Armed EP Work

[Lone Wolf]

This topic is a dicey road. I hope not to offend anyone here, although I'm sure I will. I want to preface the following with this disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and my frame of reference is largely speaking to the state of Confusion (err, California), although many states have similar laws.

Point number one: I believe it is a damned, foolish thing to do to carry an exposed, unloaded firearm on your person in public or private. I was always taught that if you're going to have a gun, you need to be prepared to use it. If it's unloaded, you can't use it. First, it gives you a false sense of security. Second, you can't use it for anything except to throw it at somebody or use it as a paperweight. Therefore, all you will have managed to do is "scare" a few people and come off looking like a gun nut in order to protect your second amendment rights.

Point number two: Don't depend on a Yahoo group or a newsgroup or anything else to explain the law to you. Ignorance of the law is not a justifiable defense, so if you can't find the criminal (penal) code for your state and look it up yourself, then you should hire a lawyer to explain it to you so that you don't make a fool out of yourself, your client, or wind up in jail - or worse, both you and the client in jail; even worse would be shot dead somewhere. For California, the penal code breaks up carrying a concealed and loaded firearm into two different violations - usually as misdemeanors for the first offense: carrying concealed, and carrying loaded. Exceptions to those laws are found a couple of sections over. Look up CPC § 12025, 12027, 12031.

Point number three: If you're doing domestic/CONUS EP work, 99.8% of the time you will never need a firearm to do your job. Sometimes, the client prefers their details to be unarmed for political/philosoph ical reasons. Unless you're in a hostile area (again, mostly outside of the U.S.), you shouldn't need to have a firearm in a tactical-ready position anyway. I'm reminded here of pictures from Miami Vice where the drug lords had their muscle at tactical positions surrounding their estates with MP5's and Uzis. Fun entertainment, but not very realistic.

What needs to be done is a more proactive approach to our respective state legislators to ease the issuance of CCW permits to legal, law abiding citizens. In California, and many other states around the country, street crime is growing at an alarming rate. Prisons are overcrowded and facing court-ordered early release programs which put more criminals back into the public. Therefore, we need (and have) a justifiable argument to be able to carry a firearm to protect ourselves because law enforcement cannot be everywhere at once. And as some of you have pointed out, the criminals don't respect the law and will arm themselves anyway.

If you want to make a difference, appeal to your lawmakers with common sense. If they won't listen to you, run against them or vote them out. Don't break the law in order to make your point and don't tote a gun around town if you can't use it the way it was designed.

Again, I apologize if I've offended anyone here,
Regards to all. God bless you and keep you safe.

AND OH YEAH... I am one of the Right Wing Gun Toating Nutjobs out there.. I carry every where I go.. Why? Because I can.. It may not be an alienable right it is a given right by the Second Amendment.. I dont agree with needing to be licensed and I do believe that the 2nd Amendment is the right to carry concealed.. And while I do not support any type of licensure (because I believe that its a form of Governmental control) I do believe that there are people out there that do not need to be carrying for everyones safety...

[Local Talent]

Wow, Wolf... what caused this?

I mostly agree with all the points you make, brother, but the situation in CA is so screwed up that positive trends we see elsewhere (like the recent AZ concealed law we just discussed on this forum) don't give me much hope, to be honest.
In many places of the country, for example, police view armed citizens and security as potential backup, while here... powerful chiefs, sheriffs, and police unions (all politicians) have a vested interest in us remaining unarmed sheep. And let's face it, they serve a population that largely feels the way they do when it comes to guns.

As for security professionals, they're not all exactly on top of the legal/tactical stuff, but I haven't seen anyone trying to OC empty weapons yet. The closest thing I've seen is a company that required its agents to keep an issued firearm unloaded and in a safe at a residence.

Empty/exposed carry is something that is being done either by sole gun activists or within the context of demonstrations throughout the state. Just like people have been (unsuccessfully) suing local LEAs for not issuing CCWs for decades.
And while I greatly sympathize with what gun activists are trying to do, I think they may be hurting their cause more than anything else (personal opinion). Cops hassle or arrest them and all they do is scare the horses.

And I'm sure that most (not all! I know guys who helped put the obamination in office. :eek:) people in our industry vote the same way, but:
1. We're a minority,
2. With pols here, we always end up giving our vote to the lesser of two evils, and gun laws are (very) low on their list.

Looking at CA from a state like FL, TX, or AZ is probably very puzzling!

Personally, I do my best to stay on top of the regs and laws (it's not easy!), then... do what I have to do to get the job done while keeping everybody employed, safe, and out of jail. :D

P.S.: I doubt you'd offend anyone knowing the law or realistic about our beautiful messed up state. :D

ETA: neither the Constitution nor the courts give us rights. They have been long established as "God-given" and are merely stated by the former and regulated by the latter. How far the courts have gone in muzzling our rights in the name of public safety or national security is often what people disagree on.

[black knife]

There is confusion on the open carry situation. Some think that they can carry an empty pistol in a holster and carry a loaded magazine on their person. Are they right?

I read the penal code 12031 P.C. hundreds of times and it does not state that you can't have a loaded magazine on your person. So you have some individuals that carry an unloaded firearm and also a loaded magazine in their back pocket.

I think this is pushing it and will probably lead them to being placed in custody. Why go through all that to prove a point. Plus the state is coming out with a bill that would remove that seciton from 12025 about the open carry anyway and it will end the controversy.



Penal Code 12031 section

g) A firearm shall be deemed to be loaded for the purposes of
this section 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; except that 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.

[Lone Wolf]

Well I dont believe that everyone... should be allowed to carry a firearm although, I understand that this is a double edged sword.. I dont believe that people should be inherently denied the right to carry either.. Bottom line is that there are some gun toating nut jobs out there that should never be allowed close to ANY type of firearm..

An armed public is a free public.. My issue is with the people that have mental health conditions and such..

I personally am a RIGHT WING GUN TOATING FREAK... Just my belief..

My attitude is... If you are going to carry a firearm is should be ready for use at all times.. Other wise.. Whats the point..

You bring up well you could carry a magazine in your pocket or somewhere else on your person.. Great.. Here is a scenario for you then..

You walk into a store that is being robbed by a gangbanger.. He sees your open carry weapon and immediately thinks THREAT..

You say (Not you specifically) wait Mr. Gangbanger.. Let me load my weapon first...

YEAH NOT...

Sorry...

Not my cup of tea... If Im carrying its ready for use... Plain and simple....

Again it wasnt meant to be directed towards anyone or to create an argument of any type.. Just an opinion..

Again I believe in the Consititution of the United States.. I am a RIGHT WING EXTREMIST.. Department of Homeland Security has said so..

Again just a point of view and I do believe that FREEDOM is not FREE...

[black knife]

Well I dont believe that everyone... should be allowed to carry a firearm although, I understand that this is a double edged sword.. I dont believe that people should be inherently denied the right to carry either.. Bottom line is that there are some gun toating nut jobs out there that should never be allowed close to ANY type of firearm..

An armed public is a free public.. My issue is with the people that have mental health conditions and such..

I personally am a RIGHT WING GUN TOATING FREAK... Just my belief..

My attitude is... If you are going to carry a firearm is should be ready for use at all times.. Other wise.. Whats the point..

You bring up well you could carry a magazine in your pocket or somewhere else on your person.. Great.. Here is a scenario for you then..

You walk into a store that is being robbed by a gangbanger.. He sees your open carry weapon and immediately thinks THREAT..

You say (Not you specifically) wait Mr. Gangbanger.. Let me load my weapon first...

YEAH NOT...

Sorry...

Not my cup of tea... If Im carrying its ready for use... Plain and simple....

Again it wasnt meant to be directed towards anyone or to create an argument of any type.. Just an opinion..

Again I believe in the Consititution of the United States.. I am a RIGHT WING EXTREMIST.. Department of Homeland Security has said so..

Again just a point of view and I do believe that FREEDOM is not FREE...

I agree.....I believe if you are going to carry a gun it should be concealed. No need to draw attention to your self and have some idiot trying to take your gun and use it on you. I can bet that half of the people (untrained) that carry guns don't have the skills to retain it.

However I think California needs to lighten up on the gun laws and be more like Arizona. I just recently took a CCW class in Arizona to obtain an Arizona CCW. The class was 8 hours long and it was torture me but for someone that has no prior training or experience on carrying a gun I think it was beneficial.

California could do the same type of program and issue out CCW's for qualified people. Take away the issuing of permits from the Chiefs and Sheriffs and let the state take over. Hell this might help out with some of the budget problems the state is having.

[Local Talent]

California could do the same type of program and issue out CCW's for qualified people. Take away the issuing of permits from the Chiefs and Sheriffs and let the state take over. Hell this might help out with some of the budget problems the state is having.
That's happened in other states and I know that some people are hopeful we can get that ball rolling in Cali as well. Yes, there is some revenue involved, but I'm a pessimist (realist?). I think that keeping people defenseless is more important, you know, for the children, to our local pols. :rolleyes:

I'm a gun guy, too, and wish our rights weren't constantly trampled on in so many ways, not just the gun stuff. They tell us how much water we can use, so don't be surprised that they put all these rules in the books on open and concealed carry of firearms. And it's hard to get back what you've given away, although we just saw it happen in AZ.
Wolf, my friend, when you come visit and operate here, you should be personally 100% covered by LEOSA but you know now to expect some headaches if you have armed employees in our state... :o

And I share your concerns about some elements of the population. Thing is, in Cali it's a large portion (personal opinion - I don't have numbers) that either can't or shouldn't have access to guns, because of psychological or background issues, or because they've been quasi-lobotomized by years of liberal endoctrination.

Those open carry activists we're talking about have nothing to do with EP, BTW, and they're not keeping their guns unloaded by choice. They're trying to bring a little attention to the ridiculous CA laws. Legislators have made it very hard to RKBA here, and very clear that they have no concern for the average citizen's safety. Such insane questions as "should I lock my gun case inside my already-locked car trunk?" or "is a loaded magazine a weapon?" are symptomatic of the kafkaeque situation we find ourselves in to stay in compliance at all times.

In CA, civilian open carry is legal but, and that's a big but, a real minefield. Because it can be prohibited by local ordinances and police are not happy to respond to the "man with a gun" calls sure to come. Should it matter? In Rome, do as the Romans do, I say. So I also agree with Black Knife's statement that CCW is preferable to OC. And I practice "don't ask, don't tell". :)

Making the exercise of a right as hard and confusing as possible is of course the goal when you can't make it disappear outright. Nothing new, guys, it's socialism showing its ugly face for you.

So... to keep it EP-related, and for the sake of our foreign and out-of-state friends here, California's armed security personnel normally are either:

1. Carrying openly (with exposed carry permit from the state): while in full uniform and on duty only.

2. Carrying concealed (with CCW issued by local authorities - sheriff or chief of police for civilians, or by their agencies for LEOs - it's a little more complicated, actually) if plain-clothed. Rules of issuance and requirements for LEOs (off duty or retired) vary wildly, and are as varied as there are agencies.

In both above cases, we carry real firearms only, duly loaded, chambered, and ready to rock, thank you very much!

Civilians with CCWs and not in private security (yes, there's a few) have to play by the rules of their issuing authority, but none is made to carry an empty weapon and the firearms are to remain concealed at all times.

[Lone Wolf]

See from what I understand is that if you are an LEO you are covered under HB 218 which technically means you dont need a ccw permit..

I think that if you want to carry a firearm, everyone should have to have some sort of training.. Plain and simple.. I think that especially in Cali.. You guys out there are totally screwed by the bleeding hearted liberals that run the state... Its time for the people of the state of California to take back their rights from the government.. Vote people out of office and put ones in that are pro firearms..

I understand that it at least seems that the people from Cali want these kinds of politicians in office.. If not them more pro gunners need to be headed to the polls and do what ever it takes to remove these people from office...

[Local Talent]

See from what I understand is that if you are an LEO you are covered under HB 218 which technically means you dont need a ccw permit...
I'll let an LEO get into that, but it's not that simple. Some LEOs dont qualify (retired before having enough years on the job, for example, or tech reserves. The retired police ID must have an endorsement stating they qualify under LEOSA).

I think that if you want to carry a firearm, everyone should have to have some sort of training.. Plain and simple...
I think so too, because:

I think that especially in Cali.. You guys out there are totally screwed by the bleeding hearted liberals that run the state...
AMEN!

Its time for the people of the state of California to take back their rights from the government.. Vote people out of office and put ones in that are pro firearms..

I understand that it at least seems that the people from Cali want these kinds of politicians in office.. If not them more pro gunners need to be headed to the polls and do what ever it takes to remove these people from office...
Where are those pro-guns candidates, ya know? That's our problem here. I don't blame out-of-staters who call us Kalifornistan...

http://www.socalbodyguards.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=5&pictureid=119 http://www.socalbodyguards.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=5&pictureid=53

[Local Talent]

"Some places (mostly Conservative) most problems can be solved with an apology and a handshake. In other places (mostly Liberal) problems are solved with a good butt kicking or lots of ammunition."
I stole this from a post on a gun forum I was just reading, as I believe it to be at the heart of the matter...

I have found the above to be true. It follows that in the first kind of place, guns are allowed, while in the other, they are taken away. The other side of that coin is that where guns are present, folks behave even more (the "polite, armed society" thing), whereas when they are largely prohibited, people are free to be the a-holes they were to begin with.

And I'm not sure that those things can ever change.

[Lone Wolf]

I think with all the gun rulings that are coming down the turnpike, its just a matter of time until it reaches Cali... With the gun rules in DC being changed and now Chicago under fire... Its going to have a domino effect.... Its a matter of time....

[Local Talent]

Fruits, nuts... and guns, then?! :eek: :D :thumbs: