Man arrested at LAX for having guns.

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's quite a generalization, what are you basing that on?
Click to expand...

Uh, try reading the original post. The episode is not from a gun rational state.

I know of two individuals who live near me, who were each stopped and found to have loaded handguns in their cars, without a carry permit. Both were allowed to proceed home with their guns after their respective stops.
Click to expand...

Let's see. Two cases out of a state of what, 70 million people? In a state of the most draconian gun laws in the nation? Sorry. Your "anecdotes" don't prove a thing.
 
I am sure that many of our members who live in California resent the constant and sometimes emotional attacks on “California,” or “The Peoples Republick of California,” etc. But while your resentment is understandable, you should remember that California’s left-wing, anti-gun government is a constant pain in the lower extremities for the rest of us, and insult becomes injury when liberal California residents move to other states and bring their political views with them. This is especially so in nearby states north and east of you. Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Nevada, and Arizona are prime examples. So it’s understandable that we wish that a major earthquake might give us some relief.

Members of California’s shooting and gun owning community should understand that we wish them no ill will, our ire is directed toward the government in that misbegotten state. The incident under discussion is an example of something we would (and do) consider intolerable, yet in California it is not only considered to be acceptable, but perfectly normal. Given the circumstances, a clash of views is quite graspable, and sometimes we slip off The High Road. That’s the reason we have moderators.
 
don't worry old fuff. i, a true american, and californian, am glad to see people exersizing their right to free speech. you can call california whatever you want.

and thats the point really. it is not the californians that are hated, its the people who run (or ruin) the state by restricting rights that are essential to how we live our lives. for the most part, CA is a great state. i live a block from the beach and an hour from the snowy mountains. if only a few things could be changed, people can see what a great place CA is to live. but since we cant appeal to everyones hobbies and interests this is what happens. thank the govt

maybe we should just get rid of hollywood. i think the rest of the world watches us alittle too closely.
 
Who elected the Government?
Click to expand...
I sure as hell didn't. It's getting really old to hear that "the people" are to blame because "they" elected the despots. Factually, about 20% (that is, a slim majority of the 40% or so who show up) of the people elect the idiots. Blame that 20%, and the ones who didn't show, but quit this collectivist BS about "the people."
 
To arrest someone because he did not drive directly form his house to the range is wrong.
Remember, this fellow paid sales tax when he bought these guns.
He paid the fees for the background check.
He paid AW registration fees and god knows what else.

While I think this law is unconstitutional I think the LAPD and the media makes out of nothing the big deal.
Uhhhhh, there we caught someone with X evil black guns!
They punish someone for just having something, which is legal but not right in the eyes of some who on the other side a corrupt and burn your money!

Welcome to CA and make no mistake:
Soon it will be like this in the state where you live thanks to people like Feinstein, Boxer, Brady and so on!!
 
Let's see. Two cases out of a state of what, 70 million people? In a state of the most draconian gun laws in the nation? Sorry. Your "anecdotes" don't prove a thing.
Click to expand...

Actually, they do. They indicate that the entire state is not subject to the craziness often portrayed in the media. Los Angeles is worlds away from the part of the state I live in, in terms of political climate. You could think of Kali more as a country, in terms of political diversity. Some people don't get that.

Yes, the laws "technically" apply to everyone here, but I wouldn't say that enforcement is the same across the board. That is what my anecdotes show. For one person to know of two individuals who were caught red-handed with loaded guns, and get to walk, with their guns, I think that's pretty significant. That must mean it happens fairly often. And as I understand it, concealed carry without a permit is a misdemeanor. I wouldn't exactly call that "draconian".

Yes, Kali is pretty bad, I wish it were MUCH different, and I won't spend much time defending the gun laws here, but I can think of places that are WAY more "draconian" D.C., Chicago, NYC... At least we can OWN guns.

BTW, the population is more like 36 million. You were off by a factor of two. Have you been here? Please don't generalize.
 
Not really false info. Actually, "connection" to a weapon is usually interpreted to mean if both are within easy reach and especially if the gun is not in a locked case. If you unload your gun and throw it in the back seat in a soft zipper case and put your loaded mags in the glove box, you still have a "loaded" gun, which is what I think the first quote meant. A lot of people get busted when they use this bit of common sense. Having loaded mags in a locked trunk with firearms is an oft debated scenario as to legality, but I think in Cali it is better to be safe than sorry.
Click to expand...

California has quite specific laws about "loaded" and 'within easy reach' is not included. See my thread at Calguns.
 
Well after trying to wade throught the maze of California firearms laws I can't find where it says specifically that a person with a permit for an assault weapon can only transport it from his home to the range with no stops. AND I have a headache, I never saw so many except as in section this which refers you to section that and back to a different section and of course law enforcement/public safety/politicians are exempt from all the laws. Does anyone have a link to where it says someone with a permit can only take their assault weapon from home to range with no stops?
 
I am sure that many of our members who live in California resent the constant and sometimes emotional attacks on “California,” or “The Peoples Republick of California,” etc.
Click to expand...

Speaking for myself, I don't resent the attacks, I just get a little fed up with the knee jerking, disinformation, and general moronic comments made on the subject. Stuff like "A literal Hell on Earth" is just so blindingly stupid that all you can do is roll your eyes and click on through.
 
If you were on the other side of the California/Arizona border and had to put up with some of the transplants from your side, you'd understand why some of our residents get a bit overwrought when the subject of California comes up - gun laws not withstanding. :cuss: :banghead:
 
I understand, Old Fuff. All I had to do was drive into Oregon with California plates to experience it, first-hand. And I can certainly understand the basis for it.
 
Yabbut... Most of California is populated by decent, sensible, fairly conservative citizens. We have a couple of major population centers -- Los Angeles and San Francisco -- that are apparently peopled primarily by nutcases. Unfortunately, enough of those nutcases vote that the rest of us have to put up with all manner of silliness. Most of the rest of us Californians would be perfectly content to turn L.A. and S.F. into their own state.

And as a resident of a very conservative county located right next door to L.A., I can understand a bit of heat under the collar where transplants are concerned. The ruckus caused by our Board of Supervisors importing a new Sheriff from L.A. still hasn't died down.

Short version: I'm sure the Californians posting on this board would appreciate it if folks were to make a distinction between the L.A./S.F. dingbats and the rest of the state.
 
37 GUNS? :what:

Ya know...

I kinda feel like I could make do with no more than a dozen guns, no matter what airport I was driving to. :D
 
Does anyone have a link to where it says someone with a permit can only take their assault weapon from home to range with no stops?
Click to expand...

The limitation doesn't quite say that. It's 12285(c).

(c) A person who has registered an assault weapon or registered a
.50 BMG rifle under this section may possess it only under any of
the following conditions unless a permit allowing additional uses is
first obtained under Section 12286:
(1) At that person's residence, place of business, or other
property owned by that person, or on property owned by another with
the owner's express permission.
(2) While on the premises of a target range of a public or private
club or organization organized for the purpose of practicing
shooting at targets.
(3) While on a target range that holds a regulatory or business
license for the purpose of practicing shooting at that target range.
(4) While on the premises of a shooting club which is licensed
pursuant to the Fish and Game Code.
(5) While attending any exhibition, display, or educational
project which is about firearms and which is sponsored by, conducted
under the auspices of, or approved by a law enforcement agency or a
nationally or state recognized entity that fosters proficiency in, or
promotes education about, firearms.
(6) While on publicly owned land if the possession and use of a
firearm described in Section 12276, 12276.1, 12276.5, or 12278, is
specifically permitted by the managing agency of the land.
(7) While transporting the assault weapon or .50 BMG rifle between
any of the places mentioned in this subdivision, or to any licensed
gun dealer, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12290, for
servicing or repair pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 12290, if
the assault weapon is transported as required by Section 12026.1.
Click to expand...
What's missing is any language specifying 'directly' to those places; the Legislature knows how to say that; see, for example, this snippet of PC 12026.2
(4) The transportation of a firearm by a person listed in Section
12026 directly between any of the places mentioned in Section 12026.
Click to expand...
- just one of 12 items using the directly language.
 
You know what- those of you who castigate this poor fellow are Fifth Columnists. You are giving the fears of those who restrict our liberties fertile ground to grow and justify their position. The man put his weapons in the back of his vehicle in good faith. He did not flash them around and he was forthright with the police and cooperative. The cops failed in their duty and you are supporting that failure. I find this criticism of a fellow enthusiast shameful and cowardly in these circumstances. One firearm or a hundred, it does not matter!

How about if it had been you going about your business and found yourself in a similar situation? How would you feel about folks making the same kind of criticism? As you isolate each sportsman who finds himself in this position with your condemnation you will find there is no one left to defend you when it becomes your turn
 
Again, the fellow apparently tried to illegally transport a weapon through a police checkpoint. Unless you are arguing that the police should not enforce laws that you don't like, you really don't have a point, unless you're simply trying to prove Godwin's law.
 
What the hell are "vehicle inspection points"?? In Florida, you can carry a gun right up to the terminal building. They sure don't search your car!
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, they have them periodically here as well. It can be on an entrance road to the airport, in which case it's usually set up by the airport police, or even at the entrance to a short or long term parking area in which case it's conducted by highly unmotivated, underpaid and undertrained unarmed contract private security people.

They make you open the doors (front and rear) to your vehicle as well as looking in the bed of trucks and requiring that any bed-mounted tool boxes be opened for visual inspection.
 
Thanks to Librarian:

(7) While transporting the assault weapon or .50 BMG rifle between
any of the places mentioned in this subdivision, or to any licensed
gun dealer, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12290, for
servicing or repair pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 12290, if
the assault weapon is transported as required by Section 12026.1.

It does not say anything about not stopping or having to go directly to the range with no stops. He was not illegally transporting his firearms. He had registered his "evil assault weapon" and had the paperwork with him. He tried to be cooperative and comply with the police and was not in a socalled gun free zone. In fact he did everything right and was arrested for it.

Lets say it wasn't an airport and he was going to pick up his friend at his friends house but gets stopped at a checkpoint where he obligingly opens the locked back of his truck and claims the guns shows the paperwork and gets arrested. That is not substantially different.
 
I don't think I'd call Orange County "very" conservative. They might look that way compared to LA, but still.
Click to expand...

If you were to use the ease of obtaining a carry permit as a bellwether, then indeed I think you could say O.C. was RKBA friendly, compared to other counties.

And Mistwolf, I agree with you 100%. Well said.
 
The cops are neither lawyers, legislators, nor Department of Justice staff members. In LEO training they are given instructions regarding the law, outlining the circumstances when it is premissible to arrest a person (or not arrest a person). If the State issued faulty instructions, don't blame the cops.


As I read California gun law posted by Librarian above:
It seems that the qualifier 'directly' appears in certain sections of gun law in California, and the Department of Justice advises that it also applies to other sections. This may or may not be true, depending upon prior court cases and other tests of the law.

Until this case works its way through the system, we are unable to draw a conclusion.


Poor Mr. Dominguez. There, but for the grace of god, go I.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
college "related" shooting
Replies
5
Views
511
Autolycus
A
Back
Top