Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: The term Unloaded

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    I have ready the CA Open Carry Pamphlet, http://californiaopencarry.org/
    But what does the term "unloaded" actually mean? Can I have the magazine loaded, and in the gun- without one in the chamber? Or does the magazine need to be away from the gun?

    How is the Oakland PD with open carry?

    Reason for asking is that there has been several robbed at gunpoint in downtown Oakland lately....

  2. #2
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    Oakland wrote:
    I have ready the CA Open Carry Pamphlet, http://californiaopencarry.org/
    But what does the term "unloaded" actually mean? Can I have the magazine loaded, and in the gun- without one in the chamber? Or does the magazine need to be away from the gun?

    How is the Oakland PD with open carry?

    Reason for asking is that there has been several robbed at gunpoint in downtown Oakland lately....
    penal code 12031 (g) A firearm shall be deemed to be loaded for the purposes of
    this section when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell,
    consisting of a case that holds a charge of powder and a bullet or
    shot, in, or attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but
    not limited to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof
    attached to the firearm; except that a muzzle-loader firearm shall be
    deemed to be loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder
    charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  3. #3
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    Gundude wrote:
    Oakland wrote:
    I have ready the CA Open Carry Pamphlet, http://californiaopencarry.org/
    But what does the term "unloaded" actually mean? Can I have the magazine loaded, and in the gun- without one in the chamber? Or does the magazine need to be away from the gun?

    How is the Oakland PD with open carry?

    Reason for asking is that there has been several robbed at gunpoint in downtown Oakland lately....
    penal code 12031 (g) A firearm shall be deemed to be loaded for the purposes of
    this section when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell,
    consisting of a case that holds a charge of powder and a bullet or
    shot, in, or attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but
    not limited to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof
    attached to the firearm; except that a muzzle-loader firearm shall be
    deemed to be loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder
    charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder.
    People Vs Clark (1996) clarified "loaded" as having a loaded magazine in the well, and or a round in the chamber. The other penal codes refer to "gang members" in the commission of a crime, and should not pertain to a law abiding citizen.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    Why? I'm a member of the OCDO gang.

  5. #5
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    different kind of gang

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    Or, you didnt know that John & Mike flag OCDO gang signs?



  7. #7
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    :celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post


  9. #9
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    NOW that's FUNNY !!!!!!! ROFL

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California, USA
    Posts
    289

    Post imported post

    So, to fully answer you;

    NO ammunition can placed in a position to be fired. Meaning nothing in the chamber or cylinder, nor even a filled magazine inserted.
    No law prohibits the carry of ammunition on the person...

    ...HOWEVER! Full magazines should not be carried in the pocket, but on the belt in their own carrier. Court decisions have determined that a loaded and concealed (in pocket) magazine can construe a loaded weapon, regardless if an actual weapon is present.

    This does not pertain to loose cartridges or filled speed loaders for revolvers, as neither is an operable necessity to function the firearm.


    I carry 4 magazines with a total of 40 rounds in a "piggy-back" mag holster when the .45 goes with me. 50 rounds are in the belt loops when the Sheriffs model SAA takes a ride.

  11. #11
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    I thought it was loaded magazine in a pocket is considered [equivalent to] a CONCEALED weapon, because the magazine is an integral part of the gun, not sure if it is considered a loaded weapon as well.

    People Vs. Hale (1974)

  12. #12
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    This is a QUESTION NOT A STATEMENT.

    With the Clark ruling doesn't that mean that a rifle (or shotgun) with one of those stock mounted shell holders is legal?

    It's not in a position from which it can be fired (per Clark) and the shell holder certainly isn't an integral part of the firearm.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  13. #13
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    We-the-People wrote:
    This is a QUESTION NOT A STATEMENT.

    With the Clark ruling doesn't that mean that a rifle (or shotgun) with one of those stock mounted shell holders is legal?

    It's not in a position from which it can be fired (per Clark) and the shell holder certainly isn't an integral part of the firearm.
    I would think so. Basically the same as the Butt compartment.

  14. #14
    Regular Member wewd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    664

    Post imported post

    We-the-People wrote:
    This is a QUESTION NOT A STATEMENT.

    With the Clark ruling doesn't that mean that a rifle (or shotgun) with one of those stock mounted shell holders is legal?

    It's not in a position from which it can be fired (per Clark) and the shell holder certainly isn't an integral part of the firearm.
    That was exactly the situation presented in Clark and the court found that the shotgun was not loaded per PC 12031.
    Do you want to enjoy liberty in your lifetime?

    Consider moving to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project.

    "Live Free or Die"

  15. #15
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    wewd wrote:
    We-the-People wrote:
    This is a QUESTION NOT A STATEMENT.

    With the Clark ruling doesn't that mean that a rifle (or shotgun) with one of those stock mounted shell holders is legal?

    It's not in a position from which it can be fired (per Clark) and the shell holder certainly isn't an integral part of the firearm.
    That was exactly the situation presented in Clark and the court found that the shotgun was not loaded per PC 12031.
    Well the way I read the Clark decision was that the shells were in a storage compartment inside the butt stock. It sounded a little strange as I don't think I've ever seen a shotgun with a storage compartment INSIDE the stock.

    But yes, it seems to me that it would be the same. Of course it's also going to be an arrest and you have to go to court and hope that the court will abide by the case law.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  16. #16
    Regular Member wewd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    664

    Post imported post

    It was a SpeedFeed stock with shells inside. The case law of Clark is clear and settled and most police are now familiar with it, thanks in large part to the UOC movement. In the past UOCers were arrested or threatened with arrest due to having ammunition on their person with an exposed firearm, but cases like that are no longer much of a concern.
    Do you want to enjoy liberty in your lifetime?

    Consider moving to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project.

    "Live Free or Die"

  17. #17
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    So what if my holster is designed to carry the firearm and a spare magazine?

    Can I remove the loaded magazine from the pistol (and with an empty chamber) and put it in the holster? It sits directly in front of the pistol in it's own pocket.

    I don't consider it "attached" to the weapon, the holster simply holds the firearm and the magazine next to each other (with just a thin piece of material between them). The way I read the laws and what's being said, I should be okay.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    We-the-People wrote:
    So what if my holster is designed to carry the firearm and a spare magazine?

    Can I remove the loaded magazine from the pistol (and with an empty chamber) and put it in the holster? It sits directly in front of the pistol in it's own pocket.

    I don't consider it "attached" to the weapon, the holster simply holds the firearm and the magazine next to each other (with just a thin piece of material between them). The way I read the laws and what's being said, I should be okay.
    I use this one. It has a external pouch on the front of the holster. It's an Uncle MIke's
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  19. #19
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    Yup, that's my holster in Cali as well. Can't find a Blackhawk that fits it.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  20. #20
    Regular Member wewd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    664

    Post imported post

    Don't pick over the minutiae. Unless there is a round in the chamber, or a round in a magazine inserted in the mag well, it's not loaded. End of story.
    Do you want to enjoy liberty in your lifetime?

    Consider moving to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project.

    "Live Free or Die"

  21. #21
    Regular Member PincheOgro1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Perris, Ca., California, USA
    Posts
    420

    Post imported post

    We-the-People wrote:
    wewd wrote:
    We-the-People wrote:
    This is a QUESTION NOT A STATEMENT.

    With the Clark ruling doesn't that mean that a rifle (or shotgun) with one of those stock mounted shell holders is legal?

    It's not in a position from which it can be fired (per Clark) and the shell holder certainly isn't an integral part of the firearm.
    That was exactly the situation presented in Clark and the court found that the shotgun was not loaded per PC 12031.
    Well the way I read the Clark decision was that the shells were in a storage compartment inside the butt stock. It sounded a little strange as I don't think I've ever seen a shotgun with a storage compartment INSIDE the stock.

    But yes, it seems to me that it would be the same. Of course it's also going to be an arrest and you have to go to court and hope that the court will abide by the case law.
    MY step father had one. Use to keep his cleaning gear in it

  22. #22
    Regular Member brokenbarrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    blowing dust, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    Oakland wrote:
    I have ready the CA Open Carry Pamphlet, http://californiaopencarry.org/
    But what does the term "unloaded" actually mean? Can I have the magazine loaded, and in the gun- without one in the chamber? Or does the magazine need to be away from the gun?

    How is the Oakland PD with open carry?

    Reason for asking is that there has been several robbed at gunpoint in downtown Oakland lately....
    no ammo in gun and an if itsa semi auto an empty mag must be inserted seeing as how a mag is required for the firearm to function it is considered part of the weapon empty mag well with loaded mag on belt is still concidered loaded-because a mag is required for the firearm to be complete and functional in many cases,just be safe put an empty mag in and dont worry-you can drop the emptymag and load pretty quick..

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California, USA
    Posts
    289

    Post imported post

    brokenbarrel wrote:
    no ammo in gun and an if itsa semi auto an empty mag must be inserted seeing as how a mag is required for the firearm to function it is considered part of the weapon empty mag well with loaded mag on belt is still concidered loaded-because a mag is required for the firearm to be complete and functional in many cases,just be safe put an empty mag in and dont worry-you can drop the emptymag and load pretty quick..
    FUD!!

    There is NO requirement to have an empty mag in the well. We do it to keep out dirt, and to give the illusion of readiness. NOTHING in the law indicates this is a requirement.

    You can carry all the ammo you want,loaded into all the magazines you want,on your belt. This in NO WAY constitutes a loaded weapon, and is, in fact, the most legal way to carry ammunition for a semi-auto. Fill your pockets with ammo for a revolver.

    BTW...punctuation is your friend, friend.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Riverside County, California, USA
    Posts
    353

    Post imported post

    Army wrote:
    brokenbarrel wrote:
    no ammo in gun and an if itsa semi auto an empty mag must be inserted seeing as how a mag is required for the firearm to function it is considered part of the weapon empty mag well with loaded mag on belt is still concidered loaded-because a mag is required for the firearm to be complete and functional in many cases,just be safe put an empty mag in and dont worry-you can drop the emptymag and load pretty quick..
    FUD!!

    There is NO requirement to have an empty mag in the well. We do it to keep out dirt, and to give the illusion of readiness. NOTHING in the law indicates this is a requirement.

    You can carry all the ammo you want,loaded into all the magazines you want,on your belt. This in NO WAY constitutes a loaded weapon, and is, in fact, the most legal way to carry ammunition for a semi-auto. Fill your pockets with ammo for a revolver.

    BTW...punctuation is your friend, friend.
    I think he was alluding to the common speculation that you can conceal a loaded magazine if there is an empty magazine in the chamber since the "essential part of the firearm" is in place, and the loaded and concealed magazines are simply spare parts. It is untested water though, and I don't like the idea of getting legal dysentery.


  25. #25
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    Well that's how I see it as well but last week I was told in a shop (in Cali) that the stock mounted shell holders made it "loaded" by their understanding of how things are enforced. This from a gal that teaches quite a few gun courses.

    Not that I've never run into an instructor that misunderstood or misrepresented the law. I'm working on an e-mail to her to spell out the facts. Pretty bad when a political refugee from Cali (to Oregon) has to "educate' a Cali instructor.

    I went to school with her and she's okay, probably just going from what someone else told her the law meant. Though she did have a lot of the law in her instructional file folder and she's open to hearing my explanation so she is tryinig to do a good job. That's better than some I've run across that say "I don't care what the law says, you can't do it".
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •