EEllis wrote:puma guy wrote:if a CHL holder unloads their weapon in public that would require exposing it. That's currently a violation.
Under the directions of a peace office at the entry table? I doubt it. And the fact that it would contradict doesn't automatically invalidate anything.
You may be correct if directed by a peace officer. I am missing the point of the second statement.[/quote]
The fact that you can't unload without displaying doesn't automatically render the requirement to unload invalid or actionable. Additionally by the time it could get to court the "illegal" display issue will no longer be, well, illegal. Not really a winner of an argument IMO. While it seems clearly against the intention of the new law I see nothing that would violate the actual language of the law.[/quote]
I guess we'll just have to disagree. The building is owned by the City of Pasadena. Doesn't matter what venue is renting the building it can not be made off limits to CHL by any of the 30.06 notification methods, i.e. verbal, written or signage notification per SB273. Having police force CHL holders unloading their weapons is oxymoronic to the intent of being able to carry a concealed weapon since it's rendered useless. It may even be illegal, unless the police are going to claim it's for officer safety; but that horse may not trot, since they are specifically enforcing the illegal notice on the ticket and signage. Say a school puts up a sign to prevent a CHL from having their weapon loaded while in the parking lot and hires police to enforce it. Are you Ok with that? In my humble non-lawyer opinion Pasadena will lose this battle.