• 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.

bay area UOC the second

when?

  • aug 29th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • aug 30th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 5th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 6th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 12th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 13th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 19th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 20th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 26th

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • sept 27th

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

bigtoe416

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

I voted for the 29th, I'm pretty open except for the 13th. The 5th would work for me too. I'm cool with meeting wherever in the South Bay/Peninsula (except for maybe Palo Alto, I seem to recall that they have some municipal code against carrying guns...too tired to cite at the moment though).
 

tall_tree

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
103
Location
"Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
imported post

Here is the bizarre Palo Alto Muni Code you speak of.

http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/paloalto_ca/title9publicpeacemoralsandsafety*/chapter908gunsandexplosives?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter9.08

9.08.010 Firing and possession of guns and firearms.

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter no person shall have in his possession within this city, and no person shall fire or discharge, or cause to be fired or discharged within this city, nor shall any parent, guardian or person having the care, custody or control of any minor permit such minor to have in his possession within this city, or to fire or discharge or cause to be fired or discharged within the city, any firearm, cannon, fireworks, gun, pistol, revolver, anvil, firecracker or explosive of similar nature, rifle, air rifle, air-gun, BB gun or pellet gun or any instrument of any kind, character or description which throws or projects bullets or missiles of any kind to any distance by means of elastic force, air or any explosive substance, all referred to in this section as "firearms."
(Ord. 1720 (part), 1956: prior code§ 8.01)

9.08.020 Exceptions.

(a) The provisions of Section 9.08.010 as to the use of any of the firearms mentioned therein shall not apply to any of the following cases:

(1) To police, peace officers or persons in military service in the discharge of their duties and using reasonable care;

(2) To persons using firearms in necessary self-defense;

(3) To the possession of such firearms for keeping at the place of residence or business of the person otherwise in lawful possession thereof, or while traveling to or from a legal firing, shooting or target range or hunting ground;

(4) To the discharging or firing of such firearms or causing them to be discharged or fired at a legal firing, shooting or target range or hunting ground;

(5) To the discharging or firing of fireworks after permit therefor has been issued by the fire chief;

(6) To the use of a gun firing .22 caliber shot-cartridge only, upon a written permit applied for and granted by the chief of police to protect life or property against animals, birds or rodents;

(7) To the discharging or firing of a pistol incapable of projecting any bullet or missile

(a) for the sole purpose of starting an organized athletic event, by an official who has charge of the competitors at the start of the athletic event; or

(b) for use as a theater prop in a bona fide theatrical production.
(Ord. 2936§ 1, 1976: Ord. 2142 (part), 1963: Ord. 1720 (part), 1956: prior code§ 8.02)


Now that 2A has been incorporated, is all of this null and void?
 

camsoup

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
167
Location
Red Bluff, California, USA
imported post

tall_tree wrote:
Here is the bizarre Palo Alto Muni Code you speak of.

http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/California/paloalto_ca/title9publicpeacemoralsandsafety*/chapter908gunsandexplosives?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter9.08

9.08.010 Firing and possession of guns and firearms.

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter no person shall have in his possession within this city, and no person shall fire or discharge, or cause to be fired or discharged within this city, nor shall any parent, guardian or person having the care, custody or control of any minor permit such minor to have in his possession within this city, or to fire or discharge or cause to be fired or discharged within the city, any firearm, cannon, fireworks, gun, pistol, revolver, anvil, firecracker or explosive of similar nature, rifle, air rifle, air-gun, BB gun or pellet gun or any instrument of any kind, character or description which throws or projects bullets or missiles of any kind to any distance by means of elastic force, air or any explosive substance, all referred to in this section as "firearms."
(Ord. 1720 (part), 1956: prior code§ 8.01)

9.08.020 Exceptions.

(a) The provisions of Section 9.08.010 as to the use of any of the firearms mentioned therein shall not apply to any of the following cases:

(1) To police, peace officers or persons in military service in the discharge of their duties and using reasonable care;

(2) To persons using firearms in necessary self-defense;

(3) To the possession of such firearms for keeping at the place of residence or business of the person otherwise in lawful possession thereof, or while traveling to or from a legal firing, shooting or target range or hunting ground;

(4) To the discharging or firing of such firearms or causing them to be discharged or fired at a legal firing, shooting or target range or hunting ground;

(5) To the discharging or firing of fireworks after permit therefor has been issued by the fire chief;

(6) To the use of a gun firing .22 caliber shot-cartridge only, upon a written permit applied for and granted by the chief of police to protect life or property against animals, birds or rodents;

(7) To the discharging or firing of a pistol incapable of projecting any bullet or missile

(a) for the sole purpose of starting an organized athletic event, by an official who has charge of the competitors at the start of the athletic event; or

(b) for use as a theater prop in a bona fide theatrical production.
(Ord. 2936§ 1, 1976: Ord. 2142 (part), 1963: Ord. 1720 (part), 1956: prior code§ 8.02)


Now that 2A has been incorporated, is all of this null and void?
Technically is has always been null and void, the state has preemption on firearm laws. Its just bad law written, that hasn't been challenged yet.



On another note, I don't see an exemption for CCW holders, are they not allowed to have firearms in their possession in the city of Palo Alto as well?
 

CA_Libertarian

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

tall_tree wrote:
Here is the bizarre Palo Alto Muni Code you speak of.

...

Now that 2A has been incorporated, is all of this null and void?
Welcome to the forum.

First, the 2A is not yet incorporated. The 9th Circuit has voted to rehear Nordyke en banc, which means the panel decision is null and void pending rehearing.

Second, as Camsoup points out, our state preempt's local ordinances from regulating any firearm regulations that state law addresses, with exception for rules on city property.

So, they can ban guns from the lawn of city hall, or the fair grounds, but they cannot ban them on the streets or any private property.
 

tall_tree

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
103
Location
"Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
imported post

I have started to create a map showing K-12 school properties in Palo Alto. I've attached it as a zipped up KMZ file for Google Earth. (I could not post it as just a straight KMZ file, not an allowed extension.) Is Palo Alto pretty typical in terms of school zone density in the Bay Area? Is seems like a mine field in terms of UOC.
 

bigtoe416

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

dirtykoala wrote:
so does this make it safe to UOC in palo alto or not?
Technically it is safe. But then bobbarker's arrest in Oceanside last July was a municipal code arrest, so technically that should have been safe too.
 

CA_Libertarian

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

bigtoe416 wrote:
dirtykoala wrote:
so does this make it safe to UOC in palo alto or not?
Technically it is safe. But then bobbarker's arrest in Oceanside last July was a municipal code arrest, so technically that should have been safe too.
Exactly. My suggestion is you call or write the city attorney. Chances are they might say, "consult your own attorney for legal advice," but they might surprise you... just sound friendly... 'you'll catch more flies with honey.'

Before I began open carrying, I contacted the PDs in Modesto and Turlock. Both have ordinances which are preempted by state law.

Modesto PD refused to discuss it beyond threatening to assault me if I dared open carry in their town. Turlock PD responded much more politely, saying they only enforce state gun laws.

Ironically, it was Turlock PD that ended up assaulting me... but to be fair I open carried about 100 times as much in Turlock as I did in Modesto, so there was much more chance for exposure. (Simply because that's where I spent most my time.)
 

boichoi

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
27
Location
, ,
imported post

I am free any time in the month of Sept. Thanks Dirty for the effort. I am looking forward to discussing the oc movement.
 

bigtoe416

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

I believe city parks would be covered by municipal codes, for example, in San Francisco there is a (illegal) code against having a firearm in a park.
 
Top