Please apply for a CCW prior to open carrying

[Coded-Dude]

LOC without permit would be ideal, but I think because of the state with which we reside, we may get something along the lines of shall issue for LOC or LCC(if i still live here when that happens).

Our politicians would never agree to allowing any law abiding citizen to carry a loaded gun without a permit.....thats just crazy, criminals will be able to do it also(think of the children)! :banghead:

 

[Decoligny]

That isn't the point at all.

If you properly apply for a ccw permit, do you feel that it will actually get approved?


Once you respond to that question honestly, we can discuss WHY it matters, and WHY it isn't a suggestion that you request permission.

What about those of us who live in pretty much "Shall Issue" counties?

If the purpose of getting a "denial letter" is to strengthen our legal standing if harrassed for Open Carry, exactly how does that work if you have been issues a persmission slip?

Wouldn't they then just push the "You have a CCW, and you should be carrying it concealed, not Open Carrying" argument?

The RIGHT to keep and bear arms ceases to be a RIGHT when it is regulated, taxed, and licensed, it devolves into a privilege.

I could have a CCW in about 4 month if I choose to humbly bow to the powers that be, make my sacrificial offering at the temple of Authoritarianism, and choose to be subservient to the Government as my "Lord and Master" and the source of my "priviliges".

 

[wrightme]

Are there actually any of those in CA? Is it actually "shall issue" in operation, or is it "shall issue" in name only? As a NV resident, I can assure you that true "shall issue" means that there isn't any denial unless specified by reason that is expressly stated in statute.

What about those of us who live in pretty much "Shall Issue" counties?
If the purpose of getting a "denial letter" is to strengthen our legal standing if harrassed for Open Carry, exactly how does that work if you have been issues a persmission slip?

Wouldn't they then just push the "You have a CCW, and you should be carrying it concealed, not Open Carrying" argument?

The RIGHT to keep and bear arms ceases to be a RIGHT when it is regulated, taxed, and licensed, it devolves into a privilege.

I could have a CCW in about 4 month if I choose to humbly bow to the powers that be, make my sacrificial offering at the temple of Authoritarianism, and choose to be subservient to the Government as my "Lord and Master" and the source of my "priviliges".

 

[kwikrnu]

The RIGHT to keep and bear arms ceases to be a RIGHT when it is regulated, taxed, and licensed, it devolves into a privilege.

A privilege which may be suspended or revoked by the issuing authority at any time.

 

[Decoligny]

Are there actually any of those in CA? Is it actually "shall issue" in operation, or is it "shall issue" in name only? As a NV resident, I can assure you that true "shall issue" means that there isn't any denial unless specified by reason that is expressly stated in statute.

Kern County is as close to "shall issue" as your are going to find in California. From what I understand, the Sheriff actually accepts "Self-defense" as Good Cause. So, if you apply, pass the background check and the CCW course, you are pretty much going to get a permit issued.

 

[inbox485]

There are a number of counties where good cause is you want to be able to defend yourself, and good moral character is you can legally own a firearm. So in that sense it is "shall issue". All the same it is still plantation politics applying. Yesah mastah. That be miiiighty kind ah you sirrr. Yooo no worry sir, ayes gettin in noo trouble.

 

[Gray Peterson]

What about those of us who live in pretty much "Shall Issue" counties?

If the purpose of getting a "denial letter" is to strengthen our legal standing if harrassed for Open Carry, exactly how does that work if you have been issues a persmission slip?

Wouldn't they then just push the "You have a CCW, and you should be carrying it concealed, not Open Carrying" argument?

No. Remember that a carry license exempts you from the GFSZA, much better than trying to get a permission slips from the school board.

The RIGHT to keep and bear arms ceases to be a RIGHT when it is regulated, taxed, and licensed, it devolves into a privilege.

I could have a CCW in about 4 month if I choose to humbly bow to the powers that be, make my sacrificial offering at the temple of Authoritarianism, and choose to be subservient to the Government as my "Lord and Master" and the source of my "priviliges".

I don't get where you get the licensing=subservience thing. There are plenty of other open carriers in other states, including may-issue states like Delaware, who open carry and have a concealed pistol license.

Kern County is as close to "shall issue" as your are going to find in California. From what I understand, the Sheriff actually accepts "Self-defense" as Good Cause. So, if you apply, pass the background check and the CCW course, you are pretty much going to get a permit issued.

That's actually not true. A poster on CalCCW.com reported that Kern has had some difficulties where a person had to appeal through two layers directly to the sheriff to get a license issued for self protection. There are plenty of counties in Northern California that issue for self defense/self protection. For example, Sutter County flat out says that self protection is OK. Sacramento is self defense as good cause, and we have plenty of good issuing counties who aren't causing problems. A bunch of them are not in statutory compliance with state law in terms of charging fees and charging everything up front.

The sheriff's will follow the law. Not "or else". Will.

 

[Gray Peterson]

There are a number of counties where good cause is you want to be able to defend yourself, and good moral character is you can legally own a firearm. So in that sense it is "shall issue". All the same it is still plantation politics applying. Yesah mastah. That be miiiighty kind ah you sirrr. Yooo no worry sir, ayes gettin in noo trouble.

Jar Jar Binks would be insulted. :lol:

That being said, what's with the disrespect towards open carriers who have carry licenses? For example, over 95 percent of the open carriers that live in Washington State and in Oregon have carry licenses. Every open carrier I know in Utah has a CFP (to carry loaded). Above 95 percent of the open carriers in Michigan have carry licenses for the same reason as Washington (vehicle carry), same with Alabama. Every legal open carrier in Minnesota, Indiana, Connecticut, and Georgia has a carry license because you can't carry there open or concealed without license.

Are you saying that the open carriers who acquire a license and continue to open carry are slaves?

 

[Coded-Dude]

the standard license for CA is a CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT(CCW). while you can obtain a LOC permit I believe it has far more restrictions(only issued in some counties, and only good in the county issued) someone correct me if i am wrong.

I do not believe that getting the standard CCW allows one to LOC.

LOC is the goal for me, but thats only because I want to carry two guns. LCC BUG and LOC PRIMARY

 

[Gray Peterson]

the standard license for CA is a CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT(CCW). while you can obtain a LOC permit I believe it has far more restrictions(only issued in some counties, and only good in the county issued) someone correct me if i am wrong.

I do not believe that getting the standard CCW allows one to LOC.

LOC is the goal for me, but thats only because I want to carry two guns. LCC BUG and LOC PRIMARY

Loaded and exposed licenses are by operation of California law only capable of being issued in counties with less than 200k population and only valid in county of issuance.

The license to carry concealed (That is the correct name, not CCW) exempts one from the GFSZA. A person with an LTCC can carry within 1000 foot of a school, either loaded concealed or unloaded open.

 

[Coded-Dude]

the front page of the DOJ application says: Standard Application for LICENSE to Carry a Concealed Weapon (CCW)

It also says CCW all over Placer counties website. I know its semantics, so no need to debate what it does say or should say.

Anywho, I didn't know that having the license exempted UOC within GFSZ. Is it at all restricted? i.e. do I have to be UOCing the gun(s) that got listed on the license? Does the license then allow LCC while also UOC?

 

[Gray Peterson]

the front page of the DOJ application says: Standard Application for LICENSE to Carry a Concealed Weapon (CCW)

It also says CCW all over Placer counties website. I know its semantics, so no need to debate what it does say or should say.

DOJ uses the wrong terms and on it's face, the application itself is unlawful. It will be challenged.

Anywho, I didn't know that having the license exempted UOC within GFSZ. Is it at all restricted? i.e. do I have to be UOCing the gun(s) that got listed on the license? Does the license then allow LCC while also UOC?

Only in Califiornia can a statute be convoluted:

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 subdivision (b), (d), (e),
or (h) of Section 12027.
(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.
(2) "Firearm" has the same meaning as that term is given in
Section 12001.
(3) "Locked container" has the same meaning as that term is given
in subdivision (c) of Section 12026.1.
(4) "Concealed firearm" has the same meaning as that term is given
in Sections 12025 and 12026.1.
(f) (1) Any person who violates subdivision (b) by possessing a
firearm in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school
providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive,
shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three,
or five years.
(2) Any person who violates subdivision (b) by possessing a
firearm within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public
or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1
to 12, inclusive, shall be punished as follows:
(A) By imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five
years, if any of the following circumstances apply:
(i) If the person previously has been convicted of any felony, or
of any crime made punishable by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
12000) of Title 2 of Part 4.
(ii) If the person is within a class of persons prohibited from
possessing or acquiring a firearm pursuant to Section 12021 or
12021.1 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and
Institutions Code.
(iii) If the firearm is any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person and the offense is
punished as a felony pursuant to Section 12025.
(B) By imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year or
by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years,
in all cases other than those specified in subparagraph (A).
(3) Any person who violates subdivision (d) shall be punished by
imprisonment in the state prison for three, five, or seven years.
(g) (1) Every person convicted under this section for a
misdemeanor violation of subdivision (b) who has been convicted
previously of a misdemeanor offense enumerated in Section 12001.6
shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than
three months, or if probation is granted or if the execution or
imposition of sentence is suspended, it shall be a condition thereof
that he or she be imprisoned in a county jail for not less than three
months.
(2) Every person convicted under this section of a felony
violation of subdivision (b) or (d) who has been convicted previously
of a misdemeanor offense enumerated in Section 12001.6, if probation
is granted or if the execution of sentence is suspended, it shall be
a condition thereof that he or she be imprisoned in a county jail
for not less than three months.
(3) Every person convicted under this section for a felony
violation of subdivision (b) or (d) who has been convicted previously
of any felony, or of any crime made punishable by Chapter 1
(commencing with Section 12000) of Title 2 of Part 4, if probation is
granted or if the execution or imposition of sentence is suspended,
it shall be a condition thereof that he or she be imprisoned in a
county jail for not less than three months.
(4) The court shall apply the three-month minimum sentence
specified in this subdivision, except in unusual cases where the
interests of justice would best be served by granting probation or
suspending the execution or imposition of sentence without the
minimum imprisonment required in this subdivision or by granting
probation or suspending the execution or imposition of sentence with
conditions other than those set forth in this subdivision, in which
case the court shall specify on the record and shall enter on the
minutes the circumstances indicating that the interests of justice
would best be served by this disposition.
(h) Notwithstanding Section 12026, any person who brings or
possesses a loaded firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or
buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research,
or administration by, a public or private university or college, that
are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it
is with the written permission of the university or college
president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college
authority, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for
two, three, or four years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a
university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary
entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are
prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.
(i) Notwithstanding Section 12026, any person who brings or
possesses a firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or buildings
owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or
administration by, a public or private university or college, that
are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it
is with the written permission of the university or college
president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college
authority, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for
one, two, or three years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a
university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary
entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are
prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.
(j) For purposes of this section, a firearm shall be deemed to be
loaded when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell, consisting of
a case that holds a charge of powder and a bullet or shot, in, or
attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited
to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the
firearm. A muzzle-loader firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when it
is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the
barrel or cylinder.
(k) This section does not require that notice be posted regarding
the proscribed conduct.
(l) This section does not apply to a duly appointed peace officer
as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of
Part 2, a full-time paid peace officer of another state or the
federal government who is carrying out official duties while in
California, any person summoned by any of these officers to assist in
making arrests or preserving the peace while he or she is actually
engaged in assisting the officer, a member of the military forces of
this state or of the United States who is engaged in the performance
of his or her duties, a person holding a valid license to carry the
firearm pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of
Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4, or an armored vehicle guard, engaged
in the performance of his or her duties, as defined in subdivision
(e) of Section 7521 of the Business and Professions Code.
(m) This section does not apply to a security guard authorized to
carry a loaded firearm pursuant to Section 12031.
This section does not apply to an existing shooting range at a
public or private school or university or college campus.
(o) This section does not apply to an honorably retired peace
officer authorized to carry a concealed or loaded firearm pursuant to
subdivision (a) or (i) of Section 12027 or paragraph (1) or (8) of
subdivision (b) of Section 12031.

Specifically:

a person holding a valid license to carry the firearm pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4.

The language of this statute is not structured like PC12025/6 (concealed carry ban) or PC12031, which states the following language:

PC12026, exemption to PC12025 (concealed carry ban):

(j) The carrying of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person by a person who is authorized to carry that weapon in a concealed manner pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050).

Loaded carry ban:

PC12031(6) The carrying of pistols, revolvers, or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person by persons who are authorized to carry those weapons pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4.

You can see the difference in language clearly.

 

[Coded-Dude]

DOJ uses the wrong terms and on it's face, the application itself is unlawful. It will be challenged.



Only in Califiornia can a statute be convoluted:

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 subdivision (b), (d), (e),
or (h) of Section 12027.
(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.
(2) "Firearm" has the same meaning as that term is given in
Section 12001.
(3) "Locked container" has the same meaning as that term is given
in subdivision (c) of Section 12026.1.
(4) "Concealed firearm" has the same meaning as that term is given
in Sections 12025 and 12026.1.
(f) (1) Any person who violates subdivision (b) by possessing a
firearm in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school
providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive,
shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three,
or five years.
(2) Any person who violates subdivision (b) by possessing a
firearm within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public
or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1
to 12, inclusive, shall be punished as follows:
(A) By imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five
years, if any of the following circumstances apply:
(i) If the person previously has been convicted of any felony, or
of any crime made punishable by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
12000) of Title 2 of Part 4.
(ii) If the person is within a class of persons prohibited from
possessing or acquiring a firearm pursuant to Section 12021 or
12021.1 of this code or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and
Institutions Code.
(iii) If the firearm is any pistol, revolver, or other firearm
capable of being concealed upon the person and the offense is
punished as a felony pursuant to Section 12025.
(B) By imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year or
by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years,
in all cases other than those specified in subparagraph (A).
(3) Any person who violates subdivision (d) shall be punished by
imprisonment in the state prison for three, five, or seven years.
(g) (1) Every person convicted under this section for a
misdemeanor violation of subdivision (b) who has been convicted
previously of a misdemeanor offense enumerated in Section 12001.6
shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than
three months, or if probation is granted or if the execution or
imposition of sentence is suspended, it shall be a condition thereof
that he or she be imprisoned in a county jail for not less than three
months.
(2) Every person convicted under this section of a felony
violation of subdivision (b) or (d) who has been convicted previously
of a misdemeanor offense enumerated in Section 12001.6, if probation
is granted or if the execution of sentence is suspended, it shall be
a condition thereof that he or she be imprisoned in a county jail
for not less than three months.
(3) Every person convicted under this section for a felony
violation of subdivision (b) or (d) who has been convicted previously
of any felony, or of any crime made punishable by Chapter 1
(commencing with Section 12000) of Title 2 of Part 4, if probation is
granted or if the execution or imposition of sentence is suspended,
it shall be a condition thereof that he or she be imprisoned in a
county jail for not less than three months.
(4) The court shall apply the three-month minimum sentence
specified in this subdivision, except in unusual cases where the
interests of justice would best be served by granting probation or
suspending the execution or imposition of sentence without the
minimum imprisonment required in this subdivision or by granting
probation or suspending the execution or imposition of sentence with
conditions other than those set forth in this subdivision, in which
case the court shall specify on the record and shall enter on the
minutes the circumstances indicating that the interests of justice
would best be served by this disposition.
(h) Notwithstanding Section 12026, any person who brings or
possesses a loaded firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or
buildings owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research,
or administration by, a public or private university or college, that
are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it
is with the written permission of the university or college
president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college
authority, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for
two, three, or four years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a
university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary
entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are
prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.
(i) Notwithstanding Section 12026, any person who brings or
possesses a firearm upon the grounds of a campus of, or buildings
owned or operated for student housing, teaching, research, or
administration by, a public or private university or college, that
are contiguous or are clearly marked university property, unless it
is with the written permission of the university or college
president, his or her designee, or equivalent university or college
authority, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for
one, two, or three years. Notwithstanding subdivision (k), a
university or college shall post a prominent notice at primary
entrances on noncontiguous property stating that firearms are
prohibited on that property pursuant to this subdivision.
(j) For purposes of this section, a firearm shall be deemed to be
loaded when there is an unexpended cartridge or shell, consisting of
a case that holds a charge of powder and a bullet or shot, in, or
attached in any manner to, the firearm, including, but not limited
to, in the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to the
firearm. A muzzle-loader firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when it
is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the
barrel or cylinder.
(k) This section does not require that notice be posted regarding
the proscribed conduct.
(l) This section does not apply to a duly appointed peace officer
as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of
Part 2, a full-time paid peace officer of another state or the
federal government who is carrying out official duties while in
California, any person summoned by any of these officers to assist in
making arrests or preserving the peace while he or she is actually
engaged in assisting the officer, a member of the military forces of
this state or of the United States who is engaged in the performance
of his or her duties, a person holding a valid license to carry the
firearm pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 12050) of
Chapter 1 of Title 2 of Part 4, or an armored vehicle guard, engaged
in the performance of his or her duties, as defined in subdivision
(e) of Section 7521 of the Business and Professions Code.
(m) This section does not apply to a security guard authorized to
carry a loaded firearm pursuant to Section 12031.
This section does not apply to an existing shooting range at a
public or private school or university or college campus.
(o) This section does not apply to an honorably retired peace
officer authorized to carry a concealed or loaded firearm pursuant to
subdivision (a) or (i) of Section 12027 or paragraph (1) or (8) of
subdivision (b) of Section 12031.

I'll get back to this on analysis later.

private property is even being challenged in some cases(i.e. parking lots)



(b) The possession or transportation of unloaded pistols,
revolvers, or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the
person as merchandise by a person who is engaged in the business of
manufacturing, importing, wholesaling, repairing, or dealing in
firearms and who is licensed to engage in that business or the
authorized representative or authorized agent of that person while
engaged in the lawful course of the business.

(d) The carrying of unloaded pistols, revolvers, or other firearms
capable of being concealed upon the person by duly authorized
military or civil organizations while parading, or the members
thereof when going to and from the places of meeting of their
respective organizations.

(e) Guards or messengers of common carriers, banks, and other
financial institutions while actually employed in and about the
shipment, transportation, or delivery of any money, treasure,
bullion, bonds, or other thing of value within this state.

(h) Transportation of unloaded firearms by a person operating a
licensed common carrier or an authorized agent or employee thereof
when transported in conformance with applicable federal law.



(c) As used in this section, "locked container" means a secure
container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, key lock,
combination lock, or similar locking device.



(a) A person is guilty of carrying a concealed firearm when
he or she does any of the following:
(1) Carries concealed within any vehicle which is under his or her
control or direction any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable
of being concealed upon the person.
(2) Carries concealed upon his or her person any pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.
(3) Causes to be carried concealed within any vehicle in which he
or she is an occupant any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable
of being concealed upon the person.


its hard to find anything with regards to specific guns not listed on the license while in GFSZ or uoc while lcc(with permit)

 

[Decoligny]

No. Remember that a carry license exempts you from the GFSZA, much better than trying to get a permission slips from the school board.

I don't get where you get the licensing=subservience thing. There are plenty of other open carriers in other states, including may-issue states like Delaware, who open carry and have a concealed pistol license.

A permission slip for one Government entity vs. a permission slip for another Government entity. One possibly attainable, the other almost completely unattainable. The fact that I first have to get permission in the first place is the crux of the matter. And that I have to pay a fee (tax) in order to exercise a fundamental right.


Licensing = Subservience. If you have to ask for permission to do something, then by definition the giver of said permission is in a position of power over the person needing the permission.

As far as "plenty of other open carriers...who have a concealed pistol license", that is good and fine, if it is their choice. In Texas for example, you can walk in, apply, pay your fees, and get your license. You are still paying to exercise a fundamental right. You still do not have the right to fully exercise a fundamental right without Government interference.

For those whose ONLY concern is being able to defend themselves, by all means, do whatever you have to. UOC, LOC where legal, get a CCW, or combine them as you see fit.

Some of us just don't want the Government mandating that we have to attend a class, get fingerprinted, allow our information to be accessible to the general public upon demand, and on top of that having to pay for the PRIVILEGE (which can be revoked at any time) of exercising our rights.

 

[Gray Peterson]

Changed my post, see above.

 

[Gray Peterson]

A permission slip for one Government entity vs. a permission slip for another Government entity. One possibly attainable, the other almost completely unattainable. The fact that I first have to get permission in the first place is the crux of the matter. And that I have to pay a fee (tax) in order to exercise a fundamental right.

No school superintendent will issue you that permission slip, and it's effectiveness is limited.

Licensing = Subservience. If you have to ask for permission to do something, then by definition the giver of said permission is in a position of power over the person needing the permission.

As far as "plenty of other open carriers...who have a concealed pistol license", that is good and fine, if it is their choice. In Texas for example, you can walk in, apply, pay your fees, and get your license. You are still paying to exercise a fundamental right. You still do not have the right to fully exercise a fundamental right without Government interference.

My understanding is that the only reason the folks in Texas hasn't sued yet is A) Because McDonald wasn't in effect yet and B) The Texas Legislature will likely legalize the practice without a required license. The federal courts should always be the last resort.

For those whose ONLY concern is being able to defend themselves, by all means, do whatever you have to. UOC, LOC where legal, get a CCW, or combine them as you see fit.

What's wrong with people carrying solely to defend themselves?

Some of us just don't want the Government mandating that we have to attend a class, get fingerprinted, allow our information to be accessible to the general public upon demand, and on top of that having to pay for the PRIVILEGE (which can be revoked at any time) of exercising our rights.

Nice words, but those words won't convince a federal judge to strike down a licensing requirement or fees, especially from person who is purely inconvenienced by licensing fees and refuses to pay it on general principle, versus someone who is truly indigent (survives solely on social security disability). You want to eliminate the licensing, you need to eliminate the ability to collect fees first to where it becomes unaffordable to the government to require a license in order to carry. Step, step, step.

First we need "good cause" to be self defense and good cause to be "not otherwise prohibited by law, within the current structure of facts that apply to carrying a functional firearm in California. That is the point of both Richards and Peruta.

Second, gun owner groups can find someone who is poor and can't afford to spend the $300 total for the initial license and they sue to eliminate the fees as it effects their ability to exercise a fundamental right (like Rhonda Ezell of Ezell v. Chicago or Guy Montague Doe of Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority). Once those licensing fees are eliminated, do you think the state government will continue requiring a carry license for a loaded firearm? They simply will not.

Purity of principle is well and nice, but the fact that you would go without any form of functional firearm protection and refuse to even apply if it was available to you, I don't know what to say. The Tueller principle is why I prefer to carry loaded, regardless of form. I'm sort of adverse to having over half a dozen stab wounds while I desperately try to load my UOC'd handgun.....

 

[Gundude]

Second, gun owner groups can find someone who is poor and can't afford to spend the $300 total for the initial license and they sue to eliminate the fees as it effects their ability to exercise a fundamental right (like Rhonda Ezell of Ezell v. Chicago or Guy Montague Doe of Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority)

I would step up for this lawsuit. I live on SS.

 

[Gray Peterson]

I would step up for this lawsuit. I live on SS.

Remember, we need to win Richards and Peruta first, and exhaust the appeals upwards. Minimum 12 months.

 

[pullnshoot25]

some people would rather crap on others for personal choices rather than respect a common interest.

wanna race?

Like I have said earlier, there is method to the madness and both Gene and Gray are not people to give others the runaround and there is a specific reason why they have asked what they have asked here.

 

[bigtoe416]

A person with an LTCC can carry within 1000 foot of a school, either loaded concealed or unloaded open.

This is true, but only if you have the firearm you are carrying listed on your license. The law reads, "a person holding a valid license to carry the firearm pursuant to [12050]". Picky picky picky....

Edit: Drats...already said! Move along, nothing to see here.