• 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.

Garden Grove/Fountain Valley, CA detainment

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
an update: had a nice chat with jason davis. i'll try to retain him to handle educating the OCP (Orange County Police) so that echecking UOC at gunpoint will be a thing of the past. any UOCer who gets violated can sue for punitives after the warning letter is issued.

on another note, jason davis is really nice. calguns foundation no longer supports financially UOC cases. i had to dish out to do the case or else nothing will be done for UOC.

fic$robo1.gif

Where might we be able to donate to your legal defense (offense) fund?
 

xnetc9

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Orange County, CA
just like to point out: you are allowed to uoc next to a school as long as you are on private property. this includes the supermarket and its parking lot. do not step onto the sidewalk. that is within school zone. hmm yes, you can be standing on the parkinglot with a gun while kids are walking on the sidewalk to/from school.


California Penal Code Section 626.9

Legal Research Home > California Lawyer > Penal Code > California Penal Code Section 626.9

(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone
, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f).
(c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm
under any of the following circumstances:

(1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private
property, if the place of residence, place of business, or private
property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the
firearm is otherwise lawful.

(2) When the firearm is an unloaded pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed on the person and is in a locked
container or within the locked trunk of a motor vehicle
.
This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
transportation of any other firearm, other than a pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed on the person, in
accordance with state law.
(3) When the person possessing the firearm reasonably believes
that he or she is in grave danger
because of circumstances forming
the basis of a current restraining order issued by a court against
another person or persons who has or have been found to pose a threat
to his or her life or safety
. This subdivision may not apply when
the circumstances involve a mutual restraining order issued pursuant
to Division 10 (commencing with Section 6200) of the Family Code
absent a factual finding of a specific threat to the person's life or
safety. Upon a trial for violating subdivision (b), the trier of a
fact shall determine whether the defendant was acting out of a
reasonable belief that he or she was in grave danger.
(4) When the person is exempt from the prohibition against
carrying a concealed firearm pursuant to Section 25615, 25625, 25630,
or 25645.
(d) Except as provided in subdivision (b), it shall be unlawful
for any person, with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to
discharge, or attempt to discharge, a firearm in a school zone, as
defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (e).
The prohibition contained in this subdivision does not apply to
the discharge of a firearm to the extent that the conditions of
paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) are satisfied.
(e) As used in this section, the following definitions shall
apply:
(1) "School zone" means an area in, or on the grounds of, a public
or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1
to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds
of the public or private school.
 
Last edited:

xnetc9

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Orange County, CA
It might be more appropriate if there were a fund account set up with Jason Davis rather than a personal pay pal account. This way, those who contribute could be assured that the funds would be used for your attorney fees.

my thoughts exactly. contact davis about it. but it sounds like he is quite busy with a lot of cases on his plate at the moment.
 

Sons of Liberty

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Riverside, California, USA
just like to point out: you are allowed to uoc next to a school as long as you are on private property. this includes the supermarket and its parking lot. do not step onto the sidewalk. that is within school zone. hmm yes, you can be standing on the parkinglot with a gun while kids are walking on the sidewalk to/from school.

You need to be verrrry careful about places on private property inside a school zone that might be viewed as a public place. You might research Theseus' case. He was in a public place (laundry mat) that was private property. Activist prosecutors and judges will find you guilty of a school zone felony.
 

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
xnetc9... Sounds like you have some good standing there.

If Jason picks up your case and decides to progress (albeit, at expense) let us know. Some of us are willing to chip in a few bucks, maybe more to see that these types of LEO encounters cease.

Also, that security guard should be slapped. Hard. Falsely reporting a crime? Oh wait... PC 148.5:
(a) Every person who reports to any peace officer listed in Section 830.1 or 830.2, or subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, the Attorney General, or a deputy attorney general, or a district attorney, or a deputy district attorney that a felony or misdemeanor has been committed, knowing the report to be false, is guilty of a misdemeanor....
 

xnetc9

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Orange County, CA
xnetc9... Sounds like you have some good standing there.

If Jason picks up your case and decides to progress (albeit, at expense) let us know. Some of us are willing to chip in a few bucks, maybe more to see that these types of LEO encounters cease.

Also, that security guard should be slapped. Hard. Falsely reporting a crime? Oh wait... PC 148.5:

that's a whole different lawsuit. i suppose if i really wanted to, i can go get the PR for the call the security guard made and hear exactly what he said to the dispatcher and sue the store for false reporting. glad there are some people on here willing to finance a fight for our UOC rights. I almost thought people on this site were just really into starbuck coffee and eating at fine restaraunts.

Gotta spend money to buy your freedom. Davis isn't going to do it for free. the litigation letter SHOULD warn OCP about treating us UOC with respect and not always pull guns on us as part of an Echeck. Happen twice to me and don't want it to happen again.
01_Omni_Consumer_Products_OCP.jpg
 
Last edited:

xnetc9

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Orange County, CA
You need to be verrrry careful about places on private property inside a school zone that might be viewed as a public place. You might research Theseus' case. He was in a public place (laundry mat) that was private property. Activist prosecutors and judges will find you guilty of a school zone felony.

heard about that case. but the law is written there. i highlight it in red. in this stop, i was less than 200 feet away. an elementary school was right behind the store. they tried to charge me on the spot with that but they couldn't because I openly had to state the law to them. these OCP really have no clue about the law. they even tried to get me for having a loaded magazine, a loaded magazine next to my gun (they think it is illegal if it is attached to your holster). couldn't charge us with anything and they let us go at the end.

HOWEVER they almost charged me with high capacity magazines. it isn't illegal to possess. i happen to find my high cap magazine next to a dumpster.

1. i didn't know it was there.
2. i was on private property. of course, as soon as i left private property, i must put the gun back into a locked container before driving off the parking lot.
ocp.jpg


(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone
, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f).
(c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm
under any of the following circumstances:

(1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private
property
, if the place of residence, place of business, or private
property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the
firearm is otherwise lawful.
 
Last edited:

Ca Patriot

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,330
Location
, ,
Ummm........to be honest this all sounds a bit fishy to me.

If the police tried to bust you for violating 629 then why would you have to read the law to them ? Also, I would imagine that almost every police officer knows that a supermarket ISNT considered private property in California.

Why dont you just post the audio and video. Is there a reason why you arent ?
 

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
Also, I would imagine that almost every police officer knows that a supermarket ISNT considered private property in California.

Being a "Public Place" doesn't make it not "Private Property" - for most businesses, they are both at the same time.
 

xnetc9

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Orange County, CA
Ummm........to be honest this all sounds a bit fishy to me.

If the police tried to bust you for violating 629 then why would you have to read the law to them ? Also, I would imagine that almost every police officer knows that a supermarket ISNT considered private property in California.

Why dont you just post the audio and video. Is there a reason why you arent ?

the police doesn't really know the full law. how many police officer sit down and read/study? i'm sure most of them are out pumping iron or at the shooting range. the supermarket, mall, stores are a private property. public parks, public street/roads are considered public zones that applies to school zones. the police even said so in regards to being banished from their grounds.

i don't know where to host my audio files. i was hoping this forum had file hosting. point me in a direction where i can just upload an audio file and have it be able to serve without too much registration.
 
Last edited:

xnetc9

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Orange County, CA
Being a "Public Place" doesn't make it not "Private Property" - for most businesses, they are both at the same time.

yep. businesses are both. they are considered public, but they have the right to kick you off their property, making it a private property.
 

Sons of Liberty

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Riverside, California, USA
heard about that case. but the law is written there.

I think you're position is right. In People v. Tapia, the Court of Appeals gives some excellent discussion concern the meaning of private property in PC 626.9. The appellate court discusses:

The difficulty with the trial court’s application of these principles to the instant case is that, unlike the statutes at issue in the aforementioned authorities, section 626.9 does not use the terms “public place” or “public area.” To the contrary, section 626.9 creates an exception for firearm possession on “private property.” “When the Legislature uses materially different language in statutory provisions addressing the same subject or related subjects, the normal inference is that the Legislature intended a difference in meaning...That the Legislature did not necessarily intend section 626.9 to be governed by the “public place” analysis is also suggested by the exception for places of business. It is readily apparent that a great many places of business are open to common use and enjoyment by members of the public. Nonetheless, section 626.9’s exception expressly encompasses places of business.
So why did the judge and prosecutor ignore this decision of the appellate court in Theseus' case???

Just sayin', give careful thought and weigh the risks and benefits in a school zone.
 

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
So why did the judge and prosecutor ignore this decision of the appellate court in Theseus' case???

Just sayin', give careful thought and weigh the risks and benefits in a school zone.
Two words: Activist Judge.

The deck was stacked against Theseus in his initial case -- everyone was on-board to get a conviction. Even if it meant ignoring the letter of/spirit of the law.
 
Top