Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51

Thread: OCing at a public place of business

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Is anyone aware of any laws or restrictions (short of specific business policy - ie; "we're sorry, we don't want weapons at our business") in California that prevent someone from OCing at a business open to the public? Such as a mall, Wal-Mart, Wallgreens, etc.

    I had a LEO of Redding Police tell me, very specifically, that I cannot OC at a place of business (I assume he means other than my place of business). I didn't challenge him on it, as I wasn't looking to start a fight. He did not produce, physically or verbally, any proof of this "law." He simply put it in a matter-of-fact manor simply "you are not allowed to carry an open firearm into a place of business."

    Can anyone verify this or offer any information?

  2. #2
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    This isn't true. If a worker at a place of business asks you to leave, you must leave, otherwise you are trespassing. Police officers are the last people I'd ask about the law when it comes to potentially sensitive topics such as open carrying.

  3. #3
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    wolfetundra wrote:
    Is anyone aware of any laws or restrictions (short of specific business policy - ie; "we're sorry, we don't want weapons at our business") in California that prevent someone from OCing at a business open to the public? Such as a mall, Wal-Mart, Wallgreens, etc.

    I had a LEO of Redding Police tell me, very specifically, that I cannot OC at a place of business (I assume he means other than my place of business). I didn't challenge him on it, as I wasn't looking to start a fight. He did not produce, physically or verbally, any proof of this "law." He simply put it in a matter-of-fact manor simply "you are not allowed to carry an open firearm into a place of business."

    Can anyone verify this or offer any information?

    There is no law that makes carrying a firearm in a place of business a crime and signs prohibiting firearms have no weight of law in California unless it is a courthouse or public building.

    However, PC602 is very relevant here. If the owner of the property or their agent does not want you on the property they can ask you to leave. If you don't leave at their request you could be arrested for trespass. I have carried in restaurants, Walmart, grocery stores, gas stations and banks. If they asked, I would leave.


    I forgot to add- when I was detained I was seen leaving one business to enter another. No crime commited.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Okay, let me give some more insight to my specific situation. I'm sure many of you will find several things I did wrong, but keep in mind please, that I did what I feel was within my rights, within my knowledge of practice, and what I felt to be the best course of action at the given time. Now, I wish I had done everything much differently. In brief summary, this was my account of the situation (irrelavent information removed for a shorter story).

    Today, around 3:30pm, I OCed into my local mall. I repeated this process the day before, and the day before that with no incident. Today, however, was much different. I wasn't really up for window shopping once I entered the mall. So I decided I would purchase a drink from the eating area (several food shops sharing a common diner). I sat down with two of my friends who accompanied me. Neither was carrying. I ordered my drink, paid for it with cash, sat down at a table, and began enjoying my drink.

    After about 5 minutes, two mall security officers approached me. Very politely, officer one told me that I can't have "that" inside the mall, that they have a very strict weapons policy. I told him I had no problem leaving. He responded; "we're not kicking you out, just asking that you put it in your vehicle." I told him I had no problem with that. "But before I leave, would I be able to get a copy of your policy?" He said he had no problem with that and he would return shortly with it. To that, I interperated as "wait here till I get back." My first mistake, I feel.

    After what felt like 20 minutes, the two security reappeared. Neither approched me or made any form of contact. I asked, officer one, if they were the ones I spoke with earlier. He confirmed. I asked if he was able to find their policy. He stated that they were detained responding to a shoplifting. Understandable. He walks to one of the nearby food businesses. At this point, I notice that officer two is on the phone and I overhear; "no they're just sitting here." He then walks over to his partner.

    At that point, I look to my friends; "thats our cue to go." We slowly rose, so not to cause alarm, and prompty left the mall. I return to my vehicle, and place my firearm into my lockbox inside my trunk and close the trunk. No sooner do I close my trunk, I hear a LEO shout, from a good distance;" please keep your hands up where I can see them."

    During the encounter, is when one of the LEOs made his statement about entering a business with a firearm.

    If you want to hear howI butchered my encounter, though I think it went well for my first, feel free to ask.

  5. #5
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    I hope you didn't say anything and you didn't open your trunk. You just stood there silently until they left, right? You certainly didn't say you had a firearm, and if you did then you certainly didn't open the trunk, or let them handle your firearm. Please say you didn't.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    I told you I badly butchered my encounter. And now that I think about it, I wish I did everything differently.

    I still had my hoster on, as I didn't have the opportunity to remove it yet. In addition, there's camaras all over (inside, showing that I had it on me, and in the parking lot, showing me placing it into my trunk) so there's really no opportunity to deny it.

    Once the officer approached, and ordered our hands in the air, I informed him, loudly and clearly, that the firearm is not on my person, it's locked inside a lockbox and in my trunk. I turned sideways to him to show that I had no firearm on me. Once he was satisfied, visually, that there was no firearm, he locked his into the holster. He did NOT draw down on me, he only had it out of the holster slightly to allow a quicker response.

    He approached and asked if he could pat me down to ensure I have no other weapons. I told him I was comfortable with that and turned my back to him so he could perform his check. He then asked if he could hold onto my exposed pocket knife until he was done with his inspection. I told him, for his safety, I could find no objection. As a matter of fact, he actually forgot to return it. He knocked on my door not 20 minutes ago to return my knife. I thought I'd have to buy a new one.

    By now, there are a total of 3 units and 4 LEOs. My friends are being questioned, as am I. One asked my friend, Aaron, for his address. Under the stress, he was unable to recall it. I told Aaron that it's ok if he can't recall it, it's not relevent information. The officer asking him the question said it was, I responded with "is he being investigated?" The officer said he was and when I asked what he was being investigated for, he gave no reply. I know that wasn't the best course of action. But as I said before, I was doing what I felt was necessary to protect myself and my friends. I wasn't looking to have some LEO who wasn't familiar with all the laws hauling me away because he was unfamiliar with something.

    So the officer questioning me, dragged me outside of earshot so I couldn't interfere. I explained to the officer that I was just looking out for my friends' interest. I don't want him to get railroaded. He replied; "if he does what we tell him to, he won't."

    Anyway, at that point, one of the officers asked me where my firearm was. To keep the situation from getting out of hand, I decided it would be benificial to extend some courtesy. I confirmed that it was inside a lockbox inside my trunk. I moment later, I noticed the officer was inside my car, what appeared, reaching under my driver seat. I informed him that I did not consent to a search of my vehicle. He said that I stated the firearm was in my trunk, hes only reaching for the trunk release. Again, I wasn't about to get into an arguement on if they were allowed to check my firearm if it's inside my vehicle. He had fun trying to unlock my (electronic, pushbutton) safe. I decided to assist by entering the access code for him. He checked my firearm and returned it to the safe and closed it, then closed my trunk.

    After that, I recieved the normal speech of "this isn't texas" "this isn't the wild wild west" "people aren't used to seeing people with guns" ... it wasn't a patron that saw me with a gun, freaked out and called the cops. It was mall security. The only reason they called the cops is because they couldn't find their supposed policy of no weapons. I don't care if they had a policy or not, I was willing to leave once they asked me to. I had no problem or objection with leaving. I just wanted to throw it in their face that they have no such policy.

    Ok, I know I badly screwed up. I know I should have done things much differently. However, the way you know to act, and the way you should act, drastically changes based on the current situation. For one, I wasn't looking to get hauled off on some fabricated or trumped charge, weather if would stick or not. And I wasn't looking forward to having my friends railroaded or screwed by some technicality because of me. Otherwise, I would have done this much much differently.

  7. #7
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    wolfetundra wrote:
    During the encounter, is when one of the LEOs made his statement about entering a business with a firearm.

    The officer making this statement was airing their opinion. If what they said was factual, you would be spending the night in Shasta County Jail or cited and released. They will say things in order to influence your behaviour, including giving unsolicited legal advice and making threats of arrest.

    Did the Mount Shasta Mall guards '86' you from the property permanantly?


    And reading your most recent post... you didnt screw up. You arent in jail facing charges. You didnt wind up having to post bail. Insofar as I am aware, you werent even cited.

    You were however, not prepared for your first police encounter. Do not feel bad. Very few are. It is very easy to get flustered or off your dialogue when a bunch of cops show up and turn up the amplitude. You and your friends need to review some videos-- the one's by Nate and ones from http://www.flexyourrights.org/

    From what your story tells me, the police had no reasonable articulable suspicion to investigate your friends, and were under no obligation to give ID.

    Practice will get you to Carnegie Hall...
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  8. #8
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Yeah, that is pretty bad. If you're not willing to be arrested, then you shouldn't be open carrying. All an officer has to do is throw out a threat of arrest and you'll do what he wishes. I have a feeling that most officers use this to their advantage, and I'm sure it works 90% of the time.

    I'm not saying anybody has to start telling a police officer what's what or anything, just stand there and don't say anything. Everybody who open carries should at least be able to stand mute when confronted by a police officer and not be afraid of arrest. Know that you don't have to identify yourself, know that you don't have to answer any questions, know that they can't charge you with anything for just standing there.

    I'm sure your next encounter will be very different.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    From what I understand, the LEO talking to me said if he really wanted to, he could have the security press charges for tresspassing. In my opinion, I wasn't tresspassing. In no way did it constitute tresspassing. They asked me to put my firearm in the trunk. I gave no objection. They did not say anything along the lines of "put your gun in your car and come back for the information requested." They said "we'll be right back." That, to me, means "stay where you are."

    So, without risking an actual arrest by returning to the mall to ask, I have no idea if I am or not.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    My next encounter, my friends will be bettereducated on the laws andon how to behave in such a situation. In addition, I will do things much differently myself. I feel this as a lesson learned, and experience gained. I had no one else to drive my car home, neither had a license. So in addition to be arrested for a false charge, my car would have most likely been impounded.

    All and all, I feel my first encounter went relatively well. Again, all things considered.

  11. #11
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    wolfetundra wrote:
    I told you I badly butchered my encounter. And now that I think about it, I wish I did everything differently. Practice makes perfect. You could have been better prepared to protect your rights, but you're not in jail. So don't beat yourself up too badly, just do a little more studying and if you can role playing.

    I still had my hoster on, as I didn't have the opportunity to remove it yet. In addition, there's camaras all over (inside, showing that I had it on me, and in the parking lot, showing me placing it into my trunk) so there's really no opportunity to deny it. DO NOT DENY or LIE to an LEO, this will get you a free night in a lovely gated community faster than UOC'ing. Besides that why would you deny anything, UOC'ing is legal, you did nothing wrong. So you may be a little nervous, which is fine, just stand firm on your knowledge that you aren't breaking any laws. If they ask you a question you don't think its relevant or you simply don't want to answer, then just zip it, go mute, you can even be a smiling mute if you want to. With some practice role playing you can even be prepared to redirect the conversation in the direction you want it to go instead of answering his question.

    Once the officer approached, and ordered our hands in the air, I informed him, loudly and clearly, that the firearm is not on my person, it's locked inside a lockbox and in my trunk. I turned sideways to him to show that I had no firearm on me. Once he was satisfied, visually, that there was no firearm, he locked his into the holster. He did NOT draw down on me, he only had it out of the holster slightly to allow a quicker response. That's fine, nothing wrong here, though it sounds like he was an inch away from drawing down on you. Refer to the San Diego DA letter available on californiaopencarry.org and note on top half of page two it talks about drawing and that they better have good reason for it, which is to say the mere fact that you are armed is not enough reason.

    He approached and asked if he could pat me down to ensure I have no other weapons. I told him I was comfortable with that and turned my back to him so he could perform his check. He then asked if he could hold onto my exposed pocket knife until he was done with his inspection. I told him, for his safety, I could find no objection. As a matter of fact, he actually forgot to return it. He knocked on my door not 20 minutes ago to return my knife. I thought I'd have to buy a new one. So from this I am concluding that at some point he askedfor ID and you gave it to him, by reason that he showed up at your door. So again, if you want to ID yourself or voluntarily present your ID its up to you, but people here have had that turn out real bad for them, so I don't advise it. If he wants your ID let him get it by illegally searching and seizing you, don't give up your rights needlessly. Call me a cynic, but he does this day in and day out, and I don't believe he forgot to give you your knife back, he held it on purpose for whatever reason if for no other than to show up at your door.

    By now, there are a total of 3 units and 4 LEOs. My friends are being questioned, as am I. One asked my friend, Aaron, for his address. Under the stress, he was unable to recall it. I told Aaron that it's ok if he can't recall it, it's not relevent information. The officer asking him the question said it was, I responded with "is he being investigated?" The officer said he was and when I asked what he was being investigated for, he gave no reply. I know that wasn't the best course of action. But as I said before, I was doing what I felt was necessary to protect myself and my friends. I wasn't looking to have some LEO who wasn't familiar with all the laws hauling me away because he was unfamiliar with something. Actually this wasn't bad at all, it was even good, this was you standing firm in your rights to know what they are doing and why. You're not being argumentative or disrespectful but you are asserting your rights to not answer any questions you don't want to. He can investigate until the sun goes down and comes up again and you don't have to say a word,its called the 5th Amendment...learn it, know it, live it.

    So the officer questioning me, dragged me outside of earshot so I couldn't interfere. I explained to the officer that I was just looking out for my friends' interest. I don't want him to get railroaded. He replied; "if he does what we tell him to, he won't." This is where an LEO will tell you if you help them, they will help you. If you just answer their questions everything will be alright. WRONG! The moment they say this is when you should be ready to zip it. They are not your friends, they are investigating a MWAG and they are ready to make an arrest the moment something doesn't seem right. Again, a little more studying here and you'll feel more confident in your lawful actions of not cooperating. Note: not cooperating and resisting are two very different things. Be sure to know the difference, in a nutshell not cooperating is fine and dandy, resisting will land you in jail.

    Anyway, at that point, one of the officers asked me where my firearm was. To keep the situation from getting out of hand, I decided it would be benificial to extend some courtesy. I confirmed that it was inside a lockbox inside my trunk. I moment later, I noticed the officer was inside my car, what appeared, reaching under my driver seat. I informed him that I did not consent to a search of my vehicle. He said that I stated the firearm was in my trunk, hes only reaching for the trunk release. Again, I wasn't about to get into an arguement on if they were allowed to check my firearm if it's inside my vehicle. He had fun trying to unlock my (electronic, pushbutton) safe. I decided to assist by entering the access code for him. He checked my firearm and returned it to the safe and closed it, then closed my trunk. Excellent, you did not surrender your right to a warrantless search. But he was intent on searching your car. Practice saying these words "Get a warrant first." If he opened yourcar door, looked around,and opened your trunk, then I think its pretty clear he illegally searched your vehicle. If your car door was already open andthen youopened your trunk for him then you just surrendered your 4th Amendment right to a search. Next time, if possible, lock your doors and pocket your keys. Then if they want to searchtell them to get a warrant.

    After that, I recieved the normal speech of "this isn't texas" "this isn't the wild wild west" "people aren't used to seeing people with guns" ... it wasn't a patron that saw me with a gun, freaked out and called the cops. It was mall security. The only reason they called the cops is because they couldn't find their supposed policy of no weapons. I don't care if they had a policy or not, I was willing to leave once they asked me to. I had no problem or objection with leaving. I just wanted to throw it in their face that they have no such policy. Tell him thanks for the geography lesson and he's right, the "wild" west was actually much safer than you are today. And as far as people seeing guns, tell him your working to change that. And bologna, mall security called them the moment they saw you were armed. They probably never even looked for the policy. They only came back to where you were to keep a close eye on you while the LEOs arrived.

    Ok, I know I badly screwed up. I know I should have done things much differently. However, the way you know to act, and the way you should act, drastically changes based on the current situation. For one, I wasn't looking to get hauled off on some fabricated or trumped charge, weather if would stick or not. And I wasn't looking forward to having my friends railroaded or screwed by some technicality because of me. Otherwise, I would have done this much much differently. Know this, they willharass you, intimidate you, lie to you, maybe even cuff you, andpossibly even take you to the station, but if you haven't violated any laws, and you haven't confessed to breaking any laws (whether intentionally or not - which is why its better you don't say anything) they will have to release you. UOC is not a crime.
    My comments are above in blue. I'm going to go into a little detail because it seems you may not be entirely prepared to UOC. Not trying to be antagonistic, take no offense, just trying to help. Also when done reading above, watch thevideos from pullnshoot, flexyourrights, and the one from the lawyer on the 5th amendment, save them as favorites, and refer to them from time to time. If you don't know these videos let me know and I'll post links to them. Carry on!



    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Thank you for all of your input. As I said before, I wish and regret, not doing things differently. Now that I look back and reflect, I see all of my mistakes that I made, things I could and should have done differently. I feel I handled the situation well, though I could have done a hell of alot better!

    As for my friends, they got a small schooling when we got back (neighbors) about remaining silent - which is what I should have done more. One of them - hes a dumb ass - had weed!!! WTF! I run the potential to get stopped by PD at any moment and he's toting around weed! Not alot - but ENOUGH. I didn't know this until we got back. "I'm glad they didn't search me I had weed" he says. I smacked him in the back of the head - hard! Hell, I wouldn't have gotten in trouble for it, be he would have. That won't happen again, he stays home.

    It was funny when the officer returned my knife. I was locked and loaded, as normal when at home, when he knocked. I looked out the window only because I saw that there was a car parked infront of my apartment. If it wasn't for me investigating the car and seeing that it was a PO, I would have answered the door, gun on hip. I dropped the gun at the table beside the door and answered. No sooner didI open the door, his eyes immediately went to my holster, which of course was now empty.

    Anyway, he hands me my knife back and says; "I told you I would return it when the investigation was over." Yea, 6 hours later. But hey, at least I didn't have to buy a new one. I excepted my knife and bid him a good night.



  13. #13
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    wolfetundra wrote:
    It was funny when the officer returned my knife. I was locked and loaded, as normal when at home, when he knocked. I looked out the window only because I saw that there was a car parked infront of my apartment. If it wasn't for me investigating the car and seeing that it was a PO, I would have answered the door, gun on hip. I dropped the gun at the table beside the door and answered. No sooner didI open the door, his eyes immediately went to my holster, which of course was now empty.
    Out of curiosity, why'd you choose to disarm yourself prior to answering the door?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    When I identified him as LE I felt no compelling reason to keep my loaded firearm on me and the LEO wasn't disrespectful to me last we met, so I didn't see any reason to intentionally make him feel uneasy. In all rights I could have kept my firearm on me, and there was nothing he could do about it. For me, I saw it as a courtesy. If I were to, not that I would without good merit, invite him into my home, I would excuse myself and put my firearm into my safe. That goes for anyone who is not accustomed to me carrying. For example, I won't carry to my mothers house or if my mother came over to visit, out of courtesy. That's all it really was, just extending courtesy to someone who was courteous to me.

  15. #15
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    wolfetundra wrote:
    When I identified him as LE I felt no compelling reason to keep my loaded firearm on me and the LEO wasn't disrespectful to me last we met, so I didn't see any reason to intentionally make him feel uneasy. In all rights I could have kept my firearm on me, and there was nothing he could do about it. For me, I saw it as a courtesy. If I were to, not that I would without good merit, invite him into my home, I would excuse myself and put my firearm into my safe. That goes for anyone who is not accustomed to me carrying. For example, I won't carry to my mothers house or if my mother came over to visit, out of courtesy. That's all it really was, just extending courtesy to someone who was courteous to me.
    I bet you he finger-printed your knife, or at least tried. I don't get it, why put away your sidearm if he's nice? It reminds me of the leftistargument for carrying guns to begin with.

    Safe Neighborhood:"You don't need to carry a gun, yourneighborhood is safe, you're just going to scare the children."

    Dangerous Neighborhood:"You better not carry a gun in your neighborhood, its too dangerous the LEO's might shoot you."

    So when exactly do you get to carry your gun?
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    You have a very good point. And I agree with you. I did it only out of a courtesy for the officer. Otherwise, I carry loaded at home, and I carry unloaded everywhere the law will allow.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    612

    Post imported post

    I lived in Red Bluff for a couple years and Anderson for 3... I feel bad that I have abandoned ya'll for a slightly better state.. (oregon)... I do have assets still in Red Bluff and some friends in Redding so when I get a chance to come down maybe we can have a UOC lunch somewhere.. and discuss the differences in experiences.. I didn't realize the law on carry while I was there, having heard wrong from sources and not checking for myself.. my bad..

    You can find a lot of my stories in the Oregon section usually titled with Junction City ..



  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    I look forward to having a UOC meeting up here.

  19. #19
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    I hope you didn't say anything and you didn't open your trunk. You just stood there silently until they left, right? You certainly didn't say you had a firearm, and if you did then you certainly didn't open the trunk, or let them handle your firearm. Please say you didn't.
    LE have the 'right' to 'examine' the firearm under 12031(e). Even if the firearm is locked in the trunk. Remember that refusal to permit the examination is grounds for arrest.

    There is case law where a college employee reported seeing guns in the trunk of the car, and police were justified in searching for the weapons in order to perform the 12031(e) examination since they had reasonable suspicion the guns were there.

    (Sorry for not including a citation at this time. I'm drawing a blank on the case name, and the OCDO website search function is out of service right now. As soon as I can find/remember it, I'll post it here, unless someone helps me out and posts it for me first.)
    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.

  20. #20
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    LE have the 'right' to 'examine' the firearm under 12031(e). Even if the firearm is locked in the trunk. Remember that refusal to permit the examination is grounds for arrest.

    There is case law where a college employee reported seeing guns in the trunk of the car, and police were justified in searching for the weapons in order to perform the 12031(e) examination since they had reasonable suspicion the guns were there.
    It's People v. Delong I believe.

    My point here is that he shouldn't admit to having a weapon in the first place. If the police somehow knew that he was the person who had a weapon, then they could bring up 12031(e). But if he would have just stood there with his empty holster on, they would have to prove that they knew the firearm was in the car.

    Maybe wolfetundra was at the mall walking around with an empty holster and there was some other guy open carrying.

    Having said all that, I'm not exactly sure what I'd do if the security guards came out and IDed me as being the person with the gun. If it was plainly obvious that the car I was next to was my car, then I might comply under duress. If it wasn't I would just claim that I was no longer in possession of the firearm in question.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    I was pretty sure the 12031 applied to my firearm even when locked up. Thank you for clarifying that. As far as making the arguement that there's no proof of the location of the firearm, there are camaras that watched me walking to the car and placingit into the car. They could also make the arguement that I was obstructing justice or an ongoing investigation by not telling them where the firearm was.

  22. #22
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    wolfetundra wrote:
    I was pretty sure the 12031 applied to my firearm even when locked up. Thank you for clarifying that. As far as making the arguement that there's no proof of the location of the firearm, there are camaras that watched me walking to the car and placingit into the car. They could also make the arguement that I was obstructing justice or an ongoing investigation by not telling them where the firearm was.
    There may have been no proof as far as the police encounter goes. Normally during a detention police officers must get probably cause on you within a reasonable time period (usually 20-40 minutes), or they have to let you go. You can't be detained forever, and it is my understanding that after a certain period of time a detention becomes an arrest.

    This is where my knowledge of the law gets sketchy. Since the 12031(e) check is an "inspection" and not a detainment, how long can a police officer investigate to see if you even have a weapon that he can inspect?

    Say wolfetundra is carrying in the mall and I call the police and give a description of him and say he is carrying a gun. They respond and encounter a man matching the description in the parking lot with a holster and no gun. Now under Florida v. JL they cannot conduct a search for a concealed weapon based on an anonymous report. There is no weapon visible to them, but there is evidence that a handgun exists somewhere (the holster gives this away).

    Delong came out way before Florida v. JL, but they don't touch on the exact same topic, but in this case I'd argue that Florida v. JL is the guiding case since there is no readily apparent firearm to inspect. Outside of wolfetundra saying he has a firearm, the police should be stuck with the task of trying to trick wolfetundra into saying he has a firearm. Other than that I think they have to go on their way.

    One thing I'm reasonably sure about though, remaining silent cannot be construed as obstructing justice.

    I'd love to hear arguments against my reasoning.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redding, California, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Therein lies the problem. As the officer approached, I made the following mistake; "I am no longer in possession of the firearm. It's in a lockbox in my trunk." I initially made this response so the officer knew I was unarmed and there was no reasonable way to quickly arm myself.

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    bigtoe416 wrote:
    I hope you didn't say anything and you didn't open your trunk. You just stood there silently until they left, right? You certainly didn't say you had a firearm, and if you did then you certainly didn't open the trunk, or let them handle your firearm. Please say you didn't.
    LE have the 'right' to 'examine' the firearm under 12031(e). Even if the firearm is locked in the trunk. Remember that refusal to permit the examination is grounds for arrest.

    There is case law where a college employee reported seeing guns in the trunk of the car, and police were justified in searching for the weapons in order to perform the 12031(e) examination since they had reasonable suspicion the guns were there.

    (Sorry for not including a citation at this time. I'm drawing a blank on the case name, and the OCDO website search function is out of service right now. As soon as I can find/remember it, I'll post it here, unless someone helps me out and posts it for me first.)
    Are you sure? I seem to recall the case quoted said the opposite. The man got drug evidence thrown out because the judge said they still needed a warrant.

    And the police will, as in my case, sometimes remove your ID and then deny it later. This is why you should sterile carry.

    As for the trespassing, they have to ask you to leave. No policy matters, posted or otherwise. Based on your report of the event, it is quite possible that both you and the security guards were not on the same page.

    They asked you to put the gun in your car. You said that was OK with you. Then you asked if you could get the policy before you leave. They likely though you were going to put the gun in your car and then come back in for a copy of the policy.

    It could go either way. This was a pretty clear miss-communication that may have saved you from a trespass charge.

    I won't otherwise critique your first detention, as almost all are flustered and accommodating. . . With each detention you get better and better at standing tall with your mouth shut. Oh, and lieing to a cop is not illegal unless they are investigating an actual crime. . . Lie away. . .

    Cop "Where are you going to this hour of night?"
    Me "Well, it is time for an oil change in my truck so I was going to Wal-Mart to get some oil and a filter. Why? Is there something illegal about that officer?" - When I was really on my way to the strip club .

    Of course the better response is "I am sorry, I don't see how that is relevant."

  25. #25
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    Say wolfetundra is carrying in the mall and I call the police and give a description of him and say he is carrying a gun. They respond and encounter a man matching the description in the parking lot with a holster and no gun. Now under Florida v. JL they cannot conduct a search for a concealed weapon based on an anonymous report. There is no weapon visible to them, but there is evidence that a handgun exists somewhere (the holster gives this away).

    I'd love to hear arguments against my reasoning.
    the empty holstercouldnt possibly be evidence of a gun. if he had kept quiet!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •