Constructing a Ca Unincorporated Area Loaded Carry Map?

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

If Knight's vehiclewas completely off of the road, (which may have been the case) then he was not in a prohibited area and PC 374c would not be a player at all.

Click to expand...

A little law enforcement bird has told me that the 'prohibited area' would include the area between the pavement to the private property line when we are discussing public roads and highways.

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

If Knight's vehiclewas completely off of the road, (which may have been the case) then he was not in a prohibited area and PC 374c would not be a player at all.

Click to expand...

The record is clear that Knight was on the road, come on.

imported post

Mike wrote:

Decoligny wrote:

If Knight's vehiclewas completely off of the road, (which may have been the case) then he was not in a prohibited area and PC 374c would not be a player at all.

Click to expand...

The record is clear that Knight was on the road, come on.

Click to expand...

Then it all boils down to this one point. In an appeal, no new evidence, and no new charges can be brought up. In the original case, the arresting officer and the district attorney screwed the pooch and did not realize that PC 374c would have made their case water tight as it made the road a prohibited place. They were going with loaded weapon in any place as being prohibited. The appeals court said that they didn't prove he was in a prohibited area so no go on the search, as no criminal act was commited based on what the cop put forth at the original trial.

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

Then it all boils down to this one point. In an appeal, no new evidence, and no new charges can be brought up. In the original case, the arresting officer and the district attorney screwed the pooch and did not realize that PC 374c would have made their case water tight as it made the road a prohibited place. They were going with loaded weapon in any place as being prohibited. The appeals court said that they didn't prove he was in a prohibited area so no go on the search, as no criminal act was commited based on what the cop put forth at the original trial.

Click to expand...

No, it all boils down to the point that Knight, which cited to an AG Opinion on this question,is binding on trial courts in Calif. - mere roads are not prohibited areas within the meaning of the California's ban on open carry in prohibited areaa of unincorporated areas.

imported post

The problem with CA open carry is that it's not allowed where CCW permit issuance is low or non existent to serve as a substitute for it. I would love to be able to OC to get around Sheriff (of Nottingham) Smith's blockade, but no dice.

imported post

BillMCyrus wrote:

The problem with CA open carry is that it's not allowed where CCW permit issuance is low or non existent to serve as a substitute for it. I would love to be able to OC to get around Sheriff (of Nottingham) Smith's blockade, but no dice.

Click to expand...

I am not sure I fully understand your statement.

If you are refering to "CA open carry" as Unloaded open carry, then where is "CA open carry" not allowed? Other than withing 1000 ft of a school zone, State Capitol Grounds, etc.

Or are you specifically talking about loaded open carry?

OC

ConditionThree said:

Oops. I highjacked my own thread back there.

Here's a start. Incorporated areas are in black.

Granted, Cato is right about properly detailing local discharge prohibitions, however in most counties,there arent many ordinances prohibiting discharge. Shasta has one Im aware of, and that is in the one mile area surrounding Shasta Dam. These areas are so small, that a state map, wont show any detail at all.

Click to expand...

OC is okay in unincorp areas at least Fallbrook and Bonsal. I spoke with a Deputy Sheriff yesterday in Fallbrook. He said other than the usual prohibited areas Gov. buildings, school area its fine as long as it isn't loaded. He even went as far to say if I have issues with police or sheriff's if someone calls to contact him directly. I do have my guard card as well as open carry permit for work. Its best to contact law enforcement prior too, he really appreciated that I called and asked questions and spent about 30 min BSing about other stuff.

Welcome to OCDO Tac1

Believe you are approaching a record for posting to a necro thread - this thread was last posted to over 7 years ago.

Nightmare said:

Welcome to OCDO. It may be best/better to start your own thread in this California sub-forum as this one is a seven years dead thread.

It is not thought wise to consult with police law enforcement agents as they are not bound to the truth and are indeed permitted to lie in order to obtain a conviction. Better to ask here, or on a dedicated California forum like CalGuns or - BEST- retain an attorney bound by the canons to YOUR interests.

Click to expand...

I agree with the first sentence and the last half of the second sentence but never, ever, rely on anything you read in a forum, not here, not anywhere and especially not at CalGuns.

Also, if your attorney says anything other than "maybe" then you need to find a competent attorney. California's gun laws are poorly written and where the courts have construed them, they have not done so consistently. The California courts cannot even agree on what constitutes a loaded gun and the California Supreme Court only recently decided to resolve a split between the California courts on what the definition of "concealed" means when it comes to weapons.

As someone who is not an attorney but as someone who has been fighting to overturn California's Open Carry bans these past four years, I can tell you the rule of thumb for carrying firearms in California is this:

Open Carry is by default, legal everywhere except where it is prohibited.
Openly carrying a loaded firearm is by default legal everywhere except where it is prohibited.
Openly carrying an unloaded firearm is by default legal everywhere except where it is prohibited.
Concealed carry is by default, illegal everywhere except where it is permitted (an unloaded firearm carried concealed, even if you don't have any ammunition, is still a concealed weapon).


The carrying of firearms on Federal land is subject both to Federal "regulations" and state restrictions. You can be arrested, prosecuted, convicted, fined and imprisoned for violating a state gun law on Federal land.

I realize that this isn't much help but that's the way it currently is here in California. Even judges don't know the law. Case in point was the vacated Peruta v. San Diego three judge panel decision. The judges thought that it is legal to carry a loaded firearm on your private residential property in incorporated cities and in unincorporated county territory where the discharge of a firearm is prohibited. It isn't. In 1976 the California courts held that one can "have" a loaded firearm on his property but one cannot "carry" a loaded firearm on his property. The Peruta court did not know this because judges, especially appellate judges do not research the relevant case law. They look just at the filings and case law citations submitted and raised on appeal. None of the plaintiffs ever mentioned that they couldn't carry a loaded firearm on their property, let alone that Ed Peruta, the lead plaintiff who lives full time out of an RV can't carry a loaded firearm in his RV or even keep an unloaded handgun in a chest of drawers in his RV.

Which brings us back to asking a competent attorney. Hint, you won't find one working for the NRA, CRPA, SAF, or CalGuns.

I guess now this thread can be closed and a new one started.