transporting a handgun into Cal?

[lylejb]

Does anyone know what the rules / laws are regarding transporting a handgun into California?

Any Cal LEO's here?

I'm an Oregon resident that will be having to take an unexpected trip to Cal and would be more comfortable with some self defense tools handy.

I'm not worried about CCW, I'm thinking more about "what if the car breaks down in the middle of nowhere"

This trip would be a couple of days, by car.

Thanks

[WILCO]

Check out this website:http://www.allstays.com/Features/california-gun-laws-travel-guide/

California Gun Laws and Travel Guide

California is not gun friendly. The just traveling through concept doesn’t work too well in California, because if you are going to another state, you don’t have to go into California at all. AZ, NV and OR all are easily and directly accessible without going through California. If you are traveling from state to state and carrying, you need to know the situation in each state you are entering or you could get into trouble. For certain states or if you have any doubt at all, keeping moving through the state (reference the McClure-Volkmer Act to only stop for gas and emergencies) towards your final destination state. Your destination state must have acceptable laws for your stay. We make some generalities with our color map here for ease of use so you should always look up the current details of the laws. Handgun laws are where it usually varies the most. This is a controversial issue but which ever side you are on, it is better to have informed people out there. You can also download an easy to print version with all states and details.

[mike in co]

just remember 10 rd max

[sagacious]

Fortunately, 10rnd mag only applies to buying a pistol, not transportation. Transportation is OK. The quote below covers what you need to know, based on the question as posed.

Go to the source, the CA Attorney General's page, and get your info there:
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/travel.php

"California Penal Code section 12025 does not prevent a citizen of the United States over 18 years of age who is not lawfully prohibited from firearm possession, and who resides or is temporarily in California, from transporting by motor vehicle any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person provided the firearm is unloaded and stored in a locked container."

Have a safe trip. :drinks:

[sargenv]

Generally, handgun locked in a container out of reach of the driver and the container out of view of the LEO is the way to go. If they can articulate that the container you are carrying contains a firearm (range bag with CR Speed, Dillon, etc), they can initiate a search to make certain that said firearm is unloaded.. kind of like CHP pulling you over to make sure all smog controls are in use and you are not driving a "modified" vehicle by California standards (if the car is registered in Cali that is). If the LEO asks if there is anything illegal in the vehicle, the best thing to do is to say nothing. You don't HAVE to answer any questions. Let em write you up and on your way.. however, doing the speed limit and driving defensively is your best bet. Don't stand out and you will likely not attract attention.

There is a lot of FUD (Fear, uncertainty, disinformation) about how ammo "must" be stored.. the law doesn't care about loaded magazines being in the same container or not, or stored separate or not, but you may get hassled by LEO that is unsure or just wants to mess with you. Giving an example.. I have a 12 gauge Browning Gold that I mounted a side saddle to (One of those Blackhawk Velcro types) that allows me to attach 8 rounds to it. The gun has to physically have a round in the chamber to be considered loaded. There are some overzealous types that would deem my gun "loaded" just by having ammo attached to the side saddle, but nowhere in the actual law does it describe this as "loaded". A buddy of mine pointed that out and I simply said, the law doesn't say that.

Mags are restricted, for the sake of argument to 10 rounders.. but there are plenty of guns here that have standard cap magazines that were made pre-2000, so it is really up to the state to tell me that I didn't have them before then, but in the case of someone from out of state, if they wanted to be jerks about it, they could say you are "importing". If you break up your magazines for transport, they are "parts kits" and they would have nothing to tag you on.

It's all convoluted and stupid and we are trying to get them overturned, but it's a long slow process. My advice would be to bring a Revolver.. then all this worry about laws is simplified. You can also check out the various stickies on the calguns website (if I overstepped myself here, sorry) that describe ways to keep yourself within the law. There are a few areas of California that are desolate that I'd feel better about having a gun with me and the more rural areas are a lot like being in other more gun friendly states.. it's just that the urban areas are like a lot of big cities elsewhere in that is where the sheeple live.. and "oh no, he has a gun!" is the mentality.

I hope you have an uneventful trip through the state.

[lylejb]

Thanks to all that replied.

In my case (a 1911) the 10 round mag rule wasn't a problem

I went to the link to the AG's, and from there found

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf

I was looking for the defination of "unloaded". I found


A firearm is deemed loaded when there is a live cartridge or shell in, or attached in any manner to,
the firearm, including, but not limited to, the firing chamber, magazine, or clip thereof attached to
the firearm. A muzzle-loading firearm is deemed loaded when it is capped or primed and has a
powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinder. (Penal Code § 12031(g).)

from that, I think a loaded magazine, in the gun case, but not in the pistol would be unloaded.

I also think if a cop was having a bad day, your side saddle ammo could spin him right up.

Thank you again for the info.

[mike in co]

Fortunately, 10rnd mag only applies to buying a pistol, not transportation. Transportation is OK. The quote below covers what you need to know, based on the question as posed.

Go to the source, the CA Attorney General's page, and get your info there:
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/travel.php

"California Penal Code section 12025 does not prevent a citizen of the United States over 18 years of age who is not lawfully prohibited from firearm possession, and who resides or is temporarily in California, from transporting by motor vehicle any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person provided the firearm is unloaded and stored in a locked container."

Have a safe trip. :drinks:


read that again...no where does it say you are exemptfrom ca's 10 rd mag limits......

[Duckiller]

The 10 round mag rule applies to new guns. I have pistols that have greater than 10 round mags that I purchased prior to current law going into effect. They are LEGAL. Lyle has a 1911 so mag capacity is not a problem. The cited section does not refer to magazine capacity.

[Bill*]

read that again...no where does it say you are exemptfrom ca's 10 rd mag limits......

I think "any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed" does

[sagacious]

read that again...no where does it say you are exemptfrom ca's 10 rd mag limits......
Mike in co,
I don't want to get into a scuffle, but I live in CA. Pre-ban is OK for transportation. You may not have looked far enough on the CA AG's page. The info you suggest is not there is easily accessable on the faq page. It's also in PC Section 12020 (b)(19-29) if you wish to look it up.

If you want to sell, or transfer ownership of a firearm or high-cap mag in CA in any way, the mags are subject to the 10-round law. Since transportation does not entail a transfer of ownership, the 10-round mag limit does not apply.

Good shooting. :drinks:

[mike in co]

Mike in co,
I don't want to get into a scuffle, but I live in CA. Pre-ban is OK for transportation. You may not have looked far enough on the CA AG's page. The info you suggest is not there is easily accessable on the faq page. It's also in PC Section 12020 (b)(19-29) if you wish to look it up.

If you want to sell, or transfer ownership of a firearm or high-cap mag in CA in any way, the mags are subject to the 10-round law. Since transportation does not entail a transfer of ownership, the 10-round mag limit does not apply.

Good shooting. :drinks:


born and raised in california..there when the law took affect. moved out!


driving a car into the state with a mag greater than 10 rounds leaves you open to the willy ways of any officer you run into.

i will not leave my freedom up to someones inturpetation of "facts" and "laws".....

notice the typical "legal" definition of a loaded gun has nothing to do with the facts.......
a loaded gun will fire with the safety off and the trigger pulled...but if no round in your chamber, but if it has a loaded mag...its "loaded" it won't fire, but your butt is in jail.....


don't trust the "law" to keep your guns in your posession, nor your butt on the street.

laws designed to make criminals of you and me..but not designed to put real criminals in jail.


mike in co

[sagacious]

I hear ya. You're stating your personal opinion and beliefs, which is fine as long as you don't try to use it to correct me. I'm simply quoting the AG page. If someone fervently believes the AG is mistaken about CA law, and they instead are the authority, then they are more than welcome to take their grievance to Jerry Brown himself.

Those with a cause to be concerned are advised to do their own homework and leave anecdotes and opinion where they belong-- in the round file.

[chboats]

The best bet is to not get pulled over!! If they pull you over for say speeding and the gun is out of sight and not accessible from the passenger compartment you will be OK, they will not ask unless you give them a reason. The biggest problem is if you do get pulled over and the officer finds out that you do have a gun it could be confiscated. Most officers don't know what the law is and when in dought confiscate.

here is the phone number for the Calif Dept of Justice. 916 263 4887 Give them a call. I have called them a couple of times and they were easy to get answers from. You may have to leave a message and have them call you back and they will return your call. They don't need to know who you are if you don't want to give them you correct name.

Carl

[mike in co]

I hear ya. You're stating your personal opinion and beliefs, which is fine as long as you don't try to use it to correct me. I'm simply quoting the AG page. If someone fervently believes the AG is mistaken about CA law, and they instead are the authority, then they are more than welcome to take their grievance to Jerry Brown himself.

Those with a cause to be concerned are advised to do their own homework and leave anecdotes and opinion where they belong-- in the round file.

you are still ignoring your own quote.
nowhere does it mention the mag limit..it only says a gun is legal...

[wistlepig1]

Very timely info for me. The wife and I were planning on going over to Death Valley from Nv. while on vacation from Colorado. Yes I have a CCW but know that NV and Calif don't honor it. I don't like the idea of car travel without a little "something" , now I have to deside on my 5 shot 357 or SW 4556. I think the 4556 might be the best choise, clips are faster to go from unloaded (to meet their ******* rules), to self Defense. The remoteness of DeathValley almost demands "something" for an old man and his wife traveling a lone.

Thanks for the Info

[sagacious]

you are still ignoring your own quote.
nowhere does it mention the mag limit..it only says a gun is legal...

Nowhere did the original poster ask about mag limits, and to add to that you want me to do your homework. Yer goofy bro! :veryconfu

[lylejb]

I also read on the AG's site about it having to be locked in a case / the trunk and unloaded.

I was mostly worried about " what if" car trouble, flat tire ect. It's looking like the trip down may have to be at night.

I guess the tools would have to come out of the trunk with the spare tire.

[Beekeeper]

Having been stoped and checked several times I know what the LEO on the job wants.
He wants the gun in a compartment away from the driver and the compartment locked.
He wants the ammo (clip or otherwise in a different compartment than the weapon also locked up.
I carried a .22 revolver for years when I was beekeeping as a snake gun.
Every time I entered California I removed the cylinder and put it in my tool box and the revolver in the glove box and locked it.
Would take them out and wear them while working and put them away before traveling.
Had numerous CHP stop me ( they hate bees traveling down the road during the day) and never had a problem with them about the gun.


Jim

[462]

As a Californian, my advise would be to store the unloaded gun in a locked container in the trunk (or bed-mounted tool box, if travelling in a truck), and the ammo somewhere in the passenger compartment.

California's gun laws are written by lawyers and are purposely confusing at best, and relying on yourself or a cop to properly understand them is an iffy proposition.

My understanding is that if an unloaded gun and its ammo are in your immediate possession, the gun is considered to be loaded. In other words, a gun in one pocket and the ammo in another means the gun is loaded. An unloaded gun on the back seat, in an unlocked suitcase, and the ammo in the glove box is a loaded gun. If wrong, I'll gladly stand corrected.

[chboats]

If you want to know what the correct answer is call the Calif Dept of Justice. 916 263 4887. They are the ones that the LEOs call for the answers.

Carl

[mike in co]

If you want to know what the correct answer is call the Calif Dept of Justice. 916 263 4887. They are the ones that the LEOs call for the answers.

Carl




yes and then call every cop in the state and see if they think the same .....



you are expecting way too much......

the printed law and enforcement often do not match....

i use to travel in a vw camper......no locked compartments, not compartment outside the cabin......any gun i had with me was loaded according to the law.

mike in co

[ammohead]

If you are driving south on 395 there is no way to pass through Coleville (10 miles past NV state line) without driving through a school zone. CA law says you can't have a gun in a school zone. Never heard of this particular law being enforced in this manner in Coleville and can't imagine it would ever happen, but the law is there. Shows how silly and unthought out some gun control laws are.

ammohead

I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[smallshot13]

In my opinion, both LEO and AG will give you a biased opinion, designed to be as vague as possible. LEO will provide personal opinion, based on maximum officer safety, ie. no weapons at all. CalGuns, however, will give you the best, clearest, most unbiased information possible. Here is a link to their Wiki on the definition of loaded. http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California You will see that the AG's information leaves out a very important court case, People vs. Clark, which clarifies that:


"Under the commonly understood
meaning of the term "loaded," a firearm is"loaded" when a shell
or cartridge has been placed into a position from which it can be
fired; the shotgun is not "loaded" if the shell or cartridge is
stored elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position"

Hope this link and quote helps.

[mike in co]

In my opinion, both LEO and AG will give you a biased opinion, designed to be as vague as possible. LEO will provide personal opinion, based on maximum officer safety, ie. no weapons at all. CalGuns, however, will give you the best, clearest, most unbiased information possible. Here is a link to their Wiki on the definition of loaded. http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California You will see that the AG's information leaves out a very important court case, People vs. Clark, which clarifies that:


"Under the commonly understood
meaning of the term "loaded," a firearm is"loaded" when a shell
or cartridge has been placed into a position from which it can be
fired; the shotgun is not "loaded" if the shell or cartridge is
stored elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position"

Hope this link and quote helps.


actually that hepls a lot...everyone in ca should carry a copy of it with them....
anyone going to ca should do the same.

mike in co

[wistlepig1]

In my opinion, both LEO and AG will give you a biased opinion, designed to be as vague as possible. LEO will provide personal opinion, based on maximum officer safety, ie. no weapons at all. CalGuns, however, will give you the best, clearest, most unbiased information possible. Here is a link to their Wiki on the definition of loaded. http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Defining_loaded_in_California You will see that the AG's information leaves out a very important court case, People vs. Clark, which clarifies that:


"Under the commonly understood
meaning of the term "loaded," a firearm is"loaded" when a shell
or cartridge has been placed into a position from which it can be
fired; the shotgun is not "loaded" if the shell or cartridge is
stored elsewhere and not yet placed in a firing position"

Hope this link and quote helps.

I have read the info in "Wiki" and I would like to express how sorry I am for our gun owners in Californa. This is as clear as mud and open to opinion, and it's that way because the Californa Government wants it that way.

The one statement about it is if you are pulled into court, that if you are following this shady law and are arrested by mistake, you wouldn't be convicted in court (People Vs Clark), after all your time and money to defend yourself, all I can say is "BIG ***** n deal" . Sorry Calif. Gun Owners for the rant, this p** me off.:evil:

Vote them all out, even if it's your brother-in law!

[462]

wistlepig1,
I've been doing my part for untold years. The big cities carry all the voting weight, and we all know which way big cities vote. Get away from Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, and Sacramento and California is more conservative than outsiders think...we're just outnumbered.

[462]

Suo Gan,
I believe that the SF gun ban was overturned, because it was more strict than state law.

[wistlepig1]

wistlepig1,
I've been doing my part for untold years. The big cities carry all the voting weight, and we all know which way big cities vote. Get away from Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, and Sacramento and California is more conservative than outsiders think...we're just outnumbered.

462,
All the best in a wayward, gun hating COUNTRY of California. The big cities were bought and paid for years ago.:drinks:

[462]

Some of us have to endure hardships and misfortune, including living in places that we would rather not.

[edsmith]

I was born and raised in kalif. san jose,it got bad enought for me to leave that sorry state,Iwent east untill I had to stop or swim,so here I am,in maine,have not been back in 40 years,and don't intend on doing so.some say I can't leave,the hell you can't,there are hundreds of roads going to other states,you have to want to. cheers

[mike in co]

A hi cap mag is legal to own and use in the state if the firearm it is used in was bought prior to 1998 (and it itself was not banned). If you sell a hi cap even unknowingly it is punishable by up to a four year prison term. When renewing my ccw, many guys there had their high cap sidearms, the LEO's giving the seminar, the and the sheriff that was signing the licenses knew that they had hi cap mags. Like I said they are perfectly legal if the gun was bought before the ban.

There is no real difference transporting through Calif than any other state you are unfamiliar with. Keep the gun out of sight and out of other peoples minds. LEO's I am familiar with in the state are good people that are logical, and not gun nazi's.

I believe that it is legal to open carry in the entire state as long as the handgun is legal, and unloaded. But that is not something that will help you blend in, lol.

There was a recent change in the feds law. Used to be that transporting a firearm through a federal park (Yosemite, Yellowstone, etc.) was highly illegal. To do it legally you had to completely disassemble the gun and lock it and ammo separately. This has changed to be more lenient. I would research this if you plan to travel through any federal park.

Certain jurisdictions like SF have ordinances against any handgun at all. Would be a good idea to make sure to have all avenues covered.
and how many of you have or carry with you reciepts for your high cap mags ???

innocent untill proven guilty applies in court, after you are arrested.....

what is, and what is suppose to be are often quite different.......

[cbrick]

Here is a "cut & Paste" from the AG web site, for links to the AG web site go here: http://www.lasc.us and scoll to the bottom of the page.

Rick

General Guidelines for Transporting Firearms In California

HANDGUNS
California Penal Code section 12025 does not prevent a citizen of the United States over 18 years of age who is not within any of the classes excepted from firearm possession and who resides or is temporarily in California from transporting by motor vehicle any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person if the firearm is unloaded and in a locked container.
The term "locked container" means a secure container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, key lock, combination lock, or similar locking device. This includes the trunk of a motor vehicle, but does not include the utility or glove compartment. For more information, refer to California Penal Code Section 12026.1.

SHOTGUNS AND RIFLES
Non-concealable firearms (rifles and shotguns) are not generally covered within the provisions of California Penal Code section 12025 and therefore are not required to be transported in a locked container. However, as with any firearm, non-concealable firearms must be unloaded while they are being transported. A rifle or shotgun that is considered an assault weapon in California must be transported in accordance with Penal Code section 12026.1.

[RollerCam]

"I believe that it is legal to open carry in the entire state as long as the handgun is legal, and unloaded."

http://static.sdnn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/photo-lori-saldana.jpg

"California Lawmaker Would Outlaw 'Open Carry'"
March 11, 2010


The "nice lady" above wants to keep California residents EVEN MORE SAFE than they already are.

READ THE ARTICLE: http://www.gunreports.com/news/news/California-Lori-Saldana-open-carry-law-gun-rights_1899-1.html


.

[Potsy]

Uh, next month I've got to travel from Middle Tennessee, through Arkansas, to Western Oklahoma. The other rep. and I are going on a sales meeting/hog hunt/turkey hunt/fishing trip. We will probably be carrying enough guns to invade the Texas panhandle.
Do I have anything to worry about (HEE HEE HEE!!!)?
GOD I LOVE THE SOUTH!!!!

[9.3X62AL]

If you want to know what the correct answer is call the Calif Dept of Justice. 916 263 4887. They are the ones that the LEOs call for the answers.

Carl

Carl, I'm glad that Cal-DOJ provided answers to gun-related questions for you. They were a source of almost complete non-information for me while I was working as a California LEO. Most of the time, Cal-DOJ referred us to our District Attorney's Office for questions concerning firearms law or identification (assault weapon or not, etc.).

There is considerable variance in the fervor with which carry & possession issues are enforced. This is regional in nature, sometimes city- or county-based. Some areas enforce "loaded" status based on "simultaneous proximity" of ammo and arm--more frequently, the ammo must be attached to the firearms in some manner to meet the standard of "loaded". MOST WORKING STREET OFFICERS AND DEPUTIES don't give a rip one way or the other if Soccer Dads and Tupperware Moms carry loaded PPKs and Chief Specials in their glove boxes.

Unfortunately, there is a small minority of officers 'out there' that will enforce such idiocies with fervent and complete absence of discretion. These types usually don't last long on the street--no, such upward-bound worthies are destined for far larger things than street work, and get kicked upstairs with the speed and trajectory of a Saturn 5 rocket. That way, the schmucks cause grief for street cops, instead of the folks who pay their salary. A net gain for citizens, if not the guys and gals pushing the black & whites.

I recently visited Death Valley with Marie. I do my best to comply with all the laws and regulations of the sites and areas I visit, and unless I'm mistaken I think the H.R. 218 bit allows me to carry in National Parks--even the ones sited in a Worker's Paradise. The Park Service's focus is not so much on firearms being used on other people, though--NPS is more concerned about critters and cacti getting ventilated ballistically.

Bottom line time--it only matters if you get caught. The best way to NOT get caught is to not cause trouble for others. Don't be a jerk. Drive at the speed limit, don't roll through stop signs. Don't check your rear-view mirror every 4-5 seconds to see if I'm gone. DON'T STICK OUT. As a wise and well-aged street maven once related to me--"If there ain't NOTHIN', there ain't gonna BE nothin'!"

[mike in co]

this is a bit whinny...but i have not seen a law/doj/att gen quote/post on hi cap mag....lots of reference...no data....

i think the ban was 94........i was still there, left shortly afterwards.


mike in co

[mike in co]

Here is a "cut & Paste" from the AG web site, for links to the AG web site go here: http://www.lasc.us and scoll to the bottom of the page.

Rick

General Guidelines for Transporting Firearms In California

HANDGUNS
California Penal Code section 12025 does not prevent a citizen of the United States over 18 years of age who is not within any of the classes excepted from firearm possession and who resides or is temporarily in California from transporting by motor vehicle any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person if the firearm is unloaded and in a locked container.
The term "locked container" means a secure container which is fully enclosed and locked by a padlock, key lock, combination lock, or similar locking device. This includes the trunk of a motor vehicle, but does not include the utility or glove compartment. For more information, refer to California Penal Code Section 12026.1.

SHOTGUNS AND RIFLES
Non-concealable firearms (rifles and shotguns) are not generally covered within the provisions of California Penal Code section 12025 and therefore are not required to be transported in a locked container. However, as with any firearm, non-concealable firearms must be unloaded while they are being transported. A rifle or shotgun that is considered an assault weapon in California must be transported in accordance with Penal Code section 12026.1.



again nice quote....
you must comply with thier definition of loaded( or carry around the clark case reference), and notice they do not mention ammo storage in the above statements...which in ca can get you into as much trouble.....


ya know i got a great education, the coast is great, the north is great, the sacto/american rivers are great wine country is great,...but as a political group it sucks.....no repect for the constitution nor the bill of rights....

mike in co
yes born and raised in california

[9.3X62AL]

ya know i got a great education, the coast is great, the north is great, the sacto/american rivers are great wine country is great,...but as a political group it sucks.....no repect for the constitution nor the bill of rights....

California, distilled nicely by Mike.

[Freightman]

I am a dumb Texican but it sounds like a "locked up loaded gun" and elsewhere "locked up" ammo is no more than a billy club or a rock. Can you carry a sharp knife?

[mike in co]

I am a dumb Texican but it sounds like a "locked up loaded gun" and elsewhere "locked up" ammo is no more than a billy club or a rock. Can you carry a sharp knife?

not over 3.5"......if i remember correctly......

now a baseball bat......

[462]

One must remember that all of California's gun laws are completely ignored by gang members.

Only law-abiding citizens are hindered.

[wistlepig1]

"I've always chosen to carry guns that cops carry because they are supported by case law. Although my 44 mag is way more effective (and I am a better shot with it), I carry a plain Jane double action Ruger 40. I am also one of THOSE people who use store bought ammo in my carry gun and not my reloads that were "hotloaded mankillers". God forbid I ever have to use it for self defense, I DO NOT want to be perceived by any jury as Rambo or Dirty Harry. Believe me, the prosecuter WILL try to make the jury believe that you intentionally are a vigilante murderer, they will do everything possible to do this. This would definately include the fact that you go out everyday prepared for battle with three 15 round mags (although you will not think of this when defending your loved ones) They will probably confiscate your pc and look at sites like this and bring this up during the trial. You will be made out to be a common criminal. Don't give them any more ammo than they already have. But I guess this is off topic. "

I don't think your off topic at all, there are prosecuter that WILL try to make the jury believe that you intentionally are a vigilante murderer, and will treat you that way. I also know that my hands are better as are all the guys on this site but with the reading I have done, Handloads are just one more issue that a prosecuter can and most like will use to make you out to be something your not. Use whatever you are ok with but I don't want anymore to deal with if I would be forced to use a gun to protect myself or my wife. Flame if you wish but that what I will carry and do it with pride.:drinks:

[mike in co]

"I've always chosen to carry guns that cops carry because they are supported by case law. Although my 44 mag is way more effective (and I am a better shot with it), I carry a plain Jane double action Ruger 40. I am also one of THOSE people who use store bought ammo in my carry gun and not my reloads that were "hotloaded mankillers". God forbid I ever have to use it for self defense, I DO NOT want to be perceived by any jury as Rambo or Dirty Harry. Believe me, the prosecuter WILL try to make the jury believe that you intentionally are a vigilante murderer, they will do everything possible to do this. This would definately include the fact that you go out everyday prepared for battle with three 15 round mags (although you will not think of this when defending your loved ones) They will probably confiscate your pc and look at sites like this and bring this up during the trial. You will be made out to be a common criminal. Don't give them any more ammo than they already have. But I guess this is off topic. "

I don't think your off topic at all, there are prosecuter that WILL try to make the jury believe that you intentionally are a vigilante murderer, and will treat you that way. I also know that my hands are better as are all the guys on this site but with the reading I have done, Handloads are just one more issue that a prosecuter can and most like will use to make you out to be something your not. Use whatever you are ok with but I don't want anymore to deal with if I would be forced to use a gun to protect myself or my wife. Flame if you wish but that what I will carry and do it with pride.:drinks:

everyone is entitled to an opinion...but this is one that gets me going.....
its just plain bs......we asked for examples of this and guess what ??

there was one "maybe" in 20 plus years of internet data...one time.....no trial of convictions...nothing...so do what you want but stop caliming somethng that does not exist.

this would be like getting in a car accident, and the da say you contributed to the violence of the accident because you used premium gas in you car!

if you are worried about this issue...dont use a gun, get a baseball bat...but not a premium one....

[wistlepig1]

There isn't a right or wrong answer to this question because we are talking about what may happen if this or that happens. As I said "Handloads are just one more issue that a prosecuter can and most like will use to make you out to be something your not. Use whatever you are ok with but I don't want anymore to deal with if I would be forced to use a gun to protect myself or my wife." The below site and Article will not change anyones mind but it does make you think, and then make your own personal chose.
I to have not heard of anyone being convicted in court for using handloads for defense to date but I didn't think OJ would get off and he did. I wouldn't want to be the first, when the simple act of using factory stuff solves one issue that could be used to make you look bad to a jury.
Sorry for the Hijack,, agree to disagree, this will be my last commint about this!:hijack:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_4_51/ai_n11840291/?tag=content;col1

Handloads are for sport and training: not defense: after a shooting, certain concerns contraindicate handloads
Guns Magazine, April, 2005 by Massad Ayoob

Handloads are great for hunting. The best shot I ever made in the game fields, was on an impala at 117 paces--double action--with a Smith & Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum, loaded with a 320-grain SSK hardcast flatpoint bullet my buddy Bill Grimmett had carefully seated over a maximum safe charge of W296.

Reloads are great for training, too. How many people can afford ample, serious shooting without them? Bless you, Mike Dillon, for opening the world of "mass-produced home loads" to the individual handgunner.

Handloads are great for match shooting, if they're carefully put together. The majority of national bull's-eye championships (military sponsored) and police pistol championships (law enforcement agency sponsored) have been won with factory amino purchased by the governmental entity that fielded the shooter. However, most IPSC and Bianchi Cup matches have been won with reloads homebrewed by the winning shooters themselves. That says something about individuality.

However, as an expert witness for the courts in shooting cases over the last quarter century, I've learned some good reasons not to use reloads for personal defense. Not in the carry gun, and not in the home or store defense gun. In the limited space of this column, let's talk about just two of those reasons.

Malice Factor

Attorneys hungry to nail you, whether in criminal or in civil court, need some hook on which to hang their argument that your actions constituted malice against the person who forced you to shoot him. We saw it with anyone who went to court after firing Black Talon ammo in self-defense, during the period when that cartridge was ludicrously demonized by the press and the politicians. We've seen it for decades, right up to the present, with the use of hollow-point amino. Appellate lawyer Lisa Steele is right now speaking for multiple individuals who suffered either conviction or enhanced sentences because juries bought lawyers' arguments that the use of HP ammunition was cruel, unusual, and malicious. A lawyer who knows his stuff--which the original trial lawyers in those cases of Lisa's apparently didn't--can defeat the hollowpoint argument easily. The simplest avenue is to show the jury that virtually all cops carry HPs. But that argument isn't available for handloads.

In one case I was consulted on back in the '70s, the shooter had used a CCI Speer 200-grain JHP he'd handloaded to equal CCI's ballistics in a factory loaded .45 ACP cartridge. The state police who investigated, and the prosecutor who brought him to trial for aggravated assault, kept asking why regular bullets weren't deadly enough for this man. On my recommendation, the defense brought Jim Cirillo in as an expert. He calmly explained the whole thing, including the fact the defendant's .45 ACP handloads were less powerful than the factory amino issued to the investigating troopers for their .357 Magnums, and the jury acquitted the shooter. Still, it was an attack that could have been prevented if the defendant had simply loaded with CCI's own factory cartridges, and used his identical handloads for training and practice.

Evidentiary Element

Many defensive shootings take place literally at "powder-burning distance," with the assailant virtually on top of the armed citizen. Those who take the criminal's side have been known to argue he was a safe distance away and the accused shot him for no good reason. Well, gunshot residue (GSR) will tell the tale and expose the liars if the distance has been close enough. However, to do that, we on the defense team have to perform testing with what is called "exemplar" ammunition. This is ammo identical to what was fired in the incident in question. We can't use what was left in the gun, because it's evidence, and the testing consumes the amino and literally destroys that evidence.

You shot him with a factory round? No problem. We call the factory, get 50 rounds of identical amino of the same lot, do the GSR testing, and determine virtually to the inch the actual distance involved. You shot him with a handload? What guarantee does the court have the ammo you provided is identical to what was fired in the case at bar? You can hear the opposing lawyer now: "Objection! Your Honor, the defendant literally manufactured the evidence!" In a case I was involved in some years ago in New Jersey, the defendant's use of nonreplicable handloads put him through a multiple-trial ordeal when, if he'd used factory amino, the facts would have been demonstrated at the starting gate and brought a just closure much sooner.

Handloads for defense? You've just seen two documentable reasons why I would urge you to use factory ammo for that purpose.

[mike in co]

neither support not doing it......

first was proven it was a non-factor.

the second never happened...it is just like your position a proposition...that never happened.


there is no reason...there are wives tales, stories, no facts!

you do drive a std vehicle with a std engine and no upgrades right......

you bought an aggressive vehicle so you could casue additional damage in an accident.....


mike

[SciFiJim]

If you are driving south on 395 there is no way to pass through Coleville (10 miles past NV state line) without driving through a school zone. CA law says you can't have a gun in a school zone.

Actually, you can carry THROUGH school zones. If you drill down far enough in the legal code on who can and cannot carry and where, in the provision on who can carry on school property it says "and other authorized persons". The way the sheriff got around that on my CCW was to specify "Never carry a weapon on to any school campus or school property". A public street in a school zone is not a school campus or school property.

Incidentally, since everyone's first weapon is between their ears, I break that law every time I step on a school campus. :bigsmyl2: But, I make sure I don't carry a pistol onto any school campus.

My CCW instructor's words were, "When near a school, don't stop!"

[Recluse]

Now that neither my wife or I *have* to travel as part of our work since we both retired from our respective careers, the gun-laws of the states outside of Texas have become much easier for us to navigate and understand.

Our first preference for recreational travel is to states that have reciprocity agreements with Texas in regards to CHL. All of our bordering neighbors do, as does Florida and Arizona.

So guess where we pack up the Cessna and fly to? :)

Now when we opt to travel to other states, again, that state's gun laws come into play. If the state is markedly anti-gun, then we opt to vacation somewhere else as I simply refuse to travel without a firearm.

Next year's vacation was going to be to the Bahamas via our personal airplane. But it dawned on me that the Bahamas is part of the British thing and the Brits love guns about as much as gun-owners love the Brady Campaign.

But, my wife wanted to see something sort of tropical with lots of beaches in the southeast.

So, we're going to fly to the Florida Keys--staying in the U.S. and taking advantage of Florida's reciprocity agreement with Texas. (And save me the world-class hassle of filing an international flight plan and clearing customs in a private plane. Been there, done that and swore Never Again.)

When we travel to Maine, we refuse to land in Massachusetts for fuel or restroom breaks. Instead, I flight-plan to stop in Vermont or New Hampshire--with New Hampshire being preferred due to outstanding fuel prices.

We have on occasion stopped in New York (state), but only for fuel or when weather was such that we needed to land and take a look at the radar. We avoid Illinois as well.

I quit going to Oshkosh when I found out Wisconsin is only one of two states that outright refuses to even consider a carry-permit law. I love Air-Venture, but I hate spending money in a location that spits on the Constitution.

Quite honestly, it just isn't worth the hassle trying to figure out how each State thinks the Second Amendment should read and how each State chooses to write their gun and self-defense laws. There are too many other states who have it figured out correctly and that we feel much safer visiting because the law still favors the potential victim rather than the known criminal.

:coffee:

[deerslayer]

I have a friend who is a CHP officer and when I asked him about this. He said they are taught to enforce with the spirit of the law. Yah i know that is vague very vague but basically it is up to the officer to determine or predict your intentions and decide whether to enforce the spirit of the law (spirit is to keep gun violence down supposedly)or the letter of the law (there is enough stupid $hi! on the books they will find something). Hopefully its my buddy you run into he is on our side. But he has also been taught to confiscate when in doubt.

[45&30-30]

Only reason I am writing this is that from reading through this thread I get the impression that some think a cop can just get in to your car or have some ability to know what you have in your car. (They actually do, it's what you TELL them.)

When I wore a badge in IDAHO the only way in to a vehicle was with consent to search by the driver (You said I could.), search incident to arrest (You commited a crime.) or something illegal was in plain view. From what I understand, search incident to arrest is no more, but an officer can still "inventory" the vehicle to be towed after an arrest. So unless you tell the officer you have something illegal, tell him he can search the vehicle, left something illegal out that he can see or commit a crime while in the vehicle (i.e. DUI, no insurance, suspended license, warrant, etc...) your good. License, registration and proof of insurance is what you have to provide. No more. At least for Idaho.

(Also, as I recall, if you are in a rental car and the person who rented it is not you or in the vehicle with you, you can open yourself up to a search.)

Don't carry the gun on you if you don't have a pemit. If the officer asks you to get out of the vehicle and does a pat down for his "safety", while he talks to you at the rear of your car, generally because he wants to ask your consent to search, your busted. Take your keys and lock the door if you are asked to get out.

I am not trying to tell you how to "get away" with bringing a gun in to California. (Follow the law.) I just think that most people's impression is that a cop can get in to your car because it's the law. The 4th Amendment protects you from unreasonable search and seizure. Exercise it. Just like you do the 2nd Amendment. I had one person in a 5 year period tell me I could not search their vehicle. Guess what? I didn't go in their vehicle, even though I was 100% sure he had illegal drugs in the car. I don't recall the number of people who let me search their car with illegal drugs inside of it. (A lot.) I did it to the same people over and over again, even though I told them MULTIPLE times they did not have to let me and they signed a waiver that told them the same. Just say, "No." It's your right. I am not letting out any "secrets", unless the law is...

I personally think everyone of age should be able to carry. I also think I am responsible for my and my families safety and am willing to take the reprecussions of the current law if they don't agree. Good luck, hope this helps.

[mike in co]

actually, i just reread the question and think we all got it wrong.


anyone can take a gun IN to california, now getting OUT may be an issue.......lol



mike in co

[MtGun44]

Anyone try the "hunting and fishing and on the way to and from a hunting or fishing
expedition" exception in the California law? It READS like you could carry a handgun while
you were driving from home to where you were fishing and on the way back home. How
it is interpreted in reality may be very different.

It is in the .pdf file with the Calif firearms laws put out by the Ca AG.

I left CA a very long time ago and while I enjoy fairly frequent visits, no way I would
ever consider living in the Worker's Paradise People's Republik of Kalifonia.

Bill

[cptinjeff]

So, we're going to fly to the Florida Keys--staying in the U.S. and taking advantage of Florida's reciprocity agreement with Texas. .

:coffee:

If you need any advice on things to do or where to stay.....just ask...I lived in the Keys for 14 years. jb

[9.3X62AL]

Wistlepig--

The source you list (Massad Ayoob) is the principal advocate and largest benefactor of the "no handloads for self-defense" cadre. He writes well, but his beliefs get little traction in the courts I worked in, which--wouldn't ya know it--were primarily in California.

I've said this several times here, and maybe it bears a repeat every 6 months or so. My experience--which is a damn sight deeper than that shill Ayoob's ever was--is that a use of lethal force is either justified, or it isn't. THE SUBJECT OF AMMUNITION USED NEVER CAME UP AT A PROSECUTORIAL STAFFING---NOT ONCE. For deputies, the question gets asked administratively--Was the ammo issued & authorized? THAT'S IT. End of criminal inquiry. NEXT!

Civilly, your homeowner's insurance will get hit on for zillions of dollars, because--after all--poor little (now deceased) Pookie was all about getting his life together now, and loved to dance and sing. He painted murals and wrote children's stories, too. Gag me with a spoon. The insurance company will throw between $5K and $15K at Pookie's lawyers, who will pocket from 1/2 to 2/3 of that amount (they always take the offer), leaving enough for Pookie's heirs and assigns to buy a big-screen TV and maybe spinners and 22s on a roach coach. Justice served, thankyoucomeagain.

Mr. Ayoob has carved himself a nice niche, although it's more like a sandcastle in a surf zone. It doesn't take much wave action to melt it.

[KCSO]

Al
Boy you sure hit it right on the head there! Samo Samo here in the great midwest, "He was such a nice boy and SOOO good to his parents". With factory HP's at 75 a box here we may all have to go to cast bullets.

[Recluse]

PS, Far be it from me to try to persuade those who despise California into people that could lend a hand in repairing Californias broken political machine. Perhaps they could donate to a good cause the next election, lord knows our liberal politicians get plenty of money from people in EVERY state that want to turn your utopia in the worst California has to offer. They know that once it goes in Cal it will eventually get to their state. But I admit it is easier to hate California than actually doing anything about it.

I hear what you're saying, and in the past six years, I've been donating to to the conservative opponents of Boxer, Feinstein, Waters, Pelosi and Waxman.

And again, I go back to the point that if at least HALF of all gun-owners were NRA or GOA members, we COULD change California gun laws.

Guaranteed.

It goes back to that apathy and excuses thing again. . .

:coffee:

[462]

Recluse,
"Apathy".

I've been using that word for the last 20-years. It's not uncommon for only 35% to 40% of California's registered voters to actually vote. I don't know what percentage of legal voting age residents are registered, but will hazard a guess of 50, hoping that it's higher.

[9.3X62AL]

"Apathy" for sure, and for a time Californians felt that NRA had largely thrown in the towel here. Perhaps not, more recently. Also at play is a sentiment of "Don't vote, it just encourages the barstads". I haven't missed an election since age 18, although there isn't a lot to choose from more often than not. A lot like grocery shopping in old Soviet Russia.

[462]

9.3X62AL,
An apt phrase, the Soviet Union.

There is an excellent opportunity for a drastic Sacramento make-over, come November.

[dogbert41]

Very timely info for me. The wife and I were planning on going over to Death Valley from Nv. while on vacation from Colorado. Yes I have a CCW but know that NV and Calif don't honor it. I don't like the idea of car travel without a little "something" , now I have to deside on my 5 shot 357 or SW 4556. I think the 4556 might be the best choise, clips are faster to go from unloaded (to meet their ******* rules), to self Defense. The remoteness of DeathValley almost demands "something" for an old man and his wife traveling a lone.

Thanks for the Info

In Nevada one can carry a pistol in their vehicle loaded and concealed (glovebox, under seat, etc.), just not concealed on their person without a permit. If you are from out of state, your CCW is only good if we have reciprocity with yours. Rifle/shotgun MUST be unloaded.

You may open carry in Nevada.

California has laws that keep their child molesters and politicians safe. But then I repeat myself.

[longranger]

I left CA in 2007, did my career there,not from there,never called it home.1Jan07 CA. passed 992 new laws that year.Which ones are CA folks going to break today? 992 that's insane.

[lylejb]

Back at home today, all is well.

Didn't meet any Cal Leo's along the way. Didn't have any problems requiring any "tools" thankfully.

Thanks for all the replies.

[Doble Troble]

Let's see...

You're driving through CA and have to stop for some reason...gas, pee, change a flat.

If someone assaults you you can excercise your rights to self defense and to keep and bear arms by...

1) unlocking your gun or its container
2) unlocking your ammunition
3) loading your gun
4) incapacitating the criminal attacking you.

But wait...are steps 3 and 4 legal?

Californians have real problems.