I used to believe a HSC was required to possess, but that is only required for purchasing.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.
Possessing a handgun that is not yours is only a sentence enhancement if you are illegally carrying concealed.It is not the intent of the Legislature to require an HSC for the mere possession of a firearm [Penal Code (PC) section 12800].
The previous quote from the study guide could actually leave someone with the wrong understanding.12801 (b) No person shall do either of the following:
(1) Purchase or receive any handgun, except an antique firearm, as defined in paragraph (16) of subsection (a) of Section 921 of Title 18 of the United States Code, without a valid handgun safety certificate.
(2) Sell, deliver, loan, or transfer any handgun, except an antique firearm, as defined in paragraph (16) of subsection (a) of Section 921 of Title 18 of the United States Code, to any person who does not have a valid handgun safety certificate.
im 18 and ive convinced my parents to let me own a glock. Is it legal for me to oc or do you have to be 21 for that? (california)
brad9point0 wrote:I used to believe a HSC was required to possess, but that is only required for purchasing.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.
From the HSC study guide:Possessing a handgun that is not yours is only a sentence enhancement if you are illegally carrying concealed.It is not the intent of the Legislature to require an HSC for the mere possession of a firearm [Penal Code (PC) section 12800].
\It was my understanding that one must be 21 to own a handgun in the state of California. Am I wrong here?
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.Joe Bullet wrote:
It was my understanding that one must be 21 to own a handgun in the state of California. Am I wrong here?
21 to purchase... its kinda odd. 18 to own thru other legal manners such as family transfer etc
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.Joe Bullet wrote:
It was my understanding that one must be 21 to own a handgun in the state of California. Am I wrong here?
21 to purchase... its kinda odd. 18 to own thru other legal manners such as family transfer etc
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:
1000 + 1 = 1001 {{{{YAWN}}}}}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.
You obviously overvalue the training one receives in the military.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?
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.
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.
It’s obvious you didn’t read my posting clearly. I said what amounts to be a “straw” purchase; that is my opinion.
I do. I've yet to find any law defining a straw purchase in the manner you are.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?
[/quote]” This child is prohibited from purchasing 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.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]
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.