desertfox
Regular Member
imported post
*Deleted*
*Deleted*
-
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.
Feedback Requested on La Mirada, CA Map
- Thread starter desertfox
- Start date
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
imported post
desertfox wrote:
Stop creating evidence that can be used against you in a court of law, publishing it on a publicinternet forumand do not carry a map detailing the location of your local schools and the 1000' zones around them.
626.9 relies on your whether you know or should reasonably know your proximity to a school. Maps of such, eliminate any credible defense against NOT knowing. While whether or not you really 'knew' where the school zones are might not arrise in trial (as DA's and local authorities might prosecute on the basis on proximity alone.), I believe you are doing yourself no favors in producing evidence of your awareness of those zones.
desertfox wrote:
Advice?
Stop creating evidence that can be used against you in a court of law, publishing it on a publicinternet forumand do not carry a map detailing the location of your local schools and the 1000' zones around them.
626.9 relies on your whether you know or should reasonably know your proximity to a school. Maps of such, eliminate any credible defense against NOT knowing. While whether or not you really 'knew' where the school zones are might not arrise in trial (as DA's and local authorities might prosecute on the basis on proximity alone.), I believe you are doing yourself no favors in producing evidence of your awareness of those zones.
mjones
Regular Member
imported post
Thanks C3, and thanks desertfox for removing the map.
Thanks C3, and thanks desertfox for removing the map.
A ECNALG
Regular Member
imported post
ConditionThree wrote:
Perhaps, but I can just as easily envision a prosecutoror judge who wag their fingers and say: "Ignorance is no excuse before the law!"
I can envision them asking: "Did you at any time make a 'reasonable' effort to determine whetherthe act of carrying of an unloaded, unconcealedfirearm in publicwas lawful? Were you not aware of the GFSZ prohibition before you made the conscious decision to UOC? Did you not make even the slightest effort to determine the boundaries of GFSZ, or did you believe that willful'ignorance' is a defense in court?Did you not feel that a 'reasonable' person would have made a 'reasonable' effort to comply with ALL laws, includinghaving 'reason' to know that one may transgress a GFSZ?"
Seems to me that a carefully prepared map, using the particular city's own map and scale, would be a powerful defense, showing, that as long as one operates clearly OUTSIDE the circumscribed GFSZ, one has demonstrated reason toknow (again, based upon theoffended city's own official map and scale)he is NOT in violation of PC626.9.
Or am I totally wet on this one?
ConditionThree wrote:
Perhaps, but I can just as easily envision a prosecutoror judge who wag their fingers and say: "Ignorance is no excuse before the law!"
I can envision them asking: "Did you at any time make a 'reasonable' effort to determine whetherthe act of carrying of an unloaded, unconcealedfirearm in publicwas lawful? Were you not aware of the GFSZ prohibition before you made the conscious decision to UOC? Did you not make even the slightest effort to determine the boundaries of GFSZ, or did you believe that willful'ignorance' is a defense in court?Did you not feel that a 'reasonable' person would have made a 'reasonable' effort to comply with ALL laws, includinghaving 'reason' to know that one may transgress a GFSZ?"
Seems to me that a carefully prepared map, using the particular city's own map and scale, would be a powerful defense, showing, that as long as one operates clearly OUTSIDE the circumscribed GFSZ, one has demonstrated reason toknow (again, based upon theoffended city's own official map and scale)he is NOT in violation of PC626.9.
Or am I totally wet on this one?
mjones
Regular Member
imported post
A ECNALG wrote:
A ECNALG wrote:
What your saying is perfectly reasonable, but it doesn't address the aspect that's really important to me...namely a forum map being provided as evidence that I personally should have known about some random school zone in some random place I never go. Planets align and an innocent OCer from OCDO gets nailed.
1245A Defender
Regular Member
imported post
mjones wrote:
is that knowing as best as you can where known schools are,, and staying out of their zones.
provides an affirmative defense if you ever are accused of being in a GFSZ that you were surprised existed.
it will sink you in court if you go where you know youre not supposed to be,
but protects you in an unexpected accidental intrusion.
mjones wrote:
it tink the point made above^^^^^^yours,,,
is that knowing as best as you can where known schools are,, and staying out of their zones.
provides an affirmative defense if you ever are accused of being in a GFSZ that you were surprised existed.
it will sink you in court if you go where you know youre not supposed to be,
but protects you in an unexpected accidental intrusion.
desertfox
Regular Member
imported post
Can someone please delete this thread.
Thanks!
Can someone please delete this thread.
Thanks!
desertfox
Regular Member
imported post
DELETE!!!
DELETE!!!