Actually, their is no mandatory burden - there is a statute giving police the OPTION to check load conditions, and then, only in incorporated areas and portions of unincorporated terretories where the County has banned all shooting. the police can exercise sound discretion - for example, only checking load condition where their is reasonable suspicion that the person might be up to possible crime, or reasonable suspicion that the gun is loaded.Here's a thought: If cops having to check every OC pistol to see if it is loaded is a burden, how about just allowing them to be carried loaded? Burden gone.
No, they do not ALWAYS e-check. I have never been e-checked a single time (even in direct interaction with LA County Sheriff's Deputies)In practice, do the police ALWAYS check load conditions of California folks open carrying?
Because Saldana would have to be educated first.If she (Saldana) is so worried about diverting police officer's attention and time to the call-ins for a person Openly Carrying a firearm, then why not start EDUCATING the community and general public about what the State Laws are and what the Rights are to LAW ABIDING CITIZENS?
Why not start and EDUCATION CAMPAIGN? Hmmmmm......
I have a dream....Here's how the 911 call should go:
Caller: Oh my God! There's a man with a gun!
911 Operator: Is the gun in a holster?
C: Yes. I am so scared of what he might do?
9: Is he at a school, post office,.........
C: No. He still has a gun!
9: Has the man said or done anything to make you think he is about to use the gun?
C: Yes. He has a gun!
9: Anything else? Is he handling it? Is he threatening anyone?
C: He's threatening me. He has a gun!
9: What has he said that is threatening you or anyone else.
C: Nothing. He has a gun!
9: If he is not doing anything besides carrying a holstered gun, which is legal, all we can do is have an available officer take a look and see if the man is doing anything illegal or is threatening anyone in any way.
C: But, he has a gun!
9: Yes, ma'am. But, having a gun is generally legal.
C: He has a gun, and you are not going to do anything.
9: Ma'am, we will send an available officer by to take a look.
C: Well. I never! *click*
I don't think you should refer to politicians by their gender. They are an insult to the reproductive process and should be referred to as "it."The faster you get that... politician put in her place, and get on to repealing the "unloaded" requirement, the better.
Don't confuse them with the TRUTH!If she (Saldana) is so worried about diverting police officer's attention and time to the call-ins for a person Openly Carrying a firearm, then why not start EDUCATING the community and general public about what the State Laws are and what the Rights are to LAW ABIDING CITIZENS?
Why not start and EDUCATION CAMPAIGN? Hmmmmm......
Too late, they're already confused.dchoepp wrote:Don't confuse them with the TRUTH!If she (Saldana) is so worried about diverting police officer's attention and time to the call-ins for a person Openly Carrying a firearm, then why not start EDUCATING the community and general public about what the State Laws are and what the Rights are to LAW ABIDING CITIZENS?
Why not start and EDUCATION CAMPAIGN? Hmmmmm......
Like all the after school specials say; knowledge is power!If she (Saldana) is so worried about diverting police officer's attention and time to the call-ins for a person Openly Carrying a firearm, then why not start EDUCATING the community and general public about what the State Laws are and what the Rights are to LAW ABIDING CITIZENS?
Why not start and EDUCATION CAMPAIGN? Hmmmmm......
If she (Saldana) is so worried about diverting police officer's attention and time to the call-ins for a person Openly Carrying a firearm, then why not start EDUCATING the community and general public about what the State Laws are and what the Rights are to LAW ABIDING CITIZENS?
Why not start and EDUCATION CAMPAIGN? Hmmmmm......