imported post
Hi folks,
'Bwiese' from Calguns here, stopping by with some UOC info just in.
We have a new UOC memo from Sacto RTTAC. The Calguns thread is:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=121589
...with init post duped here for folks' convenience:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looks like they think UOCers are terrorists. Appears I was wrong about memo contents (from prior rumor/guesswork) - they think UOCs are out to entrap - as opposed to insistence on a right and engaging in legal self protection via recorder.
It's quite notable how they use the term constitutional right in quotation marks - not to indicate exact quotation, but a reflection of the simple derision of people with a 'master' mindset wondering why people insist on their rights.
Any trivial errors/minor format changes are likely mine alone due to quick transcription and lack of OCR at hand. I did not want to post the fax image as that could reveal the fax machine used.
This memo has made it at least down to "upper SoCal" now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center
sacrttac@sacsheriff.com * 916-808-8383 * FAX 916-874-6180
SUBJECT: Officer Safety/Situational Awareness - Open Carry Movement
DATE: 24 July 2008
Recently, emails have been circulating about the Open Carry movement and its members' attempts to
openly carry firearms in public places. The intent may be to have an officer arrest them or seize their
firearm so they can file a civil lawsuit against the officer. Because of the recent incidents in the
Sacramento RTTAC region and the likelihood that the incidents will continue, the following information
is being provided to law enforcement agencies for purposes of Officer Safety and Situational Awareness.
The Open Carry movement began in 2004 when the website, OpenCarry.org, was established by two gun
rights activists. The website not only serves as a legal resource but also as a social networking portal for
thousands of American gun owners. Based on a review of the website, it appears to be well visited with
many daily postings to several forum topics.
The Sacramento Police Department recently received a phone call from an individual inquiring about
carrying an unloaded handgun in public. Additional information was received indicating that members of
the group 'Open Carry' suggested going to a Sacramento restaurant wearing non-concealed pistols on
their belts in an attempt to lure police into arresting them while other members of the group secretly
videotape the incident. The video could then be used in a civil lawsuit against the officer.
In addition, there was an incident in Turlock earlier this month where officers responded to a citizen report
of an armed person in a park on a Saturday afternoon. Upon arrival, officers encountered an adult male
armed with a handgun carried in a belt holster. Employing customary officer safety practices, the person
was disarmed at gunpoint and detained. The handgun was found to be unloaded and properly registered.
The male adult possessed valid identification and declared that he was engaging in his "constitutional right"
to openly carry an unloaded firearm. Because the firearm was unloaded and not concealed, no criminal
violation occurred. Once the person was properly identified and the weapon checked for registration status,
the person was released.
The following Monday, an individual identifying himself as a co-founder of "OpenCarry.org" called the Turlock
Police Department and suggested that Turlock police officers required training on the 'right to carry firearms’'.
OpenCarry.org also posted a message from an individual, "CA_Libertarian", who claimed he was "illegally detained
and harassed" by Turlock police officers. The website posting suggested that the incident was being reviewed
by an attorney for the purposes of pursuing a civil rights violation action and that there was an audio tape
recording of the entire incident. In addition, the individual confronted and detained by officers was not a Turlock
resident and his posting related his experiences of openly carrying firearms throughout different communities.
Based on a review of their website, it appears that the Open Carry movement is spreading to this region. The
founders are based on the East Coast and much of the activity has been in that area, but recent activity in
the Central Valley and some of the forum postings indicate that law enforcement agencies in California may
experience an increase in the number of Open Carry encountersin their jurisdictions.
If you log on to their website http://www.opencarry.org and click on "Our Forum" at the top left, then scroll down
to "California", you will se that there are 7 pages of postings, all with a sizeable number of replies. Included
in the postings are the Turlock PD incident and the Sacramento PD incident (including the High Priority internal
memo) as well as meetings and "meet & greets" that have either taken place or are being planned throughout
California. All California Law Enforcement personnel should be aware of the following firearms laws in case they
are confronted with a subject openly carrying a firearm.
Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center at 888-884-8383 or 916-803-8383.
------------------------------------------------------------
LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE
WARNING: This document contains confidential information. It is intended for law enforcement personnel only.
The information should not be released to the media or general public. Further discussion of this document
should be done on a need to know basis. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
use, review, dissemination, or copying of this document is strictly prohibited.
YEAHHHH, RIGHT.
__________________
Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA
No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Hi folks,
'Bwiese' from Calguns here, stopping by with some UOC info just in.
We have a new UOC memo from Sacto RTTAC. The Calguns thread is:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=121589
...with init post duped here for folks' convenience:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looks like they think UOCers are terrorists. Appears I was wrong about memo contents (from prior rumor/guesswork) - they think UOCs are out to entrap - as opposed to insistence on a right and engaging in legal self protection via recorder.
It's quite notable how they use the term constitutional right in quotation marks - not to indicate exact quotation, but a reflection of the simple derision of people with a 'master' mindset wondering why people insist on their rights.
Any trivial errors/minor format changes are likely mine alone due to quick transcription and lack of OCR at hand. I did not want to post the fax image as that could reveal the fax machine used.
This memo has made it at least down to "upper SoCal" now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center
sacrttac@sacsheriff.com * 916-808-8383 * FAX 916-874-6180
SUBJECT: Officer Safety/Situational Awareness - Open Carry Movement
DATE: 24 July 2008
Recently, emails have been circulating about the Open Carry movement and its members' attempts to
openly carry firearms in public places. The intent may be to have an officer arrest them or seize their
firearm so they can file a civil lawsuit against the officer. Because of the recent incidents in the
Sacramento RTTAC region and the likelihood that the incidents will continue, the following information
is being provided to law enforcement agencies for purposes of Officer Safety and Situational Awareness.
The Open Carry movement began in 2004 when the website, OpenCarry.org, was established by two gun
rights activists. The website not only serves as a legal resource but also as a social networking portal for
thousands of American gun owners. Based on a review of the website, it appears to be well visited with
many daily postings to several forum topics.
The Sacramento Police Department recently received a phone call from an individual inquiring about
carrying an unloaded handgun in public. Additional information was received indicating that members of
the group 'Open Carry' suggested going to a Sacramento restaurant wearing non-concealed pistols on
their belts in an attempt to lure police into arresting them while other members of the group secretly
videotape the incident. The video could then be used in a civil lawsuit against the officer.
In addition, there was an incident in Turlock earlier this month where officers responded to a citizen report
of an armed person in a park on a Saturday afternoon. Upon arrival, officers encountered an adult male
armed with a handgun carried in a belt holster. Employing customary officer safety practices, the person
was disarmed at gunpoint and detained. The handgun was found to be unloaded and properly registered.
The male adult possessed valid identification and declared that he was engaging in his "constitutional right"
to openly carry an unloaded firearm. Because the firearm was unloaded and not concealed, no criminal
violation occurred. Once the person was properly identified and the weapon checked for registration status,
the person was released.
The following Monday, an individual identifying himself as a co-founder of "OpenCarry.org" called the Turlock
Police Department and suggested that Turlock police officers required training on the 'right to carry firearms’'.
OpenCarry.org also posted a message from an individual, "CA_Libertarian", who claimed he was "illegally detained
and harassed" by Turlock police officers. The website posting suggested that the incident was being reviewed
by an attorney for the purposes of pursuing a civil rights violation action and that there was an audio tape
recording of the entire incident. In addition, the individual confronted and detained by officers was not a Turlock
resident and his posting related his experiences of openly carrying firearms throughout different communities.
Based on a review of their website, it appears that the Open Carry movement is spreading to this region. The
founders are based on the East Coast and much of the activity has been in that area, but recent activity in
the Central Valley and some of the forum postings indicate that law enforcement agencies in California may
experience an increase in the number of Open Carry encountersin their jurisdictions.
If you log on to their website http://www.opencarry.org and click on "Our Forum" at the top left, then scroll down
to "California", you will se that there are 7 pages of postings, all with a sizeable number of replies. Included
in the postings are the Turlock PD incident and the Sacramento PD incident (including the High Priority internal
memo) as well as meetings and "meet & greets" that have either taken place or are being planned throughout
California. All California Law Enforcement personnel should be aware of the following firearms laws in case they
are confronted with a subject openly carrying a firearm.
- PC 12025(f), unloaded firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed
within the meaning of section 12025.
- PC 12025 only applies to concealable firearms, which are defined in PC
12001(a) as a pistol, revolver or firearm with a barrel ofless than 16 inches.
There is nothing prohibiting someone from carrying an unloaded, concealed
rifle or shotgun on their person or in their vehicle unless the barrel is less
than 16 inches.
- PC 12031(g), A firearm shall be deemed to be loaded for the purposes of this
section when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell in, or attached in any
manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited to, in the firing chamber,
magazine, or clip thereof attached to the firearm. **Case law now states the
ammunition must be in a position from which it can be fired. (People v. Clark).
- PC 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.
Regional Terrorism Threat Assessment Center at 888-884-8383 or 916-803-8383.
------------------------------------------------------------
LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE
WARNING: This document contains confidential information. It is intended for law enforcement personnel only.
The information should not be released to the media or general public. Further discussion of this document
should be done on a need to know basis. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
use, review, dissemination, or copying of this document is strictly prohibited.
YEAHHHH, RIGHT.
__________________
Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA
No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
