Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: San Fernando Valley PD gets dinged 44K

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    San Fernando Valley PD gets dinged 44K

    Story here:

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=388412

    Why is this significant for the UOC movement (or gun rights in general) you ask? Look no further than this training memo. Jason Davis pretty much served SFVPD's collective posteriors on a silver platter and the result is THE BEST memo TO DATE on most of the arcane, asinine and lame gun laws here in KA.

    http://hoffmang.com/firearms/diaz/Di...dAgreement.pdf

    Self-tooting of the horn here: I have a personal connection to this case because the plaintiff (Diaz) called me to help him gather evidence for this case by having a small OC gathering and recording the entire occasion. Mulay El Raisuli was my primary wingman on this venture and just by chance Mike Hunt and his cool wife were able to join me and participate as well. Mike Hunt was instrumental in gathering the video to go with my audio.

    Good work to all those involved! I am glad to see that Mr. Diaz persevered and FINALLY got some justice. Kudos to Jason Davis as well!

    CARRY ON!

    -N8

  2. #2
    Activist Member N605TW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    118
    On page 11 of 18 the .pdf talks about how a loaded firearm is defined in California. It cites PC12031(g) and People v Clark. I'm confused on they are abiding by People v Clark witch would allow you to have a loaded magazine without a cartridge in the chamber or if they are abiding by Pc12031 that states you can't have a cartridge "...attached in any manner" Anyone have any thoughts?

  3. #3
    Regular Member Mike Hunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Pedro, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    293
    Woohoo! Nice to see a win for gunnies once in a while.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, California, USA
    Posts
    486

    Bravo!

    Thanks to Jason Davis and Calguns!!!!

    I am going to deliver a copy of the settlement to my Police Chief for his review.

    I can't believe that San Fernando allowed this process to go on for this long. They acted illegally and blatantly so.

    They arrested a federal LEO for having an openly carried gun case (I know, firearm inside)?

    Think about my last sentence. Diaz is a LEO. He has a clearly identifiable gun case on the back seat. Where was officer discretion in this case (forget about the finer points of law or civil rights)?

    A Sherriff Mack type LEO would have admonished Diaz to carry concealed, UOC, or properly lock the case. Police intervention over, everybody goes home with no jail time or civil rights lawsuits.

    Thanks again CalGuns and Jason Davis.

    This case is an example of a politician police chief who does not differentiate between progressive dogma and "clearly established civil rights and the Penal Code".

    Writing as a USCG licensed master mariner, the Coast Guard is a true law enforcement agency. You would not believe the authority they have on the high seas. Civil rights don't apply out there.

    markm

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, California, USA
    Posts
    486

    Listen to BigToe!

    Quote Originally Posted by N605TW View Post
    On page 11 of 18 the .pdf talks about how a loaded firearm is defined in California. It cites PC12031(g) and People v Clark. I'm confused on they are abiding by People v Clark witch would allow you to have a loaded magazine without a cartridge in the chamber or if they are abiding by Pc12031 that states you can't have a cartridge "...attached in any manner" Anyone have any thoughts?
    Bigtoe has admonished UOCers to read court rulings. Court rulings are interpretations of law based on actual circumstances.

    Because of case law, ammo is considered in a position to be fired if a round is capable of being jacked into the chamber. My hunting rifle has a "round in a position to fire" whenever I have ammo in the magazine, even if the chamber is empty. This is case law.

    Bullets taped to the gunstock cannot be jacked into the chamber by operating a bolt or slide.

    markm

  6. #6
    Regular Member DooFster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Nellis AFB, Nevada
    Posts
    445
    If I was to pass this PDF to LEO's in this area, will they accept it, or would they just say something like "...but that's for San Fernando PD..." and then send me packing?
    IT is better to have a gun on you and NOT need it, than to need a gun and NOT have it on you...

  7. #7
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979
    Small point of clarification; there is no "San Fernando Valley PD" - Simply "San Fernando PD" Most of the San Fernando Valley is actually Los Angeles PD. The city of San Fernando is only about 2 to 3 square miles in size.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Orange County
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by mjones View Post
    Small point of clarification; there is no "San Fernando Valley PD" - Simply "San Fernando PD" Most of the San Fernando Valley is actually Los Angeles PD. The city of San Fernando is only about 2 to 3 square miles in size.
    ]

    Correct, it is just for the City of San Fernando: http://www.ci.san-fernando.ca.us/cit...ce/index.shtml

    Thanks Pullnshoot25! The goal was to provide a substantial education memo so that these things never happen again - to anyone.
    Last edited by Jason Davis; 01-25-2011 at 05:00 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member DooFster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Nellis AFB, Nevada
    Posts
    445
    My bad - lol - I was thinking of SFPD. Basically, would it cause a big deal if I was to show this to my local PD?
    IT is better to have a gun on you and NOT need it, than to need a gun and NOT have it on you...

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by DooFster View Post
    My bad - lol - I was thinking of SFPD. Basically, would it cause a big deal if I was to show this to my local PD?
    I can't imagine it would. What are they going to do, arrest you for giving information?

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710
    Sweet. I hadn't noticed the link to the settlement and training document in the CalGuns thread. I'll link to in the Read This First thread. Thanks pullnshoot25!

  12. #12
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Davis View Post
    ]

    Correct, it is just for the City of San Fernando: http://www.ci.san-fernando.ca.us/cit...ce/index.shtml

    Thanks Pullnshoot25! The goal was to provide a substantial education memo so that these things never happen again - to anyone.
    Welcome to the board Jason. Pleased to see you logged in.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  13. #13
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Davis View Post
    ]

    Correct, it is just for the City of San Fernando: http://www.ci.san-fernando.ca.us/cit...ce/index.shtml

    Thanks Pullnshoot25! The goal was to provide a substantial education memo so that these things never happen again - to anyone.
    I see it's been posted on officer.com.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    I see it's been posted on officer.com.
    Link?

    ETA: Found it

    http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...31#post2634831
    Last edited by pullnshoot25; 01-25-2011 at 11:09 PM.

  15. #15
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638
    Nicely done!

    Here's an article link:

    http://www.examiner.com/county-polit...#ixzz1ByWlkGC0
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

Posting Permissions

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