San Bernadino Sun covers open carry California!! Comments needed!

imported post

CaCop wrote:

I responded on the behalf of you all. I posted under the name "informed."

Click to expand...

I liked your post, it was good to see an officer supporting open carry, thanks. However, in reading the link you provided, I was somewhat dismayed with some of the instructions given. I'll quote those here:

"Safety should be the primary concern when making contact. Contact and cover
protocols should be fully utilized. The contact officer should give clear direction to the armed individual. He or she should be told to raise his/her hands above their head (away from the weapon) and not to move. He or she will then be told that the weapon will be inspected. Using contact and cover tactics the weapon will be retrieved and inspected. If the weapon is unloaded, it will be returned and the contact ended. If it is loaded, justification will exist to arrest for a violation of PC 12031. If the weapon is not loaded, the detention must end after inspection, absent additional facts to justify a prolonged detention."

The bolded part sounds pretty miserable. It's a shame that it needs to go to such lengths to verify that a person obeying the law is obeying the law. It makes me more and more grateful to live here in Idaho, where I can open carry and the police just drive by, or just say hello in passing when we're in a convenience store at the same time...and that's with us able to carry loaded weapons.

I wonder how the statute giving officers the right to stop and inspect the weapons would hold up to a constitutional challange.

imported post

Whoa...pump the brakes bro...

I'm pretty sure he meant the law was stupid, not your post.

Unloaded OC is like unfueled public driving. Kinda makes owning a car pointless.



So what's on the radar about Total Carry in California?

Any progress made yet, or are those bureaucratic pigs still dragging their feet?

Maybe we should outlaw their right to cash their paychecks. Think they'd get the point?

imported post

It'd be helpful to have a map of unincorporated areas in CA that do not have a No Shooting ordinance. There are huge portions of large counties where total carry is allowed.

It's hard to research though because maps of unincorporated areas of CA counties are hard to find and once you find them you have to research the shooting ordinances.

In my mind the analogy between unloaded OC and total carry is more like driving a hybrid around town on electric and the gas engine kicks in when you need to go uphill or accelerate ~ meaning that if a bad scene starts going down, it's pretty fast to unholster, load and take next steps. Not as fast as OC would be loaded or as fast as a CC draw (probably, but I dunno), but definitely way better than going naked ~

just my 2 cents ~:dude:

imported post

Coming from San Berdo County (Rancho Cucamonga)....I can honestly see how people would get all shook up over this. The thought of everyone carrying a gun openly out there would freak not just the general public, but the police as well. The San Bernardino sheriff's department already has a bad rap for being power hungry and abusive as it is. I couldn't fathom how they would handle a citizen open carrying a firearm.:?:uhoh:

imported post

I have a revolver that I bought from a LEO in 1989. I want to exercise my right to OC, not for any political reason, but that I used to always carry, LOC when I lived in the mountain area of San Bernardino.

I couldn't find my bill of sale from way back in '89, so I called the SBSO to verify the serial number. I was told the weapon was stolen! I asked that an officer come out to the house and check the weapon. An officer did come to the house and verified that the numbers that were punched in to the computer were punched incorrectly (the weapon came back as a .22, this is a S & W .357). However, there is no record at all for this weapon. I had the Deputy check for personal guns and law enforcement guns using the correct serial number...no return on either.

My obvious concern, if I am OC'ing and I am asked to show that the gun is unloaded and the officer runs the number (as happened in Redlands), I could be in some deep stuff. Is this normal for older gun sales? This was a private party sale bettween the LEO and myself.

BTW, the SBSO officer was very cooperative, I had no problem at all. I don't think the SBSO officer was too thrilled with OC, however.

imported post

If you are that concerned about it, then just send in the DOJ paperwork to register the gun. Costs $19.00.

imported post

This is still a gray area for me. Is it a bad thing if there is no record of the gun being associated with me if an officer checks the serial number during a 12031(e) check?

imported post

There is no firearm registration here in Arizona. When I first bought the gun (private party purchase), I had a buddy who is a California LEO (with Riverside PD) run the serial number and it came up blank.

He said because it is an AZ. gun, there will be no record of it. BUT, he did state if it was stolen it would show up on ALL police databases. He told me not to worry traveling with it in CA. As long as it doesn't come back stolen, they won't confiscate the firearm.

imported post

Thanks for the advice. I really don't want to get "hooked" for something like not being in the database. Doesn't sound like much, but I have a job and a family and can't afford an unsceduled day off in the county jail.

Thanks, again!

imported post

Thanks for all the comments!

Just wanting to CMB.

Like I said, the deputy was not a jerk, just seemed to want to help out. Gotta admit, when it first came back "stolen", I was nervous.

imported post

Winkler wrote: "Seeing people with firearms has an effect of terrorizing the community in some way," said UCLA School of Law professor Adam Winkler. "I don't think it necessary should."

"I call it fraudulent `open carry' because you can carry your gun but it can't be loaded. The whole purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet," Winkler said.

Tex40c wrote: I am not sure how to take Prof. Adam Winkler's comments, he seems both pro and anti-gun simultaneously.


Army wrote: Mr. Winkler has equated law abiding American citizens with terrorists. That is so sad. More disturbing, is that Mr. Winkler likely qualifies for a coveted Concealed Weapon Permit, when 99% of us do not. I dare say, that Chief Bueermann may have taken a lesson from Mr. Winkler.

Grumpycoconut is writing: Those of you who are seeing Anti in Winkler's writting are confusing me. I read the article a few times and found only the two lines abouve atributed to him. Winkler's first qoute is very supportive of OC. He seems to be saying that grown up Californians need to grow up and quit being fraidy cats. His second quote is also supportive in that he acknowledges that the legalrestrictions on OC are silly (fraudulent).

As for sounding both pro and anti at the same time, keep this in mind. This guy does not play a lawyer on TV. He is a teacher of lawyers at a really big smart people school. His business card may not read "Constitutional Scholar" but you can bet he knows a bit more about the constitution and case lawthan even Citizen. If he can't argue 3 sides of the same argument while breathing both in and out at the same time I would be very surprised. He can hate guns with a passion for all I care as long as he is intellectuallyhonest in interpreting the constition and applying case law.

So how about that CCW for Winkler? Get real. He's a tweed wrapped academic smarty pants. He probably ain't stinkin' rich and he sure ain't no celeb. No Towney LA Sheriff worth his political salt is gonna give this hyper educated chump no CCW. Winkler will probably be better off using his pull in Sacto to get his club card.

Chief Bueermann on the other hand is making a beautiful political blunder. He's handing out statements that he can be beaten over the head with by some ax grinder.

imported post

Army wrote:

I would much prefer to carry a fully loaded firearm on my side, or even concealed. But our overlords in Sacramento do not care for my well being or safety....or yours.

Click to expand...

Because the overlords in Sacramento has hired guns with concealed loaded guns courtesy of our tax dollars.

imported post

JediWithASniper wrote:

What in the world is the purpose of open carry without ammunition in the gun? Can't it be argued that the ammunition is part of the weapon, and without it it is not completely assembled or something? I don't know, but the idea is just beyond my reasoning. Why don't we make our soldiers do the same thing in Afghanistan? Just plain stupid if you ask me.

Click to expand...

Well Bill Clinton did have such a policy, just ask the unarmed USS Cole victims.
They had orders to have unloaded weapons.


But it would be nice for the leo's to mention that it is dangerous because the
state makes them keep the weapon empty, and that law needs to be repealed
for citizens safety.

Hopefully when the next prison release program starts up, the sheep will finally
figure out, the government isn't their friend, and they need to protect themselves
from the polititions who enable the bad guys to prey on them.
But I won't hold my breath, it looks like stupidity is inbred out there.
Must be something in the environmentally pure water supply.:lol:

imported post

BTW, what paper work do I need to send to DOJ? I there a form number/name?



Thanks again.

imported post

vofsar wrote:

BTW, what paper work do I need to send to DOJ? I there a form number/name?



Thanks again.

Click to expand...

If you really want to make sure there's no doubt about the ownership status of your gun, you can submit a "Voluntary Registration" form:

http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/volreg.pdf

But keep in mind that once you're in the .gov data base...