California Assault Weapons Ban 1989 onwards

[Buzzltronic]

Although I don't spend much time on here I do sympathize with Californian gun owners (despite not residing in that state). I am a foreign national who CCW & OC.

It was one of the finest of the states and it's a shame about the low-ebb these days.

Anyway, just a few weeks ago I got a message on my Youtube account from a young Californian man.

He'd traveled in his car with his sidearm in a glovebox. Innocently he thought this was ok doing that, alas as many of us know that's not the case when you don't have a CHL.

Unfortunately he was pulled over during a routine traffic stop and his car was searched.

Well the long story short is they found the gun, charged him with not transporting it correctly and confiscated it pending court appearance.

He told me all this having been watched my Cali Gun Law video (a shame he had not seen it prior to being pulled over).

With this in mind I decided to get another video made in the hope that it may prevent others from accidentally ending up in a Californian nightmare!

Sorry for the ramble, here's the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXNaizvyyTk

Incidentally the youth says he's been told he'll get his pistol back BUT will be getting hit with a misdemenour sentence (he's pleading guilty). This occurred in central Cali. I believe.

 

[HankB]

He shouldn't have consented to the search.

If he DIDN'T consent and the car was searched anyway, it sounds like something other than a "routine traffic stop" was going on.

 

[Ohio Gun Guy]

HankB - you are correct....But....

The point is the laws are bad: California and some other states purposely set up laws that are arbitrary and confusing. They do this so that most people see owning a gun as a hassle with big consequences. Then some number of them will then not bother to own them. The point is, they are making it very difficult to be a legal gun owner. You practically have to be a lawyer.

 

[Kynoch]

Although I don't spend much time on here I do sympathize with Californian gun owners (despite not residing in that state). I am a foreign national who CCW & OC.

It was one of the finest of the states and it's a shame about the low-ebb these days.

Anyway, just a few weeks ago I got a message on my Youtube account from a young Californian man.

He'd traveled in his car with his sidearm in a glovebox. Innocently he thought this was ok doing that, alas as many of us know that's not the case when you don't have a CHL.

Unfortunately he was pulled over during a routine traffic stop and his car was searched.

Well the long story short is they found the gun, charged him with not transporting it correctly and confiscated it pending court appearance.

He told me all this having been watched my Cali Gun Law video (a shame he had not seen it prior to being pulled over).

With this in mind I decided to get another video made in the hope that it may prevent others from accidentally ending up in a Californian nightmare!

Sorry for the ramble, here's the video.

Incidentally the youth says he's been told he'll get his pistol back BUT will be getting hit with a misdemeanor sentence (he's pleading guilty). This occurred in central Cali. I believe.

#1.) One would have to be brain-dead to keep a pistol in their glove compartment unless they were absolutely sure it was allowed in the state they did so.

#2.) Why was the vehicle searched? What was the probable cause?

 

[Kynoch]

HankB - you are correct....But....

The point is the laws are bad: California and some other states purposely set up laws that are arbitrary and confusing. They do this so that most people see owning a gun as a hassle with big consequences. Then some number of them will then not bother to own them. The point is, they are making it very difficult to be a legal gun owner. You practically have to be a lawyer.

It hasn't been legal in a long time (decades) to keep a firearm in one's glove compartment in CA.

 

[HankB]

The point is the laws are bad: California and some other states purposely set up laws that are arbitrary and confusing. They do this so that most people see owning a gun as a hassle with big consequences. Then some number of them will then not bother to own them. The point is, they are making it very difficult to be a legal gun owner. You practically have to be a lawyer.

No argument there. I've already decided that if I'm ever on a jury where someone is charged with violating a law (ANY law, not just a gun law) so complex that it takes a judge or lawyer to understand it or explain it, I will NOT convict, unless the defendant is a judge or lawyer himself. (I remember a story a long time ago in the Wall Street Journal where a jury acquitted someone in a very complex securities case for that very reason - they couldn't make heads nor tails of the law.)

 

[Quiet]

Under CA laws... (Thank you CA Governor Ronald Reagan for these particular laws)

If you tell a LEO that you have a firearm for any reason, then they can legally search for it and check to see if it's loaded. Refusing to allow LEOs to search & check is probable cause for arrest for having a loaded firearm in public. [PC 25850(b)]



Penal Code 25850
(a) A person is guilty of carrying a loaded firearm when the person carries a loaded firearm on the person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or in any public place or on any public street in a prohibited area of unincorporated territory.
(b) In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized to examine any firearm carried by anyone on the person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory. Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of this section.
(g) Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 836, a peace officer may make an arrest without a warrant:
(1) When the person arrested has violated this section, although not in the officer's presence.
(2) Whenever the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has violated this section, whether or not this section has, in fact, been violated.

 

[bainter1212]

As a CCWer in CA I can sympathize with travelers who don't know the laws. They ARE confusing and arbritrary. In fact, most casual gun owners in this state don't even know the laws. Heck, most LEOs here don't know the law!
Example: most LEOs here believe the old rumor that if you transport a gun in the same compartment as ammo you are violating the law. This is not true. However many people have been cited for this and plead no contest even though they were totally legal.