• 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.

We stand to lose more than just UOC with AB 144

Moby

New member
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
6
Location
Cal
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.
 
Top