee read this decision by J. Robie:

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=200540218CalRptr3d384_1364.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006

Note that PC 12031, is now PC 25400; PC 12025 is now PC 25850.

You may OC in unicorporated territory if a discharge ban is not in place. You may not dishcharge on private property without permission from the landowner (preferably written permission from landowner).

By reading the judgement above, you will understand that LEO does not know the law. And, as in the Dorner case, they can shoot you with impunity. The surfer, and two newspaper delivery ladies were given new vehicles, but the LEOs involved have not been arrested for attempted murder.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/09/local/la-me-torrance-shooting-20130210


http://ktla.com/2013/03/14/dorner-c...nt-have-truck-promised-by-lapd/#axzz2O2CNaYY1

thanks,

markm
Click to expand...

So with all these Illegal laws, I guess the McDonald decision, and all the other Supreme court decisions,like Marbury v.Madison of (1803)
or 16 Am Jur 2d,Sec 177 late 2d,Sec 256. Don't mean nothing. Plus many more.
Well how about the "Dick Act of 1902" Which says they can't pass any laws agains't your rights.
I's sad how our country has deterioating before our eyes. :( Robin47
 
ConditionThree

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
Robin47 said:
So with all these Illegal laws, I guess the McDonald decision, and all the other Supreme court decisions,like Marbury v.Madison of (1803)
or 16 Am Jur 2d,Sec 177 late 2d,Sec 256. Don't mean nothing. Plus many more.
Well how about the "Dick Act of 1902" Which says they can't pass any laws agains't your rights.
I's sad how our country has deterioating before our eyes. :( Robin47
Click to expand...

Of course they mean something. They just don't mean what you think they mean.

Take the Dick Act, which has made several circuits around the internet as the supposed 'Ace in the Hole' invalidating gun control. It doesn't do anything of the sort and in spite of this, people keep promulgating this false notion having not even read the content of the Dick Act or understanding the purpose of the legislation.

It is impossible to fight unConstitutional laws if we are ignorant of either what the Constitution says, or the content of the legislation that harms us. Ignorance is no foundation upon which we can mount a reasonable defense for liberty.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
Correct - loaded and unloaded open carry of handguns still lawful in California provided you are in an unincorporated area where the County, and only the County (not the state), has not banned ALL discharge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top