• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

what is a locked container

halo6941

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
67
Location
Ontario, California, USA
imported post

What does california consider to be a locked container? Does it have to have some sort of lock on it or can it be considered locked when using the snap buttons on the case itself
 

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,747
Location
Oregon
imported post

A snap is not a lock. A lock is a lock. That can mean a duffel bag with a master lock through the zipper and through a fabric loop which prevents the zipper from being open, or it can mean a briefcase with a dial lock, or it can mean a metal trunk with a keyed lock. It does not mean a snap.
 

halo6941

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
67
Location
Ontario, California, USA
imported post

bigtoe416 wrote:
A snap is not a lock. A lock is a lock. That can mean a duffel bag with a master lock through the zipper and through a fabric loop which prevents the zipper from being open, or it can mean a briefcase with a dial lock, or it can mean a metal trunk with a keyed lock. It does not mean a snap.
so regaurdless if its in the passsanger compartment then it has to have some sort of lock on it. I hear what your saying. Thanks.
 

markm

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
487
Location
, ,
imported post

halo6941 wrote:
What does california consider to be a locked container? Does it have to have some sort of lock on it or can it be considered locked when using the snap buttons on the case itself

halo6941,

Here is a penal code section:



[align=left]12026.2.
(a) Section 12025 does not apply to, or affect, any of the following: … (1) through (20) omitted from this document.
[/align]


[align=left](b) In order for a firearm to be exempted under subdivision (a), while being transported to or from a place, the firearm shall be unloaded, kept in a locked container, as defined in subdivision (d), and the course of travel shall include only those deviations between authorized locations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.

[/align]


[align=left](c) This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful carrying or transportation of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in accordance with this chapter.

[/align]


[align=left](d) As used in this section, "locked container" means a secure container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, keylock, combination lock, or similar locking device. The term "locked container" does not include the utility or glove compartment of a motor vehicle.[/align]
http://www.californiaopencarry.org/CaliforniaOpenCarry.pdf


From my questioning of several CA LEOs, the "locked container" term is ambiguous. Most people accept any durable cloth bag with a reasonably strong zipper system whose zipper or zipper handles can be locked together, or the zipper handle can be locked to a tab at the end of the zipper's travel. Some have opined that there is a "finger rule";this rule makes it illegal to carry a concealable weapon in a bag that still gives a "finger" access to the weapon. I have not found case law to prove this belief.

It is my understanding that this law was devised to keep law-abiding citizens from accessing their gun quickly, which prevents cops from being shot--again, I can't substantiate this belief. However, the liberal mind's thinking process does work that way.

Liberalism is mental disorder.

I use a Porter Cable tool bag or a women's cosmetic travel bag. I never use a bag that was sold for guns or that hasgun manufacturer's trademarks on it. Camouflage is a good thing. Sometimes, I use aCraftsmanmetal tool box when the travelingis ruff and tumble.

markm

 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

halo6941 wrote:
so regaurdless if its compartment then it has to have some sort of lock on it. I hear what your saying. Thanks.
Correction:

If you want/need to CONCEAL the firearm, then it must be in a secure container. And it doesn't matter if it's in the passenger compartment or not. (That is, even if it's in the bed of your pickup or in an unlocked "saddle" compartment of your motorcycle...) Either it has to be exposed, or it must be locked up.
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
imported post

What part of "locked" don't you understand. It's not rocket surgery.

Can you access the weapon without damaging the lock or container?
 

markm

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
487
Location
, ,
imported post

"
What part of "locked" don't you understand. It's not rocket surgery.

Can you access the weapon without damaging the lock or container?

hey man cool yourself theres no need to be talking smart to me."

Hey Halo6941,

Gundude's tone notwithstanding, he does have a good point. If the case must be destroyed or the lock destroyed in order to get a "finger" on the weapon, then you should be legal. However you get a lock on your Taurus case does not matter, as long as it meets Gundude's criterion.

Supposedly, lawmaker's want law-abiding citizens to work hard at getting their weapon out during an attempted shooting of a LEO by saidlaw-abiding citizen. The LEO needs a few seconds to make it a fair fight so that the law-abiding citizen gets what he deserves. (NOTE: I am being absurd to point-out how absurd the logic is in regards to this law--criminals do not worry about being an honest law-abiding citizen--criminals arethe problem)

Hey Gundude, an apology would be nice.

markm



 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
imported post

MarkBofRAdvocate wrote:
"
What part of "locked" don't you understand. It's not rocket surgery.

Can you access the weapon without damaging the lock or container?

hey man cool yourself theres no need to be talking smart to me."

Hey Halo6941,

Gundude's tone notwithstanding, he does have a good point. If the case must be destroyed or the lock destroyed in order to get a "finger" on the weapon, then you should be legal. However you get a lock on your Taurus case does not matter, as long as it meets Gundude's criterion.

Supposedly, lawmaker's want law-abiding citizens to work hard at getting their weapon out during an attempted shooting of a LEO by saidlaw-abiding citizen. The LEO needs a few seconds to make it a fair fight so that the law-abiding citizen gets what he deserves. (NOTE: I am being absurd to point-out how absurd the logic is in regards to this law--criminals do not worry about being an honest law-abiding citizen--criminals arethe problem)

Hey Gundude, an apology would be nice.

markm



I'm sorry you're sometimes confused about what a locked container is.
 

halo6941

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
67
Location
Ontario, California, USA
imported post

hey gundude I wasnt trying to be a pain. when it comes to certian things I like to get other peoples point of view on the matter. I see your defiant to the end eh.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

Don't mind Gundude. He's normally rather harmless... must need to get laid or somethin.

Just realize that for those of us who have been here for years have explained the rules about 1000 times. After a while we get grumpy that people expect us to spoon-feed them facts that are readily available.

I know it's not the best, but the forum does have a search function. Us grumpy old men would be much more friendly/helpful if we saw the newbies putting in the effort to find the answer we gave the other newbie a week ago.
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
Don't mind Gundude. He's normally rather harmless... must need to get laid or somethin.

Just realize that for those of us who have been here for years have explained the rules about 1000 times. After a while we get grumpy that people expect us to spoon-feed them facts that are readily available.

I know it's not the best, but the forum does have a search function. Us grumpy old men would be much more friendly/helpful if we saw the newbies putting in the effort to find the answer we gave the other newbie a week ago.
or somethin.... :lol:
 

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

Ranchero wrote:
GUN INSIDE.

The case with "GUN INSIDE" give the LEO reasonable suspiscion that there is a gun in the case. This allows the LEO to demand to inspect the gun to ensure that it isn't loaded under PC 12031 (e).
 
Top