To help clear up some California confusion on Open Carry..

Just to clear a few things up for all of you out-of-staters

Unloaded Open Carry is the only legal means of carry we have in incorporated areas, that does not require permission from the governments.

In rural areas, Loaded Carry is legal where discharge of a a firearm is legal. We can also carry loaded and/or concealed while camping (but not in National Parks)

Carry of unlimited amounts of ammunition is allowed, ready in magazines or speedloaders on the belt (or even loose in the pocket if you carry a revolver. Court findings make pocketing a magazine very iffy, as that could be held as concealing a weapon). An empty magazine in the well is also legal (and is the preferred method of carry in public). I carry 4, ten round magazines in a dual stacked pouch when I carry.

We do not have "stop and ID" in California (my understanding is no state does), and you are NOT required to give any personal information to an LEO if you are not under arrest or being investigated. The "E" check is considered an illegal detainment by citizens, but the courts have not ruled specifically on it. The LEO is ALLOWED to perform the check, but he is NOT REQUIRED to do so. Many towns and cities have been enlightened, and no longer hassle UO Carriers.

Big caveat is carrying within the 1000' so-called "Gun Free School Zone", when it must be unloaded and in a locked case (no description of a "case" is mentioned in the law. We use most anything that can accept a padlock). Same restrictions involve carrying concealable firearms in a car. They can be on the seat or dash or in your lap if they are unloaded, but must be case locked in the GFSZ. Many of us simply use a small briefcase or such on the seat, and already know where the local K-12 schools are, lock them up while traversing, then pull them back out on the other side (there is no requirement to know the GFSZ's in a strange town or area, and ignorance of these is a safeguard added into the law).

We have a lot of stupid gun laws here, but nearly all are written so poorly that getting around them legally is fairly easy.

I have been told by LEO's that carrying a gun is dangerous...I reply: "That's the point".

well,,,,

I have studied california gun law for about two years, so I know what youre talking about..
I dont know why you are writing in washington to tell us some of the ins and out of your laws.

i take exception to these statements though,,,
(there is no requirement to know the GFSZ's in a strange town or area, and ignorance of these is a safeguard added into the law).
We have a lot of stupid gun laws here, but nearly all are written so poorly that getting around them legally is fairly easy.

theseus got screwed, royally when he tried to plead ignorance of the high school just down the street from the laundry mat he was in..
the requirement in 626.9, to know or reasonably should know, is so crappy, as to be unusable, as proven.

he also got screwed, when his true and correct claim that he was on private property, and exempt from 626.9 was disallowed by the court!
california has a long tradition of changing to meaning of what is and what isnt private property as proven.

im pulling for california to get with the program and hope the latest assault to prohibit open carry, of even unloaded guns fails.
i cant understand how a state can flaunt the 2nd amendment in light of heller and mcdonald.
even wisconsin went shall issue. now only Illinois absolutely refuses to issue a permit, though i know lots of other states
are for all practical people, NO issue, but were getting closer..

Great post, and a stern warning to those in free states. Liberal Californians are helping to ruin WA, OR, CO, etc in their exodus from that sinking ship of a state.

Army said:

I have been told by LEO's that carrying a gun is dangerous

Click to expand...

I would say "Then leave YOUR gun at home officer. After all, your job is not really that dangerous."

Army said:

Big caveat is carrying within the 1000' so-called "Gun Free School Zone", when it must be unloaded and in a locked case (no description of a "case" is mentioned in the law. We use most anything that can accept a padlock).

Click to expand...

Does the law specify how the case itself must be carried or not carried? Say, for example, locked case in a locked trunk? Or can you carry it in your hand, or in a backpack? Or perhaps on a belt?

I find myself wondering if you could put a pistol in a small, hard-sided case, padlock it shut, and then wear the case on your belt just about where the holster would go? If the case is made of clear ballistic polycarbonate, it wouldn't even be concealed at that point, right?

Army said:

I have been told by LEO's that carrying a gun is dangerous...I reply: "That's the point".

Click to expand...

If carrying a gun increases your danger/risk, why do police go around armed?

Is California still part of the US? I figured it was part of Mexico by now. I know Obama has all but started to concede land for Mexico in Arizona. I'm surprized the lower half of of California to Texas hasnt already been given away. The US has been invaded.

View attachment 6539

There is no description of what constitutes a "case" in the law. As long as it can be locked with its own secure lock, or any type of keyed or combo lock, then it can be moved about in any manner that you wish. While no-one has challenged LEO's with a see-through case, there is nothing saying you cannot do so.

I understand about Theseus, but he did have an activist Judge that did not allow all relevant evidence (including the actual words of the law) into the courtroom. Further appeals to higher courts should prevail, as the law is plainly written. I myself used that particular passage while in San Diego, (300 miles south of me) to prove to a Sheriff Deputy that I was not breaking the law while armed.

1245A Defender; A thread was started here about Calli carry laws, but the Mods moved it to the Calli Forum before too many of you northern folk got to read it. I thought I could help with a little understanding.

A clear, locked case AS a holster would be a novel approach, I think. It would not be concealed, it would appear to meet the California GFSZ requirement, and would also cover retention issues, since it's hard to grab the gun with the lock in the way. If the case conformed to the shape of the gun, it could even be used as a holster when not locked. If you put a fast-acting bio-metric lock on the case, you might even be able to draw it fairly quickly. A matching clear case for ammo on the other side, and you're set to carry in California even in a school zone...

But I bet the cops down there would pop gaskets...

Difdi said:

A clear, locked case AS a holster would be a novel approach, I think. It would not be concealed, it would appear to meet the California GFSZ requirement, and would also cover retention issues, since it's hard to grab the gun with the lock in the way. If the case conformed to the shape of the gun, it could even be used as a holster when not locked. If you put a fast-acting bio-metric lock on the case, you might even be able to draw it fairly quickly. A matching clear case for ammo on the other side, and you're set to carry in California even in a school zone...

But I bet the cops down there would pop gaskets...

Click to expand...

Don't know about California but in WA, when a case is required, the lawmakers included the word "opaque".

RCW 9.41.060

(9) Any person while carrying a pistol unloaded and in a closed opaque case or secure wrapper;

That pretty much puts that idea to rest here. BTW, isn't this the Washington section?

I care about CA because? Thread lock please!

Thanks for the info, I travel to Kalifornia about 4 times per year and appriciate the updates/info. When and if I no longer have my client I will avoid Kalifornia at all costs.