imported post
In my other thread I brought up these points:
626.9 doesn't say what definition it uses for pistol, but if it used the 12001 definition then it wouldn't be a pistol since the terms "pistol", "revolver" and "firearm capable of being concealed," apply to firearms with barrels of shorter length than 16"
But I suppose it is possible it uses different definitions for these terms than provided in 12001, which if that is true it could apply to rifles with barrels over 16" too since it is 12001 is what says a concealable firearm applies to a firearm with a barrel length under 16".
626.9 does use the definition of firearm from 12001 but doesn't explicitly use any of the other definitions. If it doesn't use the 12001 definitions I wonder what definitions it does use.
.....................
To me it seems that such a long barreled handgun would not be a
1. ) Pistol
2. ) Revolver
3. ) Firearm capable of being concealed
(The above 3 apply to the same in 12001)
Nor would it be
4. ) Shotgun
5. ) Rifle
and by not being one of these three categories (pistol/revolver/concealable or shotgun or rifle)
it would also not be eligible to be an
6. ) Assault weapon.
Such a weapon would clearly match the definition of firearm as provided in the Penal Code, but seems to me would escape all of the definitions provided in the Penal Code for the above listed types of firearm.
12001. (a) (1) As used in this title, the terms "pistol,"
"revolver," and "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person"
shall apply to and include any device designed to be used as a
weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any
explosion, or other form of combustion, and that has a barrel less
than 16 inches in length. These terms also include any device that
has a barrel 16 inches or more in length which is designed to be
interchanged with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(2) As used in this title, the term "handgun" means any "pistol,"
"revolver," or "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person."
It is true that 12001 does not explicitly say that a pistol, revolver, or firearm capable of being concealed would not apply to a firearm that had a non-interchangeable barrel with a length over 16 inches, but it does say that it would apply to a firearm that had a barrel length over 16" or had interchangeable barrels.
What would the purpose be to state that the definition did apply to these firearms however if was not exclude firearms that it did not apply to? Because if it did not in effect exclude a rifle that was not a short-barreled rifle from being a "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person" then wouldn't long guns not in locked cases possibly be the cause of successful prosecution for having a firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in a school zone for example? Couldn't a prosecutor put a Mosin Nagant 91/30 under his arm and then put a trench coat on that touches the floor, proving that a Mosin Nagant can in fact be concealed, although the length of the barrel alone is about 29 inches long?
My logic is that if a rifle is actually capable of being concealed as a common person would agree upon seeing it done despite it not being legally classified as an SBR and having long barrel and it is therefore somehow excluded from the requirements of being transported in a locked case in a school zone because it does not match the definition of a "firearm capable of being concealed" in 12001, shouldn't a firearm which is actually a pistol as a common person would define one also be exempt if it does not match the definition of "pistol" provided in 12001?
Once again, I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice and I could be way off base.
