Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: We stand to lose more than just UOC with AB 144

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011

    We stand to lose more than just UOC with AB 144

    AB 144 appears to be after more than just Unloaded Open Carry. It would also appear to ban unregistered (pre-registration requirement) handguns from Public lands, which would include BLM lands that allow shooting.

    It specifically states in section 26350 it does not apply to, or affect, the open carrying of an unloaded handgun on publicly owned land, if the possession and use of a handgun is specifically permitted by the managing agency of the land and the person carrying that handgun is listed as the registered owner of that handgun with the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 11106.

    So if you purchased your handgun before 1990 it would not be registered with California DOJ, unless you voluntarily registered it and paid the associated fees. Note nothing in California law compels you to register a lawfully owned pre-registration handgun. However, under AB 144 you would be subject to arrest and being charged with a crime under this section once you remove said unregistered handgun from you vehicle while on public lands.

    I know some want this bill to pass thinking it will force California into Shall Issue over the May Issue for CCW. However, with current events, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Modesto , Ca
    This really sucks! We Do the Majority of our shooting on BLM. 144 Needs to Die!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts