• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

San Fernando Valley PD gets dinged 44K

P

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
Story here:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=388412

Why is this significant for the UOC movement (or gun rights in general) you ask? Look no further than this training memo. Jason Davis pretty much served SFVPD's collective posteriors on a silver platter and the result is THE BEST memo TO DATE on most of the arcane, asinine and lame gun laws here in KA.

http://hoffmang.com/firearms/diaz/DiazSignedAgreement.pdf

Self-tooting of the horn here: I have a personal connection to this case because the plaintiff (Diaz) called me to help him gather evidence for this case by having a small OC gathering and recording the entire occasion. Mulay El Raisuli was my primary wingman on this venture and just by chance Mike Hunt and his cool wife were able to join me and participate as well. Mike Hunt was instrumental in gathering the video to go with my audio.

Good work to all those involved! I am glad to see that Mr. Diaz persevered and FINALLY got some justice. Kudos to Jason Davis as well!

CARRY ON!

-N8
 
N605TW

N605TW

Activist Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2010
Messages
118
Location
Columbus, Ohio
On page 11 of 18 the .pdf talks about how a loaded firearm is defined in California. It cites PC12031(g) and People v Clark. I'm confused on they are abiding by People v Clark witch would allow you to have a loaded magazine without a cartridge in the chamber or if they are abiding by Pc12031 that states you can't have a cartridge "...attached in any manner" Anyone have any thoughts?
 
M

markm

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
487
Location
, ,
Bravo!

Thanks to Jason Davis and Calguns!!!!

I am going to deliver a copy of the settlement to my Police Chief for his review.

I can't believe that San Fernando allowed this process to go on for this long. They acted illegally and blatantly so.

They arrested a federal LEO for having an openly carried gun case (I know, firearm inside)?

Think about my last sentence. Diaz is a LEO. He has a clearly identifiable gun case on the back seat. Where was officer discretion in this case (forget about the finer points of law or civil rights)?

A Sherriff Mack type LEO would have admonished Diaz to carry concealed, UOC, or properly lock the case. Police intervention over, everybody goes home with no jail time or civil rights lawsuits.

Thanks again CalGuns and Jason Davis.

This case is an example of a politician police chief who does not differentiate between progressive dogma and "clearly established civil rights and the Penal Code".

Writing as a USCG licensed master mariner, the Coast Guard is a true law enforcement agency. You would not believe the authority they have on the high seas. Civil rights don't apply out there.

markm
 
M

markm

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
487
Location
, ,
Listen to BigToe!

N605TW said:
On page 11 of 18 the .pdf talks about how a loaded firearm is defined in California. It cites PC12031(g) and People v Clark. I'm confused on they are abiding by People v Clark witch would allow you to have a loaded magazine without a cartridge in the chamber or if they are abiding by Pc12031 that states you can't have a cartridge "...attached in any manner" Anyone have any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Bigtoe has admonished UOCers to read court rulings. Court rulings are interpretations of law based on actual circumstances.

Because of case law, ammo is considered in a position to be fired if a round is capable of being jacked into the chamber. My hunting rifle has a "round in a position to fire" whenever I have ammo in the magazine, even if the chamber is empty. This is case law.

Bullets taped to the gunstock cannot be jacked into the chamber by operating a bolt or slide.

markm
 
DooFster

DooFster

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
445
Location
Nellis AFB, Nevada
If I was to pass this PDF to LEO's in this area, will they accept it, or would they just say something like "...but that's for San Fernando PD..." and then send me packing?
 
mjones

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
Small point of clarification; there is no "San Fernando Valley PD" - Simply "San Fernando PD" Most of the San Fernando Valley is actually Los Angeles PD. The city of San Fernando is only about 2 to 3 square miles in size.
 
J

Jason Davis

New member
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
1
Location
Orange County
mjones said:
Small point of clarification; there is no "San Fernando Valley PD" - Simply "San Fernando PD" Most of the San Fernando Valley is actually Los Angeles PD. The city of San Fernando is only about 2 to 3 square miles in size.
Click to expand...
]

Correct, it is just for the City of San Fernando: http://www.ci.san-fernando.ca.us/city_government/departments/police/index.shtml

Thanks Pullnshoot25! The goal was to provide a substantial education memo so that these things never happen again - to anyone.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top