UOCer arrested in Concord

imported post

this guy was at least a bit of a dork!
when i want to go somewhere,, i inspect my gun while im in the house,, before i go out!
there is no good excuse to be fondling, handling, or racking the slide of a gun while youre out in the world unless you are going to use it!

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

this guy was at least a bit of a dork!
when i want to go somewhere,, i inspect my gun while im in the house,, before i go out!
there is no good excuse to be fondling, handling, or racking the slide of a gun while youre out in the world unless you are going to use it!

Click to expand...

Being as this happened in CALIFORNIA where it's UOC and the weapon often needs to be locked in a container in the vehicle due to passing (or the possibility of passing) "free fire school zones" (alleged to be gun free zones) it pretty much has to be "fondled" and "handled" prior to exiting the vehicle or at the trunk of the vehicle.

Silly laws that legislate the necessity for unecessary handling of firearms (such as the 12031(e) check) do nothing but reduce safety. Every time a weapon is outside a holster there is more risk involved than when it remains in the holster. Considering some of the videos I've seen of officers yanking and jerking on weapons in retention holsters, the "E check" is certainly one of those as is causing the weapon to repeatedlyhandled by a law abiding citizen exercising his lawful ability to UOC.

imported post

I KNOW IT WAS IN CALIFORNIA!!!! ive been reading and studying the law they have to deal with for 9 months.
i very well might know as much or more about...12025, 12026,1, 12026,2, 12031(e), 626, and 626.9 than many UOCers in that state and participate on thier forum regularly.

now it seems to me, this guy (dork) was not a legaly armed citizen... if he was a CCer with a permit, then there would be no reason to be racking his gun!

if he was in fact an UOCer the only thing he might need to do would be to take it out of his lock box and put it in his holster! assuming he had a lock box, and needed to drive thru a GFSZ.

there is no knowing if it had been loaded pryer to "racking the slide" but i would guess that it was illegally loaded, and he wanted to make it legal for UOC when he got out in public!

im not a californian! i am an american, and their 2A rights are my 2A rights.
i want all americans to enjoy the constutional rights that belong to us all,

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

this guy was at least a bit of a dork!
when i want to go somewhere,, i inspect my gun while im in the house,, before i go out!
there is no good excuse to be fondling, handling, or racking the slide of a gun while youre out in the world unless you are going to use it!

Click to expand...

Fondling of course is not necessary but I always checked my weapon any time I:

• was about to leave the house OC
• Moved it from the holster to a locked container
• Moved it from a locked container to a holster
• Before I exited the vehicle at a new destination
• Any time the pistol left my physical sight

When carrying I even sometimes stroked the slide to feel the chamber load indicator to make sure it was clear. Why?

Because I became so comfortable with open carrying that I would often forget I even had it, but when I would remember I always wanted to check to make sure I hadn't forgotten that.

I normally did it on the down low because open carry is scary enough to the sheep, but to see a man racking the slide is more scary to the sheep even though they don't know I am doing to "ensure their safety".

imported post

My extensive training in the worlds biggest gun club (USMC) and the training I gave while in that club, ALWAYS included that EVERY weapon is loaded and you ALWAYS check that it is cleared when handling it.

Now, if you put it in your holster after checking it is cleared there is no need to continue to recheck. However, if placed into a safe, lockbox, trunk, etc. it WILL BE checked when again handled. When I take an cleared weapon to the safe, even if I JUST checked it in the living room, it get's another check before being placed in the safe.

I watch you clear a weapon and you hand it to me, IT GETS CHECKED BY ME. There have been a few times that that has offended the person handing it to me and a comment was made such as "what, you don't trust me" and I quite simply answer "I don't trust anyone when it comes to a cleared weapon".

Racking the slide before getting out of the vehicle is NOT "playing" with a weapon, it is called double (or triple or quadruple) checking and is a very desireable attitude to take when dealing with supposedly unloaded weapons.

Remember, a lot of people have been shot with "unloaded" guns.

Am I anal about clearing weapons? You bet cha.

Back to the direct subject of the thread..... until all the information is known, there is no way to know what happened. Just like in New Mexico, the suspect may end up being fully cleared. And then again, when the facts are heard, he could be a banger going to the big house. Or he could fall anywhere in between.

Theorizing, postulating, filling in the blanks, etc. have no place here when we are talking about someone who may very well be a fully law abiding citizen who got screwed over or the aforementioned banger.

imported post

maybe im not as anal as you would like.

if the man was a lawfull CCer, his gun would be loaded when he left the house, and there would be no need to check to see if it was still loaded..

and we know the gun ended up unloaded, and he claimed to be UOCing.

at the least a studied california UOCer would know for sure the gun was unloaded before leaving the house,
and take pains to keep his double checking on the down low so as not to set off any sheeple alarms.


a agree he should not be tarred without facts, just making comment using the facts I thought I had,, his actions did not look good for the cause!

imported post

One of the Mods could check his name to see if he ever registered as a member of OCDO and when. If not, he is just another person that learned everything about UOC from the media.

imported post

He's either an intentional criminal, or a "darwin" case (accidental criminal).

I very much doubt the police would "manufacture" the offense, as the news report states they have video showing what the guy was doing. I presume that since the video is clear enough that the guard could see what was happening, that the video is also clear enough to show whether the weapon was concealed or not.

And I don't care if he's a gang member, a ex-convict, even a violent felon. If they're safe enough to be free men walking out among the sheeple, they're safe enough to own/possess firearms. IMO lock them up forever or give them ALL their rights back when their debt to society is paid.

In my book EVERY free person deserves equal rights. (FWIW "my book" is based heavily on the US Constitution.)

imported post

You know it used to be that when they released you from prison you were given back your weapon and gun belt....because you had the RIGHT to bear arms.

It's an uncomfortable issue for many but you don't lose your other RIGHTS when you've been released, why is the 2nd any different?

imported post

what the deal here? is their no real news report about this happening?
does this lack of coraberating evidence mean, it didnt actually happen?

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

what the deal here? is their no real news report about this happening?
does this lack of coraberating evidence mean, it didnt actually happen?

Click to expand...

I'm kinda wondering the same thing. Figured that by now someone in the area would have reported at least the police blotter info.

imported post

Here is the link to the local news outlet. Not much of a story here.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/sea...contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

If the link doesn't work just goto www.contracostatimes.com and search for brenden.

imported post

well then the story must be true.
he was not a legal CCer.
and he was not a legal UOCer.
my claim that he is a dork may be rude.
he can claim the darwin award.

imported post

And if the facts are determined that:

The weapon was openly carried into the facility.

When he sat down to observe the movie his weapon was "concealed" between his leg andthe side of the chair whilethe top of his shirt covering the grip from being observed from above finished the "concealment"?

When the officers approached they ordered him to place his hands in the air and stand, whereupon the "concealed" weapon came into view.

NOT SAYING that's what happened but there have been too many incidentswhere a lawful carrier was unlawfully arrested to take only the "official" side into consideration. Almogordo NM anyone?

Has anyone considered that this individual WAS lawful and just happens to be (apparently) the first known case of an illegally detained and arrested individual keeping his mouth completely shut on public forums and in the media?

AGAIN, without all the facts (a short news story by a media which is proven to be anti-gun does not constitute the facts) there is NO WAY any of us can "armchair" this incident.