California legal folder and automatic

SimplyMinded said:
I wonder wjy he got searched on his own property.
Click to expand...

Jesse B covered it. It wasn't his property. The police were responding to a call of a break in, so they had a legal right to enter the private property. As far as why they searched SC, who knows. They had already determined that SC had permission to be there, there is no mention of SC behaving in a suspicious or threatening manner, no mention that an officer could clearly see a switchblade in his possession (clear view doctrine). The courts ruling is thin on details.

Whatever the reason may be, SC and his lawyer did not challenge the legality of the actual search on Fourth Amendment grounds during their appeal, they only challenged the possession/carrying of the switchblade claiming that because he was on private property, and because the statute (653k) only referred to possession in public places in regards to vehicles, that his conviction should be overturned. The court disagreed, and their ruling made it illegal to carry a switchblade on ones own property as a result.
 
Last edited:
BootKnifeFan said:
I suppose it could happen if the police were on your property for another reason, such as a disturbance of the peace reported by a neighbor. Depending on your appearance and demeanor, the responding officers could perform a Terry frisk for officer safety. If the switchblade is discovered under those circumstances, you would most likely be charged. Terry searches are routine and have been upheld by the courts as lawful.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that could conceivably happen. Of course it's never a good idea to do things that might draw a visit from the police, particularly if you're illegally carrying a switchblade. Fortunately, that does not apply to me. I don't do things to invite the police into my life, or into my home.

I said I could come up with a variety of hypothetical scenarios in which an LEO could discover a person carrying a switchblade on their own property, but there can be a big difference between something hypothetical, and something that is realistically possible. The idea that I might experience a Terry Stop at home is so unlikely that I consider it to be implausible, and I don't live my life or make decisions based on implausibility.

It's not like we're talking about walking around ones front yard with a flame thrower. We're talking about a knife.

There are freedoms provided by law, but I also believe there are freedoms that a man chooses for himself, particularly when laws are unjust. There are things I won't do regarding knives because I have determined for myself that the risks, and potential consequences are just a little too high for my liking (like carrying a concealed fixed-blade in public), but I'm a big believer in having the freedom to carry whatever knife I want at home, in any manner I want, regardless of what the written law says, and so I do.

It's important to know ones local knife laws, and it's good to be reasonably cautious. But there can come a point where caution crosses the line into paranoia, and that's a line I choose not to cross. Like I said, everyone can gauge the risks and choose for themselves. I've made my choice.
 
Last edited:
killgar said:
Yeah, that could conceivably happen. Of course it's never a good idea to do things that might draw a visit from the police, particularly if you're illegally carrying a switchblade. Fortunately, that does not apply to me. I don't do things to invite the police into my life, or into my home.

I said that I could come up with a variety of hypothetical scenarios where an LEO might discover a person is carrying a switchblade on their own property, but on reflection, I wouldn't call them hypothetical, I'd call them implausible. At least for me.

I regard an implausibility as an occurrence so unlikely to happen that it excludes consideration as a realistic possibility. The idea that I might experience a Terry Stop at home is so unlikely that I consider it to be an implausibility, and I don't live my life or make decisions based on implausibility.

It's not like we're talking about walking around ones front yard with a flame thrower. We're talking about a knife.

There are freedoms provided by law, but I also believe there are freedoms that a man chooses for himself, particularly when laws are unjust. There are things I won't do regarding knives because I have determined for myself that the risks, and potential consequences are just a little too high for my liking (like carrying a concealed fixed-blade in public), but I'm a big believer in having the freedom to carry whatever knife I want at home, in any manner I want, regardless of what the written law says, and so I do.

It's important to know ones local knife laws, and it's good to be reasonably cautious. But there can come a point where caution crosses the line into paranoia, and that's a line I choose not to cross. Like I said, everyone can gauge the risks and choose for themselves. I've made my choice.
[/QUOTE
killgar said:
Jesse B covered it. It wasn't his property. The police were responding to a call, so they had a legal right to enter the private property (a very important detail). As far as why they searched SC, who knows. They had already determined that SC had permission to be there, there is no mention of SC behaving in a suspicious or threatening manner, no mention that an officer could clearly see a switchblade in his possession (clear view doctrine) so it could be a simple matter of "because we're cops and we feel like it". Maybe SC had a snotty attitude. We'll never know.

Whatever the reason may be, SC and his lawyer did not challenge the legality of the actual search on Fourth Amendment grounds during their appeal, they only challenged the possession/carrying of the switchblade claiming that because he was on private property, and because the statute (653k) only referred to possession in public places in regards to vehicles, that his conviction should be overturned. The court disagreed, and their ruling made it illegal to carry a switchblade on ones own property as a result.
Click to expand...
I ended up inheriting a pristine Gerber Mark II, 1960s vintage, that my late uncle owned. My aunt and cousins were not interested in it so it ended up in my possession. Carrying a double edged knife on one's person or in a motor vehicle here in Massachusetts is a felony. In order to avoid any problems whatsoever, I placed that knife in my small arms locker with my (licensed) rifles and shotguns. It is a "safe queen". My EDC is a 100% legal 4" folder. No way am I chancing a felony conviction and lifetime prohibited person status.
Click to expand...
 
killgar said:
Jesse B covered it. It wasn't his property. The police were responding to a call of a break in, so they had a legal right to enter the private property. As far as why they searched SC, who knows. They had already determined that SC had permission to be there, there is no mention of SC behaving in a suspicious or threatening manner, no mention that an officer could clearly see a switchblade in his possession (clear view doctrine). The courts ruling is thin on details.

Whatever the reason may be, SC and his lawyer did not challenge the legality of the actual search on Fourth Amendment grounds during their appeal, they only challenged the possession/carrying of the switchblade claiming that because he was on private property, and because the statute (653k) only referred to possession in public places in regards to vehicles, that his conviction should be overturned. The court disagreed, and their ruling made it illegal to carry a switchblade on ones own property as a result.
Click to expand...
Overreach.
 
Jesse B. said:
https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2009/a123371/

“[…]police were called to a residence in Petaluma to investigate a possible break-in. When the first officer arrived, he found several people in the house. After questioning one of the group, the officer concluded they were there with permission. During this conversation, appellant and three other people left the house through the front door, without any prompting from the officer.
Several other officers had responded to the scene. By the time the second testifying officer arrived, three young men, including appellant, were sitting on the porch, facing a group of officers. The testifying officer decided to search the young men, starting with appellant. He directed appellant to leave the porch and come to where he was standing on the grass. The search revealed a folding knife with a three-inch blade in the pocket of appellant’s shorts. The officer determined the knife blade could be flipped open easily and concluded it was an illegal “switchblade” knife.
The juvenile court found true the allegation that appellant was in possession of a switchblade knife, determined appellant to be a ward of the court, and placed him on probation.”
Click to expand...
I wonder what model knife that was... maybe it wasn't a an actual switchblade at all but rather a beaten up china folder that had a few screws loose...
 
ferider said:
Except for some specific illegal to carry knife types (gravity, Balisong, etc), or on school properties (blade < 2.5“) or in government buildings (< 4“), there is no blade size restriction for manual folders or openly carried fixed blades in CA. Counties are a different story.

But I’m not a lawyer, please do your own research. For example check with your Sheriff.
Click to expand...
Good info. I wasn't aware. Thanks!
 
killgar said:
Just for the sake of complete accuracy-

It's also illegal to carry a switchblade (blade 2" or longer) on ones person on private property, including in ones own home.

This is the result of an Appeals Court ruling from 2009, People v SC (a juvenile court case, so no name of defendant).

Notice how in statute 21510, under part (b), it only says "Carries the knife upon the person", with no mention of public or private property/places. Link-


In People v SC, Mr. SC was found to have a switchblade on his person (in a pocket) while on private property. He was arrested, convicted, and appealed. He tried to argue that the "public place" reference in part (a), which refers to a switchblade in a vehicle in a public place, should also apply to part (b), carrying a switchblade on ones person, and that since he was carrying on private property rather than a public place that his conviction should be overturned.

But the Appeals Court did not agree, ruling that because part (b) doesn't specify public or private property, that it applies to everywhere in the state, including in ones own home.

Here are some quotes from their ruling-

"we conclude the statute is violated any time a person carries a switchblade knife on his or her person, regardless of where the possession occurs".

"A switchblade carried on the person represents a constant threat to others, whether carried in public or in private".

"A switchblade carried at home, for example, is dangerous to family members and house guests during an argument".

This is one of the most boneheaded rulings that I have seen the California Appeals Court make. But on the bright side, there is language in that ruling, that in my opinion, confirms ones legal right to possess "switchblades" (blades 2" or longer), in the state of California.

Here is a link to their ruling- https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2009/a123371/

Note: That ruling refers to section 653k, which was the switchblade statute in 2009, California later changed how they numbered penal code statutes. Section 653k was changed to 21510.
Click to expand...
What level of infraction is this? Low felony?
 
Puppy'sPal said:
Woah, woah, woah, the wording is so nuts in regards to this California law. Can't even store in one's car in one's own garage? What if it's a vintage switchblade stored in an old restored VW that always remains parked in the garage? Mind blowing.

Then you can't even put the knife in your pocket? Well, guess I can now be open to collecting 8 ounces and above given have to keep them on the dresser or display case. 😆

What I'd really like to know is, and I've contacted a few DA's and lawyers but so far none have provided advice because they can't technically provide "legal counsel" regarding this issue. This issue is whether or not switchblades or OTF's can be used legally in self-defense situation on one's own property/premises?

Let's say hypothetical, you are hanging with the fam watching a movie and all of a sudden at 10:30pm at night a few loud knocks hit your door. You get up to see who it is at this hour and lo and behold 3 masked guys all decked out in gear want you to open your door. I'm no gun owner but often carry a good sized knife on me. Or, let's say you're watching tv and all of a sudden a ski-masked fellow barges in at 3pm and all you have is that legal but illegal auto in your pocket. If push came to shove, could you use this knife in self-defense to protect you or your family? I ask this because I'll often have an auto on me over a manual, however whenever out the house, will always choose the manual.

Anyone have background in prosecution or defense?
Click to expand...
Common sense answer is, if there is immediate threat to live or limb.

I will now withdraw to shop flamethrowers 😄😉

Good luck, from Texas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top