-
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.
-
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.
IWB open carry?
- Thread starter pullnshoot25
- Start date
CA_Libertarian
State Researcher
imported post
Hale doesn't adress this issue specifically, but we know the courts in CA are known for their ability to defy logic. Imagine them getting to take a whack at the definition of concealed! Not a pretty prospect...
Now, in an ideal world where our courts are fair:
Since the legislature did not provide a clear definition for "concealed" in the statute, the court must use it's common/ordinary definition. This means they will look it up in their dictionary and then apply that definition. (In reality they torture both the English language and logic to bend that definition to their will.)
Here's Merriam-Webster's take on the meaning of the word "conceal":
So, the real problem here is that we cannot trust the courts to apply the law fairly. You better be able and willing to either do your time or put up a lot of money to mount a good defense (and then possibly do the time anyhow).
Hale doesn't adress this issue specifically, but we know the courts in CA are known for their ability to defy logic. Imagine them getting to take a whack at the definition of concealed! Not a pretty prospect...
Now, in an ideal world where our courts are fair:
Since the legislature did not provide a clear definition for "concealed" in the statute, the court must use it's common/ordinary definition. This means they will look it up in their dictionary and then apply that definition. (In reality they torture both the English language and logic to bend that definition to their will.)
Here's Merriam-Webster's take on the meaning of the word "conceal":
If you could get an honest reading of the definition, I think a 12025 conviction would be thrown out as long as the weapon is clearly visible and recognizable as a firearm. Looking at the pictures in the OP there is no way the firearm is concealed.
So, the real problem here is that we cannot trust the courts to apply the law fairly. You better be able and willing to either do your time or put up a lot of money to mount a good defense (and then possibly do the time anyhow).