imported post
openryan wrote:
What is california law regarding intimidation with a look alike deadly weapon. I am not saying this guy was trying to intimidate anyone, however he probably caused alarm to the person calling in. Even with a look alike weapon if they had reason to believe this, they would have grounds to arrest him, albeit unfair.
I still believe the actions by the police were within reason, nothing along the likes of the danbus controversy.
Well, this doesn't rise to the level of intimidation or brandishing, but the law governing the display of an 'imitation firearm' is fairly specific.
See CaliforniaPenal Code-
12550. As used in this article, the following definitions apply:
(a) "BB device" is defined in subdivision (g) of Section 12001.
(b) "Firearm" is defined in subdivision (b) of Section 12001.
(c)
"Imitation firearm" means any BB device, toy gun, replica of a
firearm, or other device that is so substantially similar in
coloration and overall appearance to an existing firearm as to lead a
reasonable person to perceive that the device is a firearm.
12556. (a)
No person may openly display or expose any imitation
firearm, as defined in Section 12550, in a public place.
(b) Violation of this section, except as provided in subdivision
(c), is an infraction punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars
($100) for the first offense, and three hundred dollars ($300) for a
second offense.
(c) A third or subsequent violation of this section is punishable
as a misdemeanor.
(d) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to the following, when the
imitation firearm is:
(1) Packaged or concealed so that it is not subject to public
viewing.
(2) Displayed or exposed in the course of commerce, including
commercial film or video productions, or for service, repair, or
restoration of the imitation firearm.
(3) Used in a theatrical production, a motion picture, video,
television, or stage production.
(4) Used in conjunction with a certified or regulated sporting
event or competition.
(5) Used in conjunction with lawful hunting, or lawful pest
control activities.
(6) Used or possessed at certified or regulated public or private
shooting ranges.
(7) Used at fairs, exhibitions, expositions, or other similar
activities for which a permit has been obtained from a local or state
government.
(8) Used in military, civil defense, or civic activities,
including flag ceremonies, color guards, parades, award
presentations, historical reenactments, and memorials.
(9) Used for public displays authorized by public or private
schools or displays that are part of a museum collection.
(10) Used in parades, ceremonies, or other similar activities for
which a permit has been obtained from a local or state government.
(11) Displayed on a wall plaque or in a presentation case.
(12) Used in areas where the discharge of a firearm is lawful.
(13) A device where the entire exterior surface of the device is
white, bright red, bright orange, bright yellow, bright green, bright
blue, bright pink, or bright purple, either singly or as the
predominant color in combination with other colors in any pattern, or
where the entire device is constructed of transparent or translucent
materials which permits unmistakable observation of the device's
complete contents. Merely having an orange tip as provided in
federal law and regulations does not satisfy this requirement. The
entire surface must be colored or transparent or translucent.
(e)
For purposes of this section, the term "public place" means an
area open to the public and includes streets, sidewalks, bridges,
alleys, plazas, parks, driveways, front yards, parking lots,
automobiles, whether moving or not, and buildings open to the general
public, including those that serve food or drink, or provide
entertainment, and the doorways and entrances to buildings or
dwellings.
(f) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude
prosecution for a violation of Section 171b, 171.5, or 626.10.
So, in this case- a what a reasonable persons perception plays a big part of what's going on. Would a reasonable person percieve that the belt buckle was an actual firearm? Again-
reasonable...(knee jerk, flinching, 911 dialing dingbats need not apply). There is nothing in the story indicating this person did anything that would necessitate detention by police. The belt buckle does not appear to look sufficiently like a firearm as to be construed as an 'imitation firearm' (it is as thin as a belt buckle and has no 'barrel' where bullets are supposed to come out).
And even if it were a REAL firearm carried in a belt holster, charges would only apply if it were loaded in an incorporated area ora prohibited area of unincorporated territory,or carried within 1000 feet of a school.
I'm almost inclined to send theSan Diego authorities a letter...:X
