Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 80

Thread: Does anyone carry in a locked container?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Hello all,
    I've been reading for a while, but this is my first post.
    I am also new to firearms and am eagerly awaiting my 10 day waiting period to expire.
    I was wondering if any of you who want to carry, but maybe aren't in an area where you want to make a political statement (as one does with UOC), carry your unloaded firearm in an "approved locked case" such as a small nylon gun bag with a combo lock through the zipper?
    I do realize that this delays my ability to defend myself and others by even more time than carrying openly but unloaded, but it's still better than not carrying at all, no?
    Thoughts?
    Examples?
    Thank you,
    Justice

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Antelope, California, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post

    Welcom, Justice.

    I got this tip from a post on CALGUNS, and made my own.

    I have a case that I converted from a large day planner into mylocked container. Basically, I just emptied a legal-size planner and used velcro to attach a nylon holster to the inside. I also added a pouch to hold a couple mags. The whole thing can be zipped and locked with a small combo lock.

    The lock itself is the type with 3 different dials on it. It's always just one number away from being unlocked.

    So, it's not as accessible as UOC, but it's legal for entering school zones. Once I pass through the zone, I can easily remove the gun from the case and re-insert it into the holster on my belt.

    Hope that helps.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    That does help, thanks for the personal use story as well as the construction idea.

    I am still a little confused as to whether I can the loaded magazine(s) can be in the same container as the firearm.

    I was also really wondering if anyone commonly uses this tactic while in public, such as walking into a restaurant where they don't, at that time, want to be expanding the public's awareness of the legality of UOC?

    It is not my intent to skirt the law, only to be able to carry as often as possible with the least amount of trouble, of any kind!

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    Justice76 wrote:
    I am still a little confused as to whether I can the loaded magazine(s) can be in the same container as the firearm.
    There's no law against having a 'loaded' magazine in the same case as your firearm. This is FUD commonly distributed by LE and gun shop owners.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    Also, if you decide to carry in a locked case, be sure to make it inconspicuous. I recommend NOT using a pistol case or anything that looks like a gun case. If LE have reason to believe it's a gun case, then they can assert that they have reason to believe a firearm is present. They then have a statutory right to inspect that firearm to make sure it's not loaded (PC12031(e)). Refusal to permit inspection is grounds for arrest.

    A day planner with a small lock is a good idea, but it might draw some attention. It's not common to see a lock on a day planner. In my opinion, this wouldn't be enough for probably cause for a search. However, CA courts usually disagree with me. A brief case may be a better option. Nearly all of them come with locks built in to the case or handle, so there's no added 'suspicion' factor there.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  6. #6
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Brief case carry is GTG. I knowof some (in my former life) who are not 2A interested who carried this way ALL the time.

    Be sure to read andunderstand the exemptions to PC 12025 (concealment prohibited)found in 12026.1a, 12026.2a, and 12027, then pick and followonewhich applies when you're CCing.

    Good first question and Welcome!


  7. #7
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    If LE have reason to believe it's a gun case, then they can assert that they have reason to believe a firearm is present. They then have a statutory right to inspect that firearm to make sure it's not loaded (PC12031(e)). Refusal to permit inspection is grounds for arrest.
    I'm not so sure this is true. If that were to be the case then police could get us to open any locked containers that were in our possession by merely claiming they suspect a firearm to be in a container.

    I know from reading "You and the Police" that the author would drive around with an open briefcase on the floor and if was ever stopped by police that he would toss his handgun into the briefcase and lock it. He claimed that any search of his car would prevent police from being able to compel him to open the briefcase since it would be out of his immediate control. I can't imagine this being very different for locked containers on a person.

    Then again, the locked container exception doesn't exactly say you can stroll around with a firearm in a locked container. The exception says people have to be going to or from authorized locations with deviations between these locations only occurring as reasonably necessary. Would be pretty easy to lie about it though...

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    If LE have reason to believe it's a gun case, then they can assert that they have reason to believe a firearm is present. They then have a statutory right to inspect that firearm to make sure it's not loaded (PC12031(e)). Refusal to permit inspection is grounds for arrest.
    I'm not so sure this is true. If that were to be the case then police could get us to open any locked containers that were in our possession by merely claiming they suspect a firearm to be in a container.

    I know from reading "You and the Police" that the author would drive around with an open briefcase on the floor and if was ever stopped by police that he would toss his handgun into the briefcase and lock it. He claimed that any search of his car would prevent police from being able to compel him to open the briefcase since it would be out of his immediate control. I can't imagine this being very different for locked containers on a person...
    The police must articulate their reasonable suspicion in order to justify a search. If your locked case is obviously a gun case, or you admit "I have a gun in the trunk," then they can reasonably suspect you have a gun. Once that suspicion is reasonably established, they then have statutory right to inspect that firearm. The court is very clear that an unfounded suspicion does not qualify. However, once they find your firearm it wouldn't be hard for them to creatively improvise suspicion... such as simply claiming that you admitted possessing a firearm. This is why audio recording is so important - if it's your word against a LEO, LEO will win.

    As for the author's claim... to my knowledge, anything in your car is considered under your immediate control. I can't imagine why it logically isn't under your immediate control.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    I don't think that I'd be worried if I was talking to any LEO for some reason and they wanted to either look inside my locked case or verify that my gun was unloaded.

    bigtoe416: That is an interesting question though, whether or not the container looking like a gun case is probable cause enough and then therefore where is the line is drawn between an officer just claiming that the case was large enough for controlled items and searching. I think I'll just stick to inconspicuous, but safely locked.

    Another way to put my query, is that I'm just figuring out more ways to chose my battles. That is, to carry when I'm not prepared to educate those around me or pass out the handy "California Open Carry" flyers found here.

    Do people not carry this way? Since I am posting this on OpenCarry.org, is this just too cowardly a tactic to admit? Is it just too grey area as it falls somewhere between transporting and carrying depending on the circumstances? Or, have I just come up with a really good idea for everyone to be able to always be near a firearm (albeit with very limited access), even in areas where discretion is a better choice?

  10. #10
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    The police must articulate their reasonable suspicion in order to justify a search. If your locked case is obviously a gun case, or you admit "I have a gun in the trunk," then they can reasonably suspect you have a gun. Once that suspicion is reasonably established, they then have statutory right to inspect that firearm.
    I'm definitely in agreement with you about a LEO's ability to fabricate reasonable and articulable suspicion after the fact. But I'm still not sure that by merely carrying a gun case around would constitute enough suspicion that a crime was being committed. Now if somebody called the police saying that you were carrying a loaded weapon in the case and they described you, then I could see them having enough suspicion.

    Likewise, if I was wearing a shirt that said, "Selling drugs is cool," I don't believe that a police officer could use that as suspicion that a crime was being committed.

    It's definitely not a black and white issue though, as I can see your argument that it could be construed as being valid suspicion (although I hope it wouldn't be).

    And after going back and reading the book the author says the locked briefcase _may_ prevent cops from searching it without a warrant. Not definitely.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    Then again, the locked container exception doesn't exactly say you can stroll around with a firearm in a locked container. The exception says people have to be going to or from authorized locations with deviations between these locations only occurring as reasonably necessary. Would be pretty easy to lie about it though...
    Unless I'm forgetting another section, CA Penal Code 12026.1 lists the exemptions for 12025 (prohibition of carrying a concealed firearm) as:

    (a) Section 12025 shall not be construed to prohibit any
    citizen of the United States over the age of 18 years who resides or
    is temporarily within this state, and who is not within the excepted
    classes prescribed by Section 12021 or 12021.1 of this code or
    Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, from
    transporting or carrying any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
    capable of being concealed upon the person, provided that the
    following applies to the firearm:
    (1) The firearm is within a motor vehicle and it is locked in the
    vehicle's trunk or in a locked container in the vehicle other than
    the utility or glove compartment.
    (2) The firearm is carried by the person directly to or from any
    motor vehicle for any lawful purpose and, while carrying the firearm,
    the firearm is contained within a locked container.
    So, for (1) -- in a vehicle -- you may drive (but not stroll) around town as you please. For (2) -- on foot -- it seems you must be going to or from a motor vehicle. Which means I guess you must UOC if you want to walk to the range. :? Either way, it seems a tough sell to claim you were walking to or from a car if you aren't actually anywhere near your car.

    Also,
    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    As for the author's claim... to my knowledge, anything in your car is considered under your immediate control. I can't imagine why it logically isn't under your immediate control.
    Yes, but doesn't it become legal once the case is locked, due to exemption (1) above? So, even though it's under your control and thus they can do a "protective" search of it, once you get those locks locked they can't prove any crime even when they do search the case, so long as there is no ammunition attached. Or, am I missing something?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    marshaul, well put. It does seem like a potentially hard sell. I've been reading through 12025, 12026.1 and 2 for a while now as well as the synopsis/explanation flyer found here on opencarry.org and still can't quite figure out the particulars of it.

    That's why I was wondering if those with practical as well as theoretical knowledge on these subjects have any input or stories themselves.

    It also seems to mean that regarding the glovebox issue, the glovebox ITSELF doesn't count as the locked container, but you could then put a gun in the glovebox IN a locked container and be legal.

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    All they have to do is articulate that they believed a firearm was in the vehicle.

    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.
    I think it would be easy to convince your typical CA judge/jury that a gun case is enough to cause a reasonable person to suspect a gun is present. Probably very few people carry a gun case around without a gun in it.

    The real question is: is this type of search 'reasonable' from a US Constitutional perspective?
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Also,
    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    As for the author's claim... to my knowledge, anything in your car is considered under your immediate control. I can't imagine why it logically isn't under your immediate control.
    Yes, but doesn't it become legal once the case is locked, due to exemption (1) above? So, even though it's under your control and thus they can do a "protective" search of it, once you get those locks locked they can't prove any crime even when they do search the case, so long as there is no ammunition attached. Or, am I missing something?
    So, as per this post, is there anything I'm missing? Am I forgetting a code that prohibits keeping an unloaded gun in a locked briefcase on the floor of your car?

  15. #15
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    So, as per this post, is there anything I'm missing? Am I forgetting a code that prohibits keeping an unloaded gun in a locked briefcase on the floor of your car?
    Nothing illegal that I'm aware of. However, once they reasonably believe a firearm is present... maybe they won't care if it's loaded, maybe they'll confiscate the firearm and (wrongly) charge you with possession of a loaded firearm since you possess ammo. Post Heller, this will be a very different ballgame. Until then, I say don't give LE any more opportunity to violate your rights than they already have.

    Most importantly: record, record, record. They'll look very foolish when you can prove you didn't give consent after all.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    In response to the constant assertion that the scenario I outlined is prohibited, I made the following thread (first post lol) on calguns:
    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?p=1718363

    We'll see if there's any additional input.

  17. #17
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    Very good post. I think it is worth reiterating here:

    12026.1 exemption only applies while within your car. So, don't use this exemption to carry your firearm in a brief case around the mall.

    Of course, if you do unwittingly violate the law, it is extremely unlikely anybody would ever know you had a gun in your briefcase (as long as it stays in there).
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    CA-Libertarian, 12026.1(2) is about carrying to and from your car for any "lawful purpose", not just while in the car. There are no deviation restrictions specifically mentioned. So, I guess it would be up to the LEO of judge if your deviation to/from your car was considered reasonable.

    Since 12026.2 is a separate set of exemptions from 12025 that don't specifically refer to a motor vehicle and so are specific times when one could be transporting an unloaded, locked handgun it allows non-motor-vehicle transport. For example, one could ride their skateboard to the range(9), or walk from a safety class(3) going to(4) someone's house to clean their gun(5).

    Again, it seems really up to the LEO what the INTENTION of your transporting is.

    Since I'm new to these here parts, and many here read 12025 etc. more than me, I wonder if anyone has had experience with unloaded, locked carry in practice.

    Oh, and really really appreciate everyone's input on this. It's really helped me to understand more about gun laws, and their current restriction on my ability to protect myself and others.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Susanville, California, USA
    Posts
    529

    Post imported post

    While on the subject, of how to carry,.

    I have a question ! Say if I was traveling on a grayhound bus, and "Open Carry"

    would be legal, however " Their policy" is they don't want you to carry openly,

    or they might say you can't do that on our buses.

    So my question is can you carry it in a locked backpack legally ?

    Robin47

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Strictly speaking you would not be in compliance with the law, unless you were traveling to/from one of the exemptions listed in 12026.2

    The on-foot exemption provided by 12026.1 applies only when traveling "directly to or from any motor vehicle".

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Justice76 wrote:
    CA-Libertarian, 12026.1(2) is about carrying to and from your car for any "lawful purpose", not just while in the car. There are no deviation restrictions specifically mentioned. So, I guess it would be up to the LEO of judge if your deviation to/from your car was considered reasonable.
    Incorrect. The exemption provided by 12026.1(a)2 may be for "any lawful purpose", but it must be directly to or from any motor vehicle. Thus, the deviation restrictions are absolute: no deviations.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    double-post

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Got it, you're totally right, I just saw that phrase now. It definitely IS directly to/from your car.

    It's just that the phrase "for any lawful purpose" isn't defined and doesn't reference 12026.2. So, is walking directly from my car, to a restaurant, and then directly from the restaurant, a "lawful purpose"?

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    I think, since the vehicular exemption provided by 12026.1(a)1 applies anywhere, merely intending to use the exemption qualifies as "lawful purposes" for the 12026.1(a)2 exemption. However, there isn't any exemption for being inside a restaurant with a cased/unloaded gun, and without an exemption concealed carry of a handgun qualifies as a violation of 12025, which renders your purposes certainly "unlawful". So, no exemption in the restaurant, no exemption from your car to the restaurant. I guess you'd better leave it in the car. :?

    Or UOC. :celebrate

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    off-topic, but opencarry.org needs it's own custom set of emoticons that have guns openly carried on them.

    Your post above would just be so much more poignant, if that banana was carrying!

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •