• 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.

Visibility of Mags in Pouches?

jwarren116

New member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
6
Location
, ,
imported post

So, I'm doing a lot of shopping around locally for some Mag Holsters. It seems pretty difficult to find certain stuff in my area. Lots of gun shops are selling out of accessories and whatnot. Double wide single pouches seem extinct. Anyway, to get to my question, during UOC, magazines must be in plain view. I've found the occasional Mag Pouch that almost completely conceals the Mag though. Is that okay, or are those specifically intended for LEOs? The pouch would be in plain view next to my holster, but the mags wouldn't be. I'm assuming that the requirement that mags are in plain sight is more to stop people from hiding them in pockets and whatnot, but I figure I should clarify first.

On a side note, does anyone have any advice for OCing while wearing a coat or jacket? How much visibility constitutes "plain sight"? I was thinking I can wear the holster in the front, but with some coats, the gun wouldn't be visible from the side, only the front.
 

Theseus

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
964
Location
Lamma Island, HK
imported post

Well, I have been OC'ing for some time....Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that I have a firm understanding of the rules. Some of us may argue about the nuances, but basically, as long as your magazines are contained in a belt pouch instead of in your pocket it is not concealed, full coverage of the magazine or otherwise.

When it comes to the visibility of magazines itself, it is what we call "unsettled law". There is no clear definition that we can use to determine concealed or not.

As for a jacket or coat, when carrying your weapon you need to ensure that your clothing does not "substantially" conceal the firearm. It is a gray area however, because it is a subjective thing.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

jwarren116 wrote:
but with some coats, the gun wouldn't be visible from the side, only the front.
This jacket was recommended in another thread due to the price. It has a zipper down each side that you are supposed to pull the gun through for open carry, preventing any issues with the jacket getting in the way.

http://www.lapolicegear.com/5ta5fijabrcl.html

They also sell other styles with the same zipper access. I tried on the Sabre style at a local store, and didn't like the fit. It's very loose at the bottom (I do have a size 30 waist) . I'll probably end up getting one of these anyways for the zipper.

Another option I've seen recommended is to purchase a large zipper, and pay a tailor (dry cleaner's, etc.) to sew it into the side of a jacket that you already own.
 

CA_Libertarian

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

Theseus wrote:
When it comes to the visibility of magazines itself, it is what we call "unsettled law". There is no clear definition that we can use to determine concealed or not.
Actually, I think this is settled law.

There is no statute that states a magazine cannot be concealed. I'm at a loss for my citation for the case law, but I'm certain we've discussed it here before... The court determined that a magazine is an integral part of the firearm, and concealing any part of a firearm is a violation of 12025.

Since a magazine is the legal equivalent of an entire and intact firearm for the purposes of 12025, we can construe that all the statutory exemptions to 12025 apply to magazines as well as the rest of the firearm. Therefore, as long as you carry in an exposed holster, you meet the 12025(f) exemption, even if your holster conceals your magazines.
 

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
Theseus wrote:
When it comes to the visibility of magazines itself, it is what we call "unsettled law". There is no clear definition that we can use to determine concealed or not.
Actually, I think this is settled law.

There is no statute that states a magazine cannot be concealed. I'm at a loss for my citation for the case law, but I'm certain we've discussed it here before... The court determined that a magazine is an integral part of the firearm, and concealing any part of a firearm is a violation of 12025.

Since a magazine is the legal equivalent of an entire and intact firearm for the purposes of 12025, we can construe that all the statutory exemptions to 12025 apply to magazines as well as the rest of the firearm. Therefore, as long as you carry in an exposed holster, you meet the 12025(f) exemption, even if your holster conceals your magazines.


The specific case law is (People v. Hale 1974)
 

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,747
Location
Oregon
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
There is no statute that states a magazine cannot be concealed. I'm at a loss for my citation for the case law, but I'm certain we've discussed it here before... The court determined that a magazine is an integral part of the firearm, and concealing any part of a firearm is a violation of 12025.

Since a magazine is the legal equivalent of an entire and intact firearm for the purposes of 12025, we can construe that all the statutory exemptions to 12025 apply to magazines as well as the rest of the firearm. Therefore, as long as you carry in an exposed holster, you meet the 12025(f) exemption, even if your holster conceals your magazines.
Good point! Hadn't thought of that. Although I guess one could argue that if a magazine was the legal equivalent of an entire firearm, then we couldn't have loaded magazines since they would be a loaded firearm. Got to love the wacky downward spiral of nonsense laws.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

I disagree. A reading of the decision is instrumental.

A firearm disassembled into two or more parts, can nevertheless constitute an operable weapon within the meaning of the Dangerous Weapons Control Law.

http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/calapp3d/43/353.html
(login required)

bigtoe416 wrote:
Although I guess one could argue that if a magazine was the legal equivalent of an entire firearm, then we couldn't have loaded magazines since they would be a loaded firearm.
You're right, and this is yet another reason CA_Libertarian's interpretation doesn't mesh with the case law.
 

CA_Libertarian

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

I agree that the Hale decision does not mesh with logic. However, the ruling is standing case law (to my knowledge).

If you are found concealing a magazine, the prosecutor would likely get an easy conviction by citing this case.

Having the magazine carried openly in a holster would qualify the 12025(f) exemption.


Hale is bad law, and shouldn't be too hard to get overturned. The court erred seriously when it arbitrarily stated that 12025 applies to 'partially concealed' weapons. When the legislature does not provide a specific definition of the terminology used, the court must use the common meaning of the word.

From FindLaw's legal dictionary:
Conceal
2 a: to place out of sight
Note: A weapon need only be placed out of ordinary observation in order to be considered a concealed weapon.

The prosecution failed to assert - let alone prove - that the firearm was placed 'out of ordinary observation.' In this case, the officer was immediately able to see the firearm. I believe most reasonable people would agree that a plainly visible object that is easily identified as a firearm is not concealed.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

I was really disagreeing that Hale makes a magazine the legal equivalent to an entire firearm. If you read the decision, that conclusion is nearly impossible to reach.
 

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

marshaul wrote:
I was really disagreeing that Hale makes a magazine the legal equivalent to an entire firearm. If you read the decision, that conclusion is nearly impossible to reach.

"The carrying of concealed firearms is prohibited as a means of preventing physical harm to persons other than the offender." (People v. Jurado, 25 Cal.App.3d 1027, 1032 [102 Cal.Rptr. 498].) [2] In our opinion concealment of an essential component of a visible weapon, when done in such a fashion as to make the weapon readily available for use as a firearm, presents a threat to public order comparable to concealment of the entire firearm and falls within the prohibition of section 12025. [1b] In the light of the bizarre arsenal of weaponry Hale had installed around the driver's seat of his automobile, Officer Price had reasonable cause to suspect that a clip and ammunition for the automatic pistol might be hidden close at hand and to make a search for them."

This section says that when the "essential component" i.e. the magazine, is concealed, in such a fashion as to make the weapon readily available for use as a firearm, it violates 12025.

So in essence, if all that you have is a magazine and it is concealed, without the firearm being present, then it is not a concealed firearm.

However, if you have the gun, and the magazine is concealed and the gun is not, it is a violation of 12025 and you WILLbe convicted.
 

Justice76

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
22
Location
, ,
imported post

I haven't seen discussion of EXTRA magazines.
That is, if I have an unloaded openly carried firearm, and a loaded magazine openly carried in a belt pouch, thus openly carrying the entirety of the concealable weapon, can't I have MORE parts (in this case more loaded magazines CONCEALED in my pockets?
 

cato2

New member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
159
Location
, ,
imported post

We really need to get someone arrested for this so we can overturn Hale :uhoh: Theseus, what are you doing after you beat the 626.9 rap?
 

cato2

New member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
159
Location
, ,
imported post

Here are some great mags from a great local long time California holster maker: http://www.alfonsosgunleather.com/Pages/accessories.htm

Lets support our local mom and pop vendors!!! Great belts and holsters too! http://www.alfonsosgunleather.com/Pages/concealed.htm (these are too beautiful to conceal)

Pineda, the founder of Alfonso's of Hollywood, was born in Argentina on May 24, 1923 and grew up in Nicaragua. As a young man, Alfonso guided wealthy American sportsmen on alligator hunts. Alfonso took a byproduct of this business; the alligator hides, and turned them into fine leather goods for the tourists. In 1955, he founded his own business buying and selling alligator hides and manufacturing all kinds of custom leather goods such as handbags, wallets, belts and portfolios. In 1957, Alfonso traveled to the US, settling in California in 1959, where he found a job in the Property Department at Universal Studios in Hollywood. It was there that he first met Arvo Ojala, the designer of the popular Hollywood Fast Draw Holster. Alfonso was soon working for Ojala, producing Hollywood Fast Draw Holsters.[/b]

Eventually Alfonso founded his own holster shop, Al and Dick's Holster & Gun Shop, with a partner. Approximately one year later, Alfonso became the sole owner and changed the name to Alfonso's of Hollywood. In one night's time he designed his excellent line of Fast Draw Rigs, known simply as the Number 1, Number 2, Number 3, and Number 4. All four were readily identified by the double stitching around the edges of the rigs. This was unique to the Alfonso line of Fast Draw rigs. Alfonso raised the holster higher on the belt than other Fast Draw rigs, and added more steel, including a steel plate in the holster side of the belt. This higher gun position and additional rigidity enhanced the speed of an Alfonso rig. By the time of the 1961 National Fast Draw Championship held annually in Las Vegas, Nevada and sponsored by Colt firearms and the Sahara Hotel and Casino, the Alfonso Number 2 was the most popular rig in attendance. Though best known for his beautiful Western rigs, many of which were made for Hollywood celebrities such as John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Jerry Lewis and Sammy Davis Jr., the shop offered a full line of sporting, police duty and concealment holsters.

Sadly, Alfonso passed away in 1995. His son Omar Pineda has stepped forward and with the assistance of his Uncle Gus, a professional saddle and holster maker in his own right, has carried on the business.
[/quote][/b]
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

Justice76 wrote:
I haven't seen discussion of EXTRA magazines.
That is, if I have an unloaded openly carried firearm, and a loaded magazine openly carried in a belt pouch, thus openly carrying the entirety of the concealable weapon, can't I have MORE parts (in this case more loaded magazines CONCEALED in my pockets?
I don't think this can be considered "settled" law.

Logically, what you're suggesting makes sense, but I'm not volunteering to be the test case. :p
 

KandyRedCoi

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
31
Location
, ,
imported post

Justice76 wrote:
I haven't seen discussion of EXTRA magazines.
That is, if I have an unloaded openly carried firearm, and a loaded magazine openly carried in a belt pouch, thus openly carrying the entirety of the concealable weapon, can't I have MORE parts (in this case more loaded magazines CONCEALED in my pockets?

i too would like to know more about this
 

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
imported post

I am jumping in here because I can't find a clear answer to the question asked, "OC with jackets?"

Is it correct to assume the safe approach would be to get a jacket or coat that does not extend further down than my holster belt? That way I'm warm and the firearm is visible?
 
Top