-
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.
-
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.
open carry
- Thread starter iceeman
- Start date
brad9point0
Regular Member
imported post
18 to OC. If the gun is not registered to you, you must have a Basic Firearms Safety Certificate with you, or the registered owner of it with you. Easy to get.
18 to OC. If the gun is not registered to you, you must have a Basic Firearms Safety Certificate with you, or the registered owner of it with you. Easy to get.
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
imported post
brad9point0 wrote:
From the HSC study guide:
** Followup and Correction**
brad9point is right.
brad9point0 wrote:
I used to believe a HSC was required to possess, but that is only required for purchasing.
From the HSC study guide:
Possessing a handgun that is not yours is only a sentence enhancement if you are illegally carrying concealed.
** Followup and Correction**
brad9point is right.
The previous quote from the study guide could actually leave someone with the wrong understanding.
JJ
Regular Member
imported post
iceeman wrote:
As we all preach here, please do your homework and be aware of the restrictions associated with UNLOADED Open Carry in California.
and Welcome to the forum!!!!
iceeman wrote:
As we all preach here, please do your homework and be aware of the restrictions associated with UNLOADED Open Carry in California.
and Welcome to the forum!!!!
brad9point0
Regular Member
imported post
Theseus wrote:
correct. it just saves more headache. cheap insurance.
Theseus wrote:
correct. it just saves more headache. cheap insurance.
Joe Bullet
Regular Member
imported post
It was my understanding that one must be 21 to own a handgun in the state of California. Am I wrong here?
It was my understanding that one must be 21 to own a handgun in the state of California. Am I wrong here?
brad9point0
Regular Member
imported post
Joe Bullet wrote:
21 to purchase... its kinda odd. 18 to own thru other legal manners such as family transfer etc.
Joe Bullet wrote:
\
21 to purchase... its kinda odd. 18 to own thru other legal manners such as family transfer etc.
Joe Bullet
Regular Member
imported post
brad9point0 wrote:
Yes, this type of action should add a sense of legitimacy to the open carry "movement" that a lot of the Gentlemen on this board are working very hard for. Let’s give the lame Anti-Gun folks some more ammunition. I can see the article now: 18 year old OPEN CARRIES[/b] in store, restaurant, school, Etc. Yes, the Anti-Gun idiots should have a field day with this one.
What kind of parents would purchase a weapon for their child to open carry and be harassed or worse by the very accepting police of California? What am I saying? An 18 year old is so very mature as to carry a weapon on his hip in the streets of California. Smart.
:banghead:
brad9point0 wrote:
So basically his parents are about to commit what amounts to a "straw" purchase in the way of buying him the weapon (that he cannot legally purchase himself) and transferring it to an 18 year old kid that probably should not own a handgun in the first place. Smart.
Yes, this type of action should add a sense of legitimacy to the open carry "movement" that a lot of the Gentlemen on this board are working very hard for. Let’s give the lame Anti-Gun folks some more ammunition. I can see the article now: 18 year old OPEN CARRIES[/b] in store, restaurant, school, Etc. Yes, the Anti-Gun idiots should have a field day with this one.
What kind of parents would purchase a weapon for their child to open carry and be harassed or worse by the very accepting police of California? What am I saying? An 18 year old is so very mature as to carry a weapon on his hip in the streets of California. Smart.
:banghead:
brad9point0
Regular Member
imported post
Joe Bullet wrote:
It does not need to be a straw purchase. They could already own one and decide to gift it to him, or sell it to him. I would never advise for anyone to take the straw purchase route and buy one with the intent to immediately transfer it.
Joe Bullet wrote:
It does not need to be a straw purchase. They could already own one and decide to gift it to him, or sell it to him. I would never advise for anyone to take the straw purchase route and buy one with the intent to immediately transfer it.
imported post
We've gone over this a thousand times on this forum, but it is not a straw purchase for a parent to buy their 18 year old child a handgun as long as that child is not prohibited from owning firearms. A straw purchase occurs when someone buys a firearm with the intent to give or sell it to a prohibited person.
We've gone over this a thousand times on this forum, but it is not a straw purchase for a parent to buy their 18 year old child a handgun as long as that child is not prohibited from owning firearms. A straw purchase occurs when someone buys a firearm with the intent to give or sell it to a prohibited person.
Gundude
Regular Member
imported post
wewd wrote:
wewd wrote:
1000 + 1 = 1001 {{{{YAWN}}}}}
Joe Bullet
Regular Member
imported post
wewd wrote:
It’s obvious you didn’t read my posting clearly. I said what amounts to be a “straw” purchase; that is my opinion. Brad9point0 is also right; it may not be a purchase and simply handed down. However, call it what you want to, if a parent buys him the weapon and transfers it to him, it is a “straw” purchase……. in my opinion. Do you really believe otherwise?
Your very posting is contradictive. Read what you wrote…..” it is not a straw purchase for a parent to buy their 18 year old child a handgun as long as that child is not prohibited from owning firearms.[/i][/quote]” This child is prohibited frompurchasing a certain firearm (handgun); otherwise he could just buy it himself legally. If it’s legal for him to buy, then why is the parent buying it? He can own, not buy; therefore purchasing a weapon and transferring it to the child is in fact a “straw” purchase. Technicalities aside, you know it’s true.
I think the bigger issue here (what all of you glossed over) it the fact that an 18 year old wants to open carry the weapon. Whatever your personal opinion is on the matter, I think that an instance such as this only serve to lend credence to the Anti-Gun philosophy and defeats the hard work of some here.
wewd wrote:
It’s obvious you didn’t read my posting clearly. I said what amounts to be a “straw” purchase; that is my opinion. Brad9point0 is also right; it may not be a purchase and simply handed down. However, call it what you want to, if a parent buys him the weapon and transfers it to him, it is a “straw” purchase……. in my opinion. Do you really believe otherwise?
Your very posting is contradictive. Read what you wrote…..” it is not a straw purchase for a parent to buy their 18 year old child a handgun as long as that child is not prohibited from owning firearms.[/i][/quote]” This child is prohibited frompurchasing a certain firearm (handgun); otherwise he could just buy it himself legally. If it’s legal for him to buy, then why is the parent buying it? He can own, not buy; therefore purchasing a weapon and transferring it to the child is in fact a “straw” purchase. Technicalities aside, you know it’s true.
I think the bigger issue here (what all of you glossed over) it the fact that an 18 year old wants to open carry the weapon. Whatever your personal opinion is on the matter, I think that an instance such as this only serve to lend credence to the Anti-Gun philosophy and defeats the hard work of some here.
imported post
Your opinion is not legal fact. Straw purchase is a very specific crime. I already explained what a straw purchase is, you are free to look up the law yourself. What he and his parents are proposing to do is perfectly legal under state and federal law. Give the BATF and CA DOJ a call if you don't believe me. As for an 18 year old open carrying, we have thousands of such citizens open carrying fully automatic assault weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan. Who are you to judge someone else's maturity level whom you have never met and know nothing about? That is for he and his parents to determine, not you or anyone else. He is an adult citizen perfectly capable of making his own decisions. And you, sir, are an ass. Good day to you.
Your opinion is not legal fact. Straw purchase is a very specific crime. I already explained what a straw purchase is, you are free to look up the law yourself. What he and his parents are proposing to do is perfectly legal under state and federal law. Give the BATF and CA DOJ a call if you don't believe me. As for an 18 year old open carrying, we have thousands of such citizens open carrying fully automatic assault weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan. Who are you to judge someone else's maturity level whom you have never met and know nothing about? That is for he and his parents to determine, not you or anyone else. He is an adult citizen perfectly capable of making his own decisions. And you, sir, are an ass. Good day to you.
JJ
Regular Member
imported post
My 2cents.... While I agree most 18 year olds would not appear to be mature enough to handle the extreme responsibilities of gun ownership, let alone the carrying of said gun on a daily basis in the public eye, some kids do mature faster than others and take any responsibility very seriously.
Speaking of myself, I believe when I was 18 I could have handled the task admirably. Having started working when I was 12 or 13 years of age (for my Dad) and accepting my first "real" job with a large corporation (Xerox) after I had just turned 17 (worked there for almost 6 years, working my way up the ranks and gaining the respect of my peers) I believe I was a very responsible and mature 18 year old.
Most people would stereotype when observing a young adult openly carrying a weapon of any type, and think "punk" or "thug". Let's not forget, it is not wise to stereotype or judge a book by its cover.
Having said all that, let's not also forget some people on this forum, when asked "why do need to carry a gun?" often reply "because it's my right and it is legal to do so".
Does an 18 year old have any less rights than an older person?
And for the record, this is not one "teenager" sticking up for another as my teenage years are nearly 3 decades behind me.
I believe we all have a right to self defense. We just need to make sure we all take the responsibility of open carry very seriously and know the consequences of any action we may take.
My 2cents.... While I agree most 18 year olds would not appear to be mature enough to handle the extreme responsibilities of gun ownership, let alone the carrying of said gun on a daily basis in the public eye, some kids do mature faster than others and take any responsibility very seriously.
Speaking of myself, I believe when I was 18 I could have handled the task admirably. Having started working when I was 12 or 13 years of age (for my Dad) and accepting my first "real" job with a large corporation (Xerox) after I had just turned 17 (worked there for almost 6 years, working my way up the ranks and gaining the respect of my peers) I believe I was a very responsible and mature 18 year old.
Most people would stereotype when observing a young adult openly carrying a weapon of any type, and think "punk" or "thug". Let's not forget, it is not wise to stereotype or judge a book by its cover.
Having said all that, let's not also forget some people on this forum, when asked "why do need to carry a gun?" often reply "because it's my right and it is legal to do so".
Does an 18 year old have any less rights than an older person?
And for the record, this is not one "teenager" sticking up for another as my teenage years are nearly 3 decades behind me.
I believe we all have a right to self defense. We just need to make sure we all take the responsibility of open carry very seriously and know the consequences of any action we may take.
Joe Bullet
Regular Member
imported post
I'm an ass? I'm the one whom resorts to personal attack and insult when my opinion is not validated by otherson the board? Yes, I can see where you would think I'm the ass.
You asked who I think I am to judge someone else’s maturity level whom I’ve never met? Well, I’ll pose the same question to you. Do you know this individual? You can personally attest to his mental aptitude and or maturity level as an 18 year old? Don’t know about anyone else but most 18 year olds I’ve met are not as mature as they think they are. All I’ve said here was my opinion; I didn’t ask you to agree and yet you attack. I thought we were free to post our opinions; as long as they don’t disagree with Mr. Wewd. Get a grip man.
Would you let your kid go outside with a handgun on his hip? Would you let your kid ride in a car with a kid who has a gun? You think it OK for an 18 year old to be in the streets with a handgun on his hip? Look at all the negative encounters with these police out here. Imagine what they would do to some young kid. That’s my @#$%ing opinion; so get a grip and stop insulting people when their opinion doesn’t match yours.
As for your “comparison” of the members of the U.S. Military to a kid in the California streets; I’d have to say you’re way off here. It is the job of the U.S. Military to be out there on the battlefield with weapons. Comparing the training and conditioning of a member of the U.S. Military vs. (my opinion) some regular kid is laughable. California police will not understand a kid with a gun. No matter what you say it creates a difficult situation for the kid. I wish that wasn’t true but it’s a fact. Some people are being arrested and threaten with guns pointed at them. Sometimes you have to use some common @#$%ing sense. When it comes to open carry I’m the first one to admit some cops are way off and don’t know or totally disregard the laws governing open carry and they are out there. An 18 year oldkid does not need a gun charge in any respect on his record.That's not a great way to start a young promising life. What parent in their right mind would find this acceptable for their child?
I'm an ass? I'm the one whom resorts to personal attack and insult when my opinion is not validated by otherson the board? Yes, I can see where you would think I'm the ass.
You asked who I think I am to judge someone else’s maturity level whom I’ve never met? Well, I’ll pose the same question to you. Do you know this individual? You can personally attest to his mental aptitude and or maturity level as an 18 year old? Don’t know about anyone else but most 18 year olds I’ve met are not as mature as they think they are. All I’ve said here was my opinion; I didn’t ask you to agree and yet you attack. I thought we were free to post our opinions; as long as they don’t disagree with Mr. Wewd. Get a grip man.
Would you let your kid go outside with a handgun on his hip? Would you let your kid ride in a car with a kid who has a gun? You think it OK for an 18 year old to be in the streets with a handgun on his hip? Look at all the negative encounters with these police out here. Imagine what they would do to some young kid. That’s my @#$%ing opinion; so get a grip and stop insulting people when their opinion doesn’t match yours.
As for your “comparison” of the members of the U.S. Military to a kid in the California streets; I’d have to say you’re way off here. It is the job of the U.S. Military to be out there on the battlefield with weapons. Comparing the training and conditioning of a member of the U.S. Military vs. (my opinion) some regular kid is laughable. California police will not understand a kid with a gun. No matter what you say it creates a difficult situation for the kid. I wish that wasn’t true but it’s a fact. Some people are being arrested and threaten with guns pointed at them. Sometimes you have to use some common @#$%ing sense. When it comes to open carry I’m the first one to admit some cops are way off and don’t know or totally disregard the laws governing open carry and they are out there. An 18 year oldkid does not need a gun charge in any respect on his record.That's not a great way to start a young promising life. What parent in their right mind would find this acceptable for their child?
imported post
You're the one insulting the original poster by calling him a kid. He is an adult and it is his right to own and carry a handgun in the state of California. State law says an 18 year old may own and carry a handgun. Everything else is ancillary. He came here asking for our help and you are simply insulting him. You are an ass.
You're the one insulting the original poster by calling him a kid. He is an adult and it is his right to own and carry a handgun in the state of California. State law says an 18 year old may own and carry a handgun. Everything else is ancillary. He came here asking for our help and you are simply insulting him. You are an ass.
heliopolissolutions
Regular Member
imported post
I think that some of us here have a chip far too easily dislodged.
LEO enjoy a good trolling as much as anyone. I wouldn't be surprised if3/4ths of ridiculous immature posts are trolling by antis and BBs and CGs.
*shrug*
YMMV
I think that some of us here have a chip far too easily dislodged.
LEO enjoy a good trolling as much as anyone. I wouldn't be surprised if3/4ths of ridiculous immature posts are trolling by antis and BBs and CGs.
*shrug*
YMMV
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Joe Bullet wrote:
BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship) is only 2 weeks of training. I shot more the last time I was at the range than i ever did in Basic Training.
Some MOS specialties might get more, but to suggest somehow that the boys that join the Army are any more mature than the boys on the street of California is humerus. I was in the Army with many boys from California in the late 90's and I can tell you that they were far worst than most boys I meet today.
Joe Bullet wrote:
You obviously overvalue the training one receives in the military.
BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship) is only 2 weeks of training. I shot more the last time I was at the range than i ever did in Basic Training.
Some MOS specialties might get more, but to suggest somehow that the boys that join the Army are any more mature than the boys on the street of California is humerus. I was in the Army with many boys from California in the late 90's and I can tell you that they were far worst than most boys I meet today.
inbox485
Regular Member
imported post
Joe Bullet wrote:
A straw purchase is a purchase for somebody who can not own or possess the item themselves. An 18 year old can own and possess a handgun. They simply can't buy one. The law was deliberately made this way so that an 18 - 20 year old could only have a handgun (legally) if their parent was willing to buy it for them. Obviously the parent wouldn't do that if they thought the kid was an asshat.
brad9point0 wrote:
This would still be fine. If the purchase is legal and the transfer is legal, it is not a straw purchase. The intentions or time elapsed are irrelevant.
Joe Bullet wrote:
Good thing your opinion carries no legal weight.
Owning is not the same as purchasing. It isn't a technicality it is the law. It is similar to it being legal for a teenager to own spray paint, but not be able to buy it.
Thankyou Mrs Brady. You can take your seat now.
For the record: I was 15 the first time I carried a loaded handgun for personal protection. Nobody got hurt as a result.
Also you:
Joe Bullet wrote:
A straw purchase is a purchase for somebody who can not own or possess the item themselves. An 18 year old can own and possess a handgun. They simply can't buy one. The law was deliberately made this way so that an 18 - 20 year old could only have a handgun (legally) if their parent was willing to buy it for them. Obviously the parent wouldn't do that if they thought the kid was an asshat.
brad9point0 wrote:
This would still be fine. If the purchase is legal and the transfer is legal, it is not a straw purchase. The intentions or time elapsed are irrelevant.
Joe Bullet wrote:
Good thing your opinion carries no legal weight.
I do. I've yet to find any law defining a straw purchase in the manner you are.
[/quote]
Owning is not the same as purchasing. It isn't a technicality it is the law. It is similar to it being legal for a teenager to own spray paint, but not be able to buy it.
Thankyou Mrs Brady. You can take your seat now.
For the record: I was 15 the first time I carried a loaded handgun for personal protection. Nobody got hurt as a result.
Also you:
- Seem to think an average 18 year old out of high school who has shoot a few rounds in basic training has anywhere near the small arms competency of an 18 year old that grew up shooting with the parents then willing to buy and give them a handgun. I'd suggest the opposite.
- Seem to think that an 18 year old is a child. Perhaps if the 18 year old was raised as some spoiled, pussified puke allowed to act out on hormones and coddled to the point of being dysfunctional as many teenage adults are you would have a point. But, I'd imagine if the a parent is willing to trust the child now adult with a handgun, that was not the case.
- Seem to be forgetting the traditional age of being a military aged male adult (hint: 16). That age was changed to accommodate cultural norms, not because the 16 year olds in the military were too childish.