CA_Libertarian
State Researcher
imported post
dirtykoala wrote:
To be clear, this is the current law of the land in CA only, and only until it is challenged properly. 12031(e) is obviously considered a "detention" under Terry and its progeny. It is a seizure of the person any time you're not free to go, even if just for 1 minute.
The "examination" is also obviously a "search" under Terry and its progeny. I think it's also abundantly clear and obvious that such a search is an unreasonable one when viewed in light of the US Supreme Court's opinions.
The CA Supreme Court erred in it's interpretation of 12031(e), and the appelant's counsel did a poor job, IMO, at presenting a thorough argument against 12031(e).
FWIW, I think this case lends validity to CGF's fears about open carry at this time. Without proper representation, it's easy to create bad case law that will take decades to fix. 12031(e) should have been ruled unconstitutional, and we'd not be worried about "e" checks at all. This means LE wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to investigatory stops.
In essence, some incompetant attorney can screw the pooch for all of us.
This is why I'm abiding by the stand-down (for the most part).
dirtykoala wrote:
...12031 (e) is not a detainment, it is only to be used for inspection of the weapon to determine of detainment is reasonable. (i.e. loaded magazine in mag well)...
To be clear, this is the current law of the land in CA only, and only until it is challenged properly. 12031(e) is obviously considered a "detention" under Terry and its progeny. It is a seizure of the person any time you're not free to go, even if just for 1 minute.
The "examination" is also obviously a "search" under Terry and its progeny. I think it's also abundantly clear and obvious that such a search is an unreasonable one when viewed in light of the US Supreme Court's opinions.
The CA Supreme Court erred in it's interpretation of 12031(e), and the appelant's counsel did a poor job, IMO, at presenting a thorough argument against 12031(e).
FWIW, I think this case lends validity to CGF's fears about open carry at this time. Without proper representation, it's easy to create bad case law that will take decades to fix. 12031(e) should have been ruled unconstitutional, and we'd not be worried about "e" checks at all. This means LE wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to investigatory stops.
In essence, some incompetant attorney can screw the pooch for all of us.
This is why I'm abiding by the stand-down (for the most part).