• 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.

Say goodbye to Loaded Unincorporated Carry

steveforopen

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
108
Location
Erie, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

Lawmaker targets gun ‘loophole’ The California Senate Public Safety Committee on Tuesday approved a bill being carried by State Sen. Jack Scott that would prohibit carrying a loaded firearm while in a vehicle in unincorporated areas of the state.

Incorporated cities already prohibit carrying loaded firearms in vehicles, as do some individual counties that have passed similar gun-control ordinances — including Los Angeles County.

But Scott’s bill, which is sponsored by a host of public safety entities including the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, would extend the prohibition of loaded firearms in vehicles to unincorporated areas in counties that don’t currently address the issue, he said.

“Right now, the only way you could outlaw carrying a loaded weapon in unincorporated areas, it has to be a local ordinance, but it creates a patchwork,” Scott said. “What this really does is establish uniformity throughout the state.”

Many of the unincorporated areas that would be affected by the bill are rural areas of the state, where hunting is more common. advertisement

“The Legislature probably left that loophole in place for certain rural areas where people want rifles for hunting,” said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. “So what this does, it closes the loophole.”

The measure also defines a loaded firearm as a gun with an attached, loaded clip, Scott said. If the clip is not attached to a gun, it’s not considered loaded, he said.

Scott called the bill a natural extension of a comprehensive gun-control measure he ushered through the Legislature in 1999 that made it easier for district attorneys to charge people carrying concealed firearms with a felony.

In 2000, less than 45% of people arrested for possession of a concealed firearm were charged with felonies; in 2003, that number jumped to 61.5%, according to Scott’s office.

The current bill, which passed 3-2 in the committee, also gives discretion to district attorneys to determine whether those carrying a loaded firearm in their vehicle would be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, Scott said.

“This is a very helpful matter to target nefarious people who have an evil intent on the other hands,” Scott said. “Normally if you’re carrying around a loaded gun, you’re ready for action. It’s not like a hunter who goes out into the woods, loads his gun and hunts deer or quail — that’s not what I’m talking about.”

The bill will be heard next in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Film festival still taking submissions

Private and public high school students in Glendale and Burbank have until April 18 to submit films to Filmfest 43, Assemblyman Paul Krekorian’s first student film festival.

Students who live in or attend high school anywhere in Krekorian’s 43rd Assembly District are invited to submit to the festival, which is set to take place on May 16 at the Alex Theatre.

As chair of the Assembly Select Committee on the Preservation of California’s Entertainment Industry, Krekorian conceived the event as a way to promote and encourage the potential next wave of Southern California filmmakers, Krekorian’s office said.

Students are encouraged to submit original films of any genre, including narrative, documentary, animation and experimental.

Films should be less than 35 minutes in length, and all submissions must be directed, produced, photographed and edited by the student contestants. Submissions must be accompanied by a synopsis of 50 words or less, and a complete and accurate list of credits.

Films produced by class of 2007 students may be submitted for consideration if they were completed before August 2007.

For more information and an application, contact Krekorian’s district service office at (818) 240-6330 or visit www.assembly.ca.gov/ krekorian.
 

cato

Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,338
Location
California, USA
imported post

My understanding is that this bill will give Fish and Game Code section 2006 the same loaded definition as is in PC 12031.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

steveforopen wrote:
Lawmaker targets gun ‘loophole’ The California Senate Public Safety Committee on Tuesday approved a bill being carried by State Sen. Jack Scott that would prohibit carrying a loaded firearm while in a vehicle in unincorporated areas of the state.

Incorporated cities already prohibit carrying loaded firearms in vehicles, as do some individual counties that have passed similar gun-control ordinances — including Los Angeles County.

But Scott’s bill, which is sponsored by a host of public safety entities including the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, would extend the prohibition of loaded firearms in vehicles to unincorporated areas in counties that don’t currently address the issue, he said.

“Right now, the only way you could outlaw carrying a loaded weapon in unincorporated areas, it has to be a local ordinance, but it creates a patchwork,” Scott said. “What this really does is establish uniformity throughout the state.”

Many of the unincorporated areas that would be affected by the bill are rural areas of the state, where hunting is more common. advertisement

“The Legislature probably left that loophole in place for certain rural areas where people want rifles for hunting,” said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. “So what this does, it closes the loophole.”

The measure also defines a loaded firearm as a gun with an attached, loaded clip, Scott said. If the clip is not attached to a gun, it’s not considered loaded, he said.

Scott called the bill a natural extension of a comprehensive gun-control measure he ushered through the Legislature in 1999 that made it easier for district attorneys to charge people carrying concealed firearms with a felony.

In 2000, less than 45% of people arrested for possession of a concealed firearm were charged with felonies; in 2003, that number jumped to 61.5%, according to Scott’s office.

The current bill, which passed 3-2 in the committee, also gives discretion to district attorneys to determine whether those carrying a loaded firearm in their vehicle would be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, Scott said.

“This is a very helpful matter to target nefarious people who have an evil intent on the other hands,” Scott said. “Normally if you’re carrying around a loaded gun, you’re ready for action. It’s not like a hunter who goes out into the woods, loads his gun and hunts deer or quail — that’s not what I’m talking about.”

The bill will be heard next in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Film festival still taking submissions

Private and public high school students in Glendale and Burbank have until April 18 to submit films to Filmfest 43, Assemblyman Paul Krekorian’s first student film festival.

Students who live in or attend high school anywhere in Krekorian’s 43rd Assembly District are invited to submit to the festival, which is set to take place on May 16 at the Alex Theatre.

As chair of the Assembly Select Committee on the Preservation of California’s Entertainment Industry, Krekorian conceived the event as a way to promote and encourage the potential next wave of Southern California filmmakers, Krekorian’s office said.

Students are encouraged to submit original films of any genre, including narrative, documentary, animation and experimental.

Films should be less than 35 minutes in length, and all submissions must be directed, produced, photographed and edited by the student contestants. Submissions must be accompanied by a synopsis of 50 words or less, and a complete and accurate list of credits.

Films produced by class of 2007 students may be submitted for consideration if they were completed before August 2007.

For more information and an application, contact Krekorian’s district service office at (818) 240-6330 or visit http://www.assembly.ca.gov/ krekorian.
Steve - what is link to this article??
 

cato

Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,338
Location
California, USA
imported post

I like your theory!:). But I'm also of the opinion that 374C does already what this legislation claims is a "loophole". I just think that legislator doesn't understand 12031g.

This is still a small step backwards for unlicensed car carry in unincorporated areas.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

cato wrote:
I like your theory!:). But I'm also of the opinion that 374C does already what this legislation claims is a "loophole". I just think that legislator doesn't understand 12031g.

Funny how even our legislator(s) don't understand the statutes, yet it's our asses if we don't interpret it correctly.

Further proof that due process does not exist in this area of the penal code...
 

lockman

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,193
Location
Elgin, Illinois, USA
imported post

Anytime the law allows something the politicians don’t like it is labeled a “loophole”. If it was written with rural loaded carry excepted then it is not a loophole.

I also wonder about the discretionary provision to allow filing as a felony or misdemeanor depending on how good a person the prosecutor feels the offender is. A thousand dollar donation to the prosecutor’s election fund would be good reason to go lenient on a fellow wouldn’t it?
 

MudCamper

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
709
Location
Sebastopol, California, USA
imported post

It's already illegal to carry loaded in 99% of unincorperated territory because of 12031(f) and 374c. Any new legislation is just political posturing for more left wing votes.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

MudCamper wrote:
It's already illegal to carry loaded in 99% of unincorperated territory because of 12031(f) and 374c. Any new legislation is just political posturing for more left wing votes.
That's not what the case law and AG opinion says, so this statement makes no sense.
 

MudCamper

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
709
Location
Sebastopol, California, USA
imported post

Mike wrote:
MudCamper wrote:
It's already illegal to carry loaded in 99% of unincorperated territory because of 12031(f) and 374c. Any new legislation is just political posturing for more left wing votes.
That's not what the case law and AG opinion says, so this statement makes no sense.

What I stated makes sense, if you know CA law. Per 12031 (a) (1) you cannot carry loaded in "prohibited area of unincorporated territory".

12031 (f) As used in this section, "prohibited area" means any place where it is unlawful to discharge a weapon.

374c Every person who shoots any firearm from or upon a public road or highway is guilty of a misdemeanor.

374c triggers 12031(f). In addition, most counties have restrictions on shooting within 150 yards of ANY buildings. All of this makes carrying loaded a 12031 violation. You just have to carry your mags or speedloaders with you.

I have it all detailed here.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

Deja vu.

I'm fairly certain we had this debate in another thread. I remember Mike posted the case law, but I can't remember reading an AG opinion on this.

I've been looking for that thread for about 30 mins. Can someone find it, or maybe Mike can post a link to the case law and AG opinion.

Any help would be appreciated.
 

cato

Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,338
Location
California, USA
imported post

The case law Mike is referring to in People vs Knight and deals directly with 12031. It's a decision in our favor but I believe it to have been incorrectly decided. 12031 f and 374C were not entered in to the judicial notice of the case. It is likely to be help full at the trial court level but I see it being overturned when challenged (if ever).

Here's to placing all of our eggs in the Heller and Son of Heller baskets:shock:
 
Top