• 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.

Unloaded Mag in the Gun?

CREWDAD

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
73
Location
San Marcos, California, USA
imported post

Maybe a stupid question, but can you have an Unloaded Magazine in the gun when OC'ing? I know if the Fit hits the Shan you want to be able to slap your loaded Mag in, but just curious. Thanks
 

bigtoe416

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

Absolutely. Nearly everybody carries an empty mag in their pistols to give the appearance of it being loaded and to keep foreign objects out of the inside of the handgun.
 

wewd

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
664
Location
Oregon
imported post

This is how I carry. Unless your gun doesn't have drop-free magazines (nearly all modern handguns do), it shouldn't slow down your loading process any appreciable amount. Thumb the mag release during the draw, slap the loaded one in, rack the slide.
 

CREWDAD

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
73
Location
San Marcos, California, USA
imported post

Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
 

Ranchero

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
119
Location
NORCO, California, USA
imported post

CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.
 

Decoligny

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

Ranchero wrote:
CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.

This isa majorassumption, and wild speculation at best. The wording of the case law (People v. Hale) simply says that a full magazine, being an integral part of the firearm, ifconcealedin the presence of an unconcealed firearm would be considered a 12025 violation. It doesn't even address the possibility of whether or not there is an empty magazine in the firearm.

There is absolutely nothing in writing anywhere saying that having an empty magazine in the gun eliminates the possibility of a 12025 conviction for having a concealed full magazine.
 

demnogis

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

Even though logically you are correct, a loaded magazine is still considered an essential part of the (concealable) firearm, therefore it is a firearm and cannot be concealed. Rifle magazines and revolver speedloaders do not fit this definition so they can be concealed.

Ranchero wrote:
CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.org than place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

Ranchero wrote:
CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.

That is incorrect. The magazine has been determined by case law to be an essential part of the gun so it has to be in view.

Then again always disregard advice that does not show specificcase law or P.C.... since I can not remember the case, disregard my post hahaha.
 

Decoligny

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

Streetbikerr6 wrote:
Ranchero wrote:
CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.

That is incorrect. The magazine has been determined by case law to be an essential part of the gun so it has to be in view.

Then again always disregard advice that does not show specificcase law or P.C.... since I can not remember the case, disregard my post hahaha.

See my post above, the case is PEOPLE V. HALE


November 20, 1974

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
CHARLES ANDREW HALE, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT


Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. A516323, August J. Goebel, Judge.

Paul A. Doyle, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, Jack R. Winkler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, S. Clark Moore, Assistant Attorney General, and Edward T. Fogel, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Opinion by Fleming, J., with Roth, P. J., and Compton, J., concurring.

Fleming

[suP]*fn1[/suP]

While Brown detained Hale, Price entered Hale's automobile to examine the pistol, and in so doing he discovered the pistol lacked an ammunition clip. Inside the automobile Price saw a hunting knife with a 6-inch blade wedged between the driver's seat and the center console, a bayonet with a 12-inch blade protruding beneath the seat, and a dagger-like letter opener above the sun visor. Suspecting that an ammunition clip might be readily available nearby for use with the pistol, and desiring to make certain the pistol could not be used as a weapon when he returned it, Price searched the immediate area of the front seat. Underneath the ashtray of the center console he found one .380 caliber cartridge of the type used in the pistol as well as a vial containing white double-scored tablets which Price recognized as "mini-bennies" (the amphetamine that provided the basis for the prosecution). This is the search challenged here as illegal and unconstitutional.

On the facts of the case we conclude that Officer Price had reasonable cause to search the front seat of Hale's automobile and that consequently his discovery of contraband was an incident of a lawful search.

[suP]*fn2[/suP]). Only partial concealment of a firearm is required. (People v. Koehn, 25 Cal. App. 3d 799, 802 [102 Cal. Rptr. 102]; People v. Tarkington, 273 Cal. App. 2d 466, 469 [78 Cal. Rptr. 149]; People v. Linden, 185 Cal. App. 2d 752, 757 [8 Cal. Rptr. 640].) One portion of the automatic pistol, the housing and barrel, was visible, and it was reasonable for the officer to suspect concealment nearby of the remaining portion of the firearm, the automatic clip and ammunition. (See Green v. State (Okla.Crim.) 489 P.2d 768.) A firearm disassembled into two or more parts, can nevertheless constitute an operable weapon within the meaning of the Dangerous Weapons Control Law. (People v. Ekberg, 94 Cal. App. 2d 613, 616-617 [211 P.2d 316]; see also, State v. Ware (Fla.App.) 253 So.2d 145.)

"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].) 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. 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.

Apart from any specific Penal Code violation, the search was justified as a natural incident of the officer's right to search for weapons when he has reasonable grounds to believe a criminal suspect is "armed and presently dangerous." (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 24, 27, 30 [20 L.Ed.2d 889, 907-908, 909, 911, 88 S.Ct. 1868]; People v. Superior Court (Simon), 7 Cal. 3d 186, 203 [101 Cal. Rptr. 837, 496 P.2d 1205].) The totality of the circumstances, the array of odd and deadly weapons stored about the driver's seat of an automobile by one reported to have been previously arrested on a weapons charge, warranted Officer Price in concluding that during his confrontation with Hale, his safety and the safety of others required a

[suP]*fn1[/suP] Price later learned that Brown had actually said he once arrested Hale on some type of traffic warrant when Hale came to the station to inquire about serial numbers on a gun. However, we must accept the facts as Price reasonably and in good faith understood them at the time of search. (Burke v. Superior Court, 39 Cal. App. 3d 28, 32-33 [113 Cal. Rptr. 801].)

[suP]*fn2[/suP] Section 12025: "Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any person who carries concealed upon his person or concealed within any vehicle which is under his control or direction any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person without having a license to carry such firearm as provided in this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor, and if he has been convicted previously of any felony or of any crime made punishable by this chapter, is guilty of a felony."
 

OPS MARINE

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
391
Location
, California, USA
imported post

I agree fully with STUCKINCHICO. When the fit hits the shan, this will be nothing but a reloading drill to you. Just remember to tap and rack to be condition one. You should be fine. Also, I want to further illustrate the point that the magazine (when loaded) should NOT be concealed at all.
 

Sons of Liberty

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Riverside, California, USA
imported post

Decoligny wrote:
Ranchero wrote:
CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.

This isa majorassumption, and wild speculation at best. The wording of the case law (People v. Hale) simply says that a full magazine, being an integral part of the firearm, ifconcealedin the presence of an unconcealed firearm would be considered a 12025 violation. It doesn't even address the possibility of whether or not there is an empty magazine in the firearm.

There is absolutely nothing in writing anywhere saying that having an empty magazine in the gun eliminates the possibility of a 12025 conviction for having a concealed full magazine.

IANAL, but I don't agree. If your semi-automatic handgun has an empty mag in it and is fully exposed, it cannot be made readily available for use as a firearm until thatessential component of that completehandgun is removed. You cannot place a non-empty mag into a handgun until the empty one is removed.

In People v. Hale, the visible portion of the handgun was incomplete. The mag, an essential componentwhich completed the handgun, was concealed. Therefore, because that essential component of the visible incomplete handgun was concealed, the "entire firearm" was considered concealed in violation of 12025. A semi-automatic handgun with its mag is an "entire firearm."

Having said that...there is no worthwhile reason to carry concealed a non-empty mag. Don't do it. Don't be the test case.
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
imported post

Sons of Liberty wrote:
Decoligny wrote:
Ranchero wrote:
CREWDAD wrote:
Thanks again! You guys are all a great help! I've learned more about my 2nd Amendment Rights from OC.orgthan place else on the net. Thanks again to you all.
Having an empty magazine in your gun will make it complete. So if you conceal your loaded magazines you'd be legal, because the gun is complete and there's no partial concealment. I'd still carry loaded magazines on my belt. Remember not all LEOs know the law.

This isa majorassumption, and wild speculation at best. The wording of the case law (People v. Hale) simply says that a full magazine, being an integral part of the firearm, ifconcealedin the presence of an unconcealed firearm would be considered a 12025 violation. It doesn't even address the possibility of whether or not there is an empty magazine in the firearm.

There is absolutely nothing in writing anywhere saying that having an empty magazine in the gun eliminates the possibility of a 12025 conviction for having a concealed full magazine.

IANAL, but I don't agree. If your semi-automatic handgun has an empty mag in it and is fully exposed, it cannot be made readily available for use as a firearm until thatessential component of that completehandgun is removed. You cannot place a non-empty mag into a handgun until the empty one is removed.

In People v. Hale, the visible portion of the handgun was incomplete. The mag, an essential componentwhich completed the handgun, was concealed. Therefore, because that essential component of the visible incomplete handgun was concealed, the "entire firearm" was considered concealed in violation of 12025. A semi-automatic handgun with its mag is an "entire firearm."

Having said that...there is no worthwhile reason to carry concealed a non-empty mag. Don't do it. Don't be the test case.

On the other hand, if you have a ccw, and part of the weapon is exposed, (showing from under your shirt) is it still considered concealed or wouldit beLOC?

Can they have it both ways?
 

wewd

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
664
Location
Oregon
imported post

CCW permits do not preclude LOC. There is no duty to conceal under the state penal code. 12050 gives exemptions for 12025, 12031, and parts of 626.9 (the 1,000 foot zone specifically), but the issuing authority may pose restrictions on the permit. If your CCW permit says you must conceal, then you must do so or your permit may be revoked. The Sheriff has the authority to revoke permits for nearly any reason, and many people have had theirs revoked for LOC and UOC even when there are no restrictions printed on the card. That's what you end up with when you have a discriminatory system as California does.
 

Decoligny

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

wewd wrote:
CCW permits do not preclude LOC. There is no duty to conceal under the state penal code. 12050 gives exemptions for 12025, 12031, and parts of 626.9 (the 1,000 foot zone specifically), but the issuing authority may pose restrictions on the permit. If your CCW permit says you must conceal, then you must do so or your permit may be revoked. The Sheriff has the authority to revoke permits for nearly any reason, and many people have had theirs revoked for LOC and UOC even when there are no restrictions printed on the card. That's what you end up with when you have a discriminatory system as California does.
The issueing Sherrif may revoke the CCW License for violating any of the conditions of issue. If you have a CCW and your shirt slips up and you weapon is seen, then the decision falls onto the officer investigating the MWAG call as to whether of not they report the incident to the issuing Sherrif. Then it is up to the issuing Sherrif as to whether or not the "display" was justified, and then whether or not to revoke your CCW.

They cannot however prosecute you for an accidental exposure of a CCW weapon.




From the "Standard Application for CCW License"

While exercising the privileges granted to the licensee under the terms of this license, the licensee shall not, when carrying a concealed weapon"

-Consume any alcoholic beverage.

-Be in a place having the primary purpose of dispensing alcoholic beverages for consumption.

-Be under the influence of any medication or drug, whether prescribed or not.

-Refuse to show the license of surrender the concealed weapon to any peace officer upon demand.

-Impede any peace officer in the performance of his/her duties.

-Present himslef/herself as a peace officer to any person unless he/she is, in fact a peace office as defined by California law.

-Unjustifiably display a concealed weapon.

-Carry a concealed weapon not listed on the permit.

-Carry a concealed weapon at times and circumstances other than those specified in the permit.
 

CA_Libertarian

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

Note that NONE of the above is binding unless it is printed ON the permit itself.

However, the issuing authority can revoke your permit at any time with or without reason. For example:

- Doesn't like your haircut
- You didn't contribute to his/her re-election campaign
- You did something (s)he doesn't like (e.g. carrying an exposed firearm in public).
 
Top