ConditionThree
State Pioneer
imported post
12031. (e) In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory. Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of this section.
So, John Q Public open carries in an unincorporatedterritory of the county that is not in a prohibited area. Someone calls the police and reports a man with a gun. The sheriff's department is dispatchedand responds to a 417, with units responding. John Q Public looks up from his meal in the outdoor dining area of a fast food restaurant to be apprehended by several deputies. The firearm is holstered and JQP's hands are visible and away from the weapon. the deputies begin an interrogatory with the subject to determine his intent and ask to inspect the firearm. JQP asks the deputies what crime they are investigating. They reply 417pc 'brandishing' and 12031pc (loaded firearm in public). JQP declines the search of his person, indicatingit is not a crime to carry loaded and exposed in an unincorporated area and since there was no crime commited and no warrant issued, there was also no concent to search. JQP is then manhandled, tazered, OC sprayed, or otherwise subdued, his firearm confiscated, hands cuffed and the 'perp' hauled to the pokey.
Anyone else see the snag here?
Legislators have created a situation where police could potentially be conducting an illegal search and seizure. In the text of the above law, cops are given open discretionto inspect a persons firearm to determine if a person is breaking the law- but it specifies and limits the vicinities where the the person cannot refuse such a search of their person and property under threat of arrest.
What would you do in JQP's position?
12031. (e) In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory. Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of this section.
So, John Q Public open carries in an unincorporatedterritory of the county that is not in a prohibited area. Someone calls the police and reports a man with a gun. The sheriff's department is dispatchedand responds to a 417, with units responding. John Q Public looks up from his meal in the outdoor dining area of a fast food restaurant to be apprehended by several deputies. The firearm is holstered and JQP's hands are visible and away from the weapon. the deputies begin an interrogatory with the subject to determine his intent and ask to inspect the firearm. JQP asks the deputies what crime they are investigating. They reply 417pc 'brandishing' and 12031pc (loaded firearm in public). JQP declines the search of his person, indicatingit is not a crime to carry loaded and exposed in an unincorporated area and since there was no crime commited and no warrant issued, there was also no concent to search. JQP is then manhandled, tazered, OC sprayed, or otherwise subdued, his firearm confiscated, hands cuffed and the 'perp' hauled to the pokey.
Anyone else see the snag here?
Legislators have created a situation where police could potentially be conducting an illegal search and seizure. In the text of the above law, cops are given open discretionto inspect a persons firearm to determine if a person is breaking the law- but it specifies and limits the vicinities where the the person cannot refuse such a search of their person and property under threat of arrest.
What would you do in JQP's position?