Municipal Codes

[wolfindagger]

Hello all! Been reading these forums for some time and finally made the decision to join because I have a question of my own to ask. I recently moved to a new city, and with that, I am now under new laws regarding knives, etc.
Below I have pasted the Municipal Codes on so-called "Dangerous Weapons":::

- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -

Chapter 10.12 DANGEROUS WEAPONS
Note
* As to carrying dangerous or deadly weapons concealed, see § 10.12.020. As to use of firearms in parks, see § 14.08.050.

10.12.010 Definition.
A dangerous or deadly weapon is defined as and includes, but is not limited to any dirk, dagger, any knife with a blade three inches or more in length, any snap-blade or spring-blade knife, regardless of the length of the blade, any ice pick or similar sharp-stabbing tool, any straight-edge razor or any razor blade fitted to a handle, any dangerous or deadly weapon within the meaning of any law of this state restricting the use thereof, and any cutting, stabbing or bludgeoning weapon or device capable of inflicting grievous bodily harm and any firearm other than one carried pursuant to a valid permit issued by a duly authorized government authority or an ordinary rifle or shotgun lawfully carried for the purpose of hunting or other lawful sport. (Prior code § 18-8)

10.12.020 Carrying concealed weapons.
No person shall be or appear on or within any street, alley, sidewalk, parkway or any public place or place open to public view while carrying concealed upon his person or having in his immediate possession any dangerous weapon.
The restrictions contained in this section shall not be deemed to prohibit the carrying of or having possession of ordinary tools or equipment carried by any person in connection with his trade, employment, business or profession or for the purpose of legitimate sport or recreation. (Prior code § 18-9)

10.12.030 Discharge of firearms within city—Possession by minors in public.
(a) No person shall shoot or discharge any gun, pistol or firearm or any air gun or pistol or any spring gun or pistol or any device that shoots or propels pellets or missiles by any means, unless such person shall first have obtained a written permit from the police department to discharge such firearm or other device within the city.
(b) It is unlawful for any person to allow or permit a minor under eighteen years of age to have or to carry any gun or device set forth in this section upon any public thoroughfare or upon any public property or in any vehicle within the city.
(c) It is unlawful to sell, give away, barter, or trade, any gun, pistol, or firearms or any air gun or pistol or any spring gun or pistol or any device that shoots or propels pellets or missiles by any means, to any minor under the age of eighteen years.
(d) It is unlawful to sell, give away, barter, or trade any ammunition, pellets, missiles or any device used for shooting from pistols, guns or firearms, or any springloaded gun or pistol or device that shoots or propels or missiles by any means to any person under the age of eighteen (18) years without the written consent of the police department.
(e) It is unlawful for any parent, juvenile, or any person to transport or have shipped into the city any of the abovementioned items for the use of any person under the age of eighteen (18) years.
(f) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit any person from carrying or transporting a rifle, shotgun, spring gun, pellet gun, airgun, or other firearm to any bona fide target range or while going to or returning from a hunting trip or other lawful sport. (Ord. 71-O-129 §§ 1, 2, 1971; prior code § 18-16)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I have read over the codes several times, but I'm confused because I am not exactly sure if my concept of a term is the same as the lawmakers. For example, when they say, "any cutting, stabbing or bludgeoning weapon or device capable of inflicting grievous bodily harm" what do they actually mean. Any knife could kill somebody if used right, so, is this line considering all knives to be "dangerous weapons." And also, they say, "Spring-blade knife." How far are they taking that phrase. Switchblade? AO knife? or basically any knife?, because even average lockback knives use a bar that acts like a spring to lock the blade open.

Also, when they say in 10.12.020, " immediate possession " what does that mean? Does this mean that you can't carry any knife on you at all if your an average person? And if not any knife, if it does qualify as being a dangerous weapon under the 3 inches or more blade length clause, is it considered to be in immediate possession if in a pocket or in a sheath on the belt?

Also the part about "aforementioned items" in 10.12.030 (e) applies only to 10.12.030 and not the before-that-mentioned knives, correct?

In addition, I am a minor. However, in about a year I turn 18, so when you answer, please tell me how things might be different depending on that. Also please note that I am going to contact the police department to ascertain the exact definitions, etc, but I before I do that, I want to ask you guys what you think so I can understand the situation a little bit better. Also, since I am new to this, forgive me if I posted this in the wrong section of this forum.

Thank you all for your help! I know that was a lot to read, but if you help me, it is greatly appreciated!


Peace out.

 

[hardheart]

The definition includes pretty much everything. It does not exclude any object capable of causing any harm. Technically an ink pen qualifies as a dangerous weapon if you aren't working or in school.

 

[ron_m80]

1st post, welcome.

Knife laws sub-forum.

I use this homepage, it really helps you find your way around Bladeforums. Bookmark it if you like it.

 

[risen]

Hi wolfindagger,

Speaking as a non-lawyer, a lot of the language used is pretty much standard stuff for local/city codes, which tend to be more specific/restrictive than state statutes.

I believe the main part you should be focusing on is, "A dangerous or deadly weapon is defined as and includes, but is not limited to any dirk, dagger, any knife with a blade three inches or more in length, any snap-blade or spring-blade knife, regardless of the length of the blade, ..."

Basically, it seems if you have a knife with a blade under 3" in length, and it's not an automatic or assisted-opening knife, you should be okay, as long as there's no age requirement. If you're not sure about the specs of your knife, check that company's info on the model.

Regarding "10.12.020 Carrying concealed weapons.", this applies if your knife falls under the the first part, "10.12.010 Definition." (over 3", etc...), I believe. In other words, if your knife's legal (not defined as a "dangerous weapon"), you should be fine. Please keep in mind, there are other factors to be considered, like intent/use. Never claim to carry a knife for protection. Don't take onto school property, etc..., that sort of stuff.

So, if your knife's legal, you shouldn't have to worry about "10.12.020 Carrying concealed weapons.", in my layman opinion.

Regarding "Also the part about "aforementioned items" in 10.12.030 (e) applies only to 10.12.030 and not the before-that-mentioned knives, correct?" I believe you are correct.

...I am going to contact the police department to ascertain the exact definitions, etc,...

That's fine. However, please keep in mind that most Police/Peace Officers cannot interpret laws (except for those elite few who've gone to law school & passed the bar). Cops mostly just enforce laws, so their own knowledge is more basic. They're just given enough to make a legal call out in the field, which later gets reviewed by superiors and/or the District Attorney's Office.

I believe many don't fully understand legal definitions/interpretations. Realistically, they wouldn't/shouldn't have time to apply a full understanding out in the field, where quick decisions have to be made. Still, their understanding/misunderstanding may be enough to cause you & your family grief/money if they mistakenly confiscate your knife and/or arrest you, even if the whole thing gets dismissed later.

That said, there really are some great cops out there with a lot of experience & wisdom who have a better grasp on definitions, and the judgement to give you terrific advice. If you come to know one of them, make him/her your best friend and you'll never go wrong.

Mostly, I believe only attorneys can interpret laws, with very few exceptions.

If you really want more accurate information, and you can't afford a lawyer, ask a Public Defender. Just schedule an appointment and one should be able to answer most, if not all, your questions. Also, don't be afraid to ask a Deputy/Assistant District Attorney. See if your parents have a friend who's an attorney. Hey, he/she might give you some free advice (should be used to it, lol!).

Please keep in mind that both Police/Peace Officers and Deputy/Assistant District Attorneys may be more discouraging about you carrying a knife, for obvious reasons. Ultimately, the decision is yours, with your parent's consent, as long as it's legal.

Oh, I know, check with the local Boy Scouts. They might be helpful.

Again, please know that we're just basically covering things here. You've only provided a few quotes, and there's a lot more to consider (what's your actual city & state, what's the status quo there, etc...).

We're all constituents of the legislature, so as citizens, we can kick around the meaning/s of laws as non-lawyers, in my humble opinion. Plus, don't forget, one can always represent himself/herself in court (I know, I know, a fool for a client...).

Anyway, hope this helps.

 

[Watchful]

For what it's worth, I concur with Risen's interpretations.

 

[MORIMOTOM]

That's fine. However, please keep in mind that most Police/Peace Officers cannot interpret laws (except for those elite few who've gone to law school & passed the bar). Cops mostly just enforce laws, so their own knowledge is more basic. They're just given enough to make a legal call out in the field, which later gets reviewed by superiors and/or the District Attorney's Office.


Mostly, I believe only attorneys can interpret laws, with very few exceptions.

overall, good post with useful information.

i have only highlighted portions to which i would like to respond, as i'm not sure i completely understand their intent.

police officers do in fact interpret laws on a daily basis. many, if not most, laws are written vaguely and intentionally left open to interpretation. at the base of this interpretation is the specific officer's training and experience, added to the facts (objective and subjective) of the specific encounter.

an officer's interpretation, does not however, create a legal standard in and of itself. this is only done by a judge's interpretation of a law or an action.

 

[risen]

...police officers do in fact interpret laws on a daily basis. many, if not most, laws are written vaguely and intentionally left open to interpretation. at the base of this interpretation is the specific officer's training and experience, added to the facts (objective and subjective) of the specific encounter.

I agree, in part.

As I've already stated, we can all interpret the law for ourselves, just as we can represent ourselves, and even effect a citizen's arrest on our own. We can also share our own interpretations for others, as long as it's clearly established/understood that it's from a non-lawyer/layman perspective. That includes Police/Peace Officers.

Officers can & do interpret the law in an authoritative capacity, but only within the extent of their own performance/enforcement of the law in given situations, which may include citing laws to others (not quite the same as interpreting), contributing their own past experience/s with those laws, and they can even go into procedural aspects.

However, they cannot, from a counseling perspective, officially/legally define & interpret the law for others. That would constitute giving legal advice, I believe, which only attorneys can do. When experts recommend folks seek out legal advice, they don't suggest going to LEOs.

The main intent with my prior post was to point out that Police/Peace Officers may not always be the best source for understanding the definition/interpretation of laws.

For instance, if I didn't know better and I wanted to find out what the possible outcome might be in court regarding a knife charge, and I wanted to seek input from a uniformed officer, I wouldn't ask a cop, I'd ask a Court Bailiff. They witness court operations daily and are very familiar with sentencing trends/current mandates (including plea deals, etc...). They know the Judges (styles, etc...), and all the regular players (prosecution & defense).

For non-uniformed input, there are the usual suspects, Judges & attorneys (which are usually the best sources), and paralegals & investigators. I'd also go to court clerks (they assist the Judges), court reporters, even court personnel who handle court filings/records.

Some of these folks also can't interpret the law (give legal advice). However, they can, without going into specifics, indicate the majority of outcomes in particular cases.

an officer's interpretation, does not however, create a legal standard in and of itself. this is only done by a judge's interpretation of a law or an action.

If it gets to a Judge.

I agree with this quote. Basically, an officer's "interpretation" is a tentative call, pending an upper decision/outcome, which is why that "interpretation of the law" cannot be considered as an official/accurate/complete source to go by, in most cases.

I do realize cop's decisions have to take many things into account in a minimal amount of time. It's a tough job. Fortunately, there are some really great cops in the field (out on the streets). I wish there were more.

 

[MORIMOTOM]

^^

i thought so, but wasn't certain.

thx for the clarification. as per usual, i believe we are on the same page.

 

[risen]

thx for the clarification. as per usual, i believe we are on the same page.

Yes, sir.

You're welcome.

 

[tom19176]

Good reading gents thanks! I have found that in reguards to knives ( what this forum is all about and why we are talking to eachother) there is alot of confusion and different opinions from all levels of the legal system. The police, DA and private lawyers may tell you several different things that contracdict eachother, and mostly restrict your rights more than the law actually does. Most officers and DA's will simply tell you knives are bad and all but small folders are illegal.
I am not sure if this would help the OP, but in NY it is written in the penal law that it is an affirmative defense to act in accordance with the direction given by someone in authoirty to uphold the law. This would include the police and DA. If you were to get an written statement from one or both of them that allows for the carry of the knife you chose, then by NY standards you would have a strong defense if charged. Just my non lawyer understanding of the laws in NY....lol....

 

[Speed Triple]

Crappy bylaws!!! In SA everything goes!!!!

 

[KennyB]

I've talked to a few law enforcement officers about the legality of knives, and I think the key is to ask the right questions. A lot of them aren't going to be comfortable enough with their knowledge of the law to say definitively if something is legal; however, they will tell you what they will arrest you for. So for example, your law says that you cannot carry a knife concealed, as does my state law; I would ask, "If my knife was found under my shirt, but above the waist-band, would you arrest me for concealment?"

Really, what you're most concerned with is not how the officer interprets the law, but whether he's going to make an arrest, seizure or citation. That's how I feel about it anyway. Consulting a lawyer about the legality of things may be fine, but if a police officer disagrees with your lawyer, you're going to find yourself detained until a court date for "the law" to make a difference. Personally I like to focus on staying out of jail rather than what my defense will be after arrested.

I suppose there's an off chance that a police officer might give you bad advice, or advice that one of his fellow officer's may not agree with, so it's still good to have a take on it from a lawyer... The thing to remember is that when you talk to a lawyer about it, you're discussing case law, and typically things that are going to be used as a defense after arrest. As I said, I think avoiding arrest in the first place is the smartest idea, and for that I would trust law enforcement officers to give you a good idea of what they would and would not make an arrest on.

 

[risen]

...A lot of them aren't going to be comfortable enough with their knowledge of the law to say definitively if something is legal; however, they will tell you what they will arrest you for. ...

So, they're not comfortable with their own knowledge of the law to say if something is legal, but would arrest, anyway? I don't think so.

Really, what you're most concerned with is not how the officer interprets the law, but whether he's going to make an arrest, seizure or citation. ...Personally I like to focus on staying out of jail rather than what my defense will be after arrested. ...

On the contrary, folks should be most concerned with how an officer interprets the law because it's a primary factor in whether or not they're going to make an arrest, in my opinion.

For me, I don't believe people should have to worry about whether or not they're going to be arrested if they're not breaking the law.

If anything, it's the cop who should be most concerned if he/she goes around making too many bogus busts. I believe that would make for a very short career in law enforcement.

...Consulting a lawyer about the legality of things may be fine, but if a police officer disagrees with your lawyer, you're going to find yourself detained until a court date for "the law" to make a difference. ...

Not necessarily. While talking with the cop, depending on how you present it, I think if you mention that you've consulted an attorney regarding the issue at hand, I'm pretty sure he/she is going to think twice about arresting you, especially if he/she was as uncertain about his/her own knowledge of the law, as stated.

Honestly, though, I do feel most cops are more confident about their grasp of law. If they're going to make an arrest, I believe they'll want to be pretty sure it's going to stick.

...The thing to remember is that when you talk to a lawyer about it, you're discussing case law, and typically things that are going to be used as a defense after arrest. ...

Incorrect. Folks go to attorneys everyday to protect against potential legal issues, civil & criminal, before having problems with the law. Furthermore, an experienced attorney specializing in criminal law is well-versed in statute law, as well, not just case law.

Heck, even police departments seek advice from counsel to help ensure against legal missteps, not just from the DA's Office, but from their own attorneys, too.

Why shouldn't we?

 

[KennyB]

So, they're not comfortable with their own knowledge of the law to say if something is legal, but would arrest, anyway? I don't think so.


On the contrary, folks should be most concerned with how an officer interprets the law because it's a primary factor in whether or not they're going to make an arrest, in my opinion.

For me, I don't believe people should have to worry about whether or not they're going to be arrested if they're not breaking the law.

If anything, it's the cop who should be most concerned if he/she goes around making too many bogus busts. I believe that would make for a very short career in law enforcement.



Not necessarily. While talking with the cop, depending on how you present it, I think if you mention that you've consulted an attorney regarding the issue at hand, I'm pretty sure he/she is going to think twice about arresting you, especially if he/she was as uncertain about his/her own knowledge of the law, as stated.

Honestly, though, I do feel most cops are more confident about their grasp of law. If they're going to make an arrest, I believe they'll want to be pretty sure it's going to stick.



Incorrect. Folks go to attorneys everyday to protect against potential legal issues, civil & criminal, before having problems with the law. Furthermore, an experienced attorney specializing in criminal law is well-versed in statute law, as well, not just case law.

Heck, even police departments seek advice from counsel to help ensure against legal missteps, not just from the DA's Office, but from their own attorneys, too.

Why shouldn't we?

I don't know, I guess on one hand I have a lot of faith in LEOs that say something like, "Well, I don't know the full word of the law, but I would only arrest if they had a blade this long tucked under their waistband," but on the other hand, I don't have a lot of faith that they wouldn't make a false arrest either. I mean, if I consult an attorney and he says because of statute law that carrying a particular knife is okay, but a cop arrests you because they were told to arrest anyone with that particular style of knife, then you still get arrested. That's what I try to avoid all together. I wasn't really saying you shouldn't consult a lawyer, just not to write off what police say they will arrest for even though others ( and often times themselves) will say that they don't know the law very well.

I mean, let's say that statue law says, "Any knife that can open with the thrust of gravity and is not biased toward being closed by a detent," and an officer takes your knife and flings it open at the wrists, decides, "Well, it's gravity knife," and arrests you? On the one hand, a lawyer reading statute law would say that it would be a legal knife to carry, but if you asked a cop and they said, "If I flick the knife with my wrist and it comes open I'll consider it a switch blade", then you can avoid being arrested or detained all together.

I mean, I guess it's still a good idea to consult a lawyer, but I would still want to avoid getting caught up in the legal system entirely.

 

[risen]

...I mean, if I consult an attorney and he says because of statute law that carrying a particular knife is okay, but a cop arrests you because they were told to arrest anyone with that particular style of knife, then you still get arrested. That's what I try to avoid all together....

I think if one has it on qualified authority (so to speak) that they're legal, there's nothing to avoid.

...On the one hand, a lawyer reading statute law would say that it would be a legal knife to carry, but if you asked a cop and they said, "If I flick the knife with my wrist and it comes open I'll consider it a switch blade"...

The attorney wouldn't just be reading statute law. Again, a good criminal defense attorney knows what's going on. He/She knows what police departments are doing, etc. He/She would've already dealt with the cops on these particular issues.

I mean, I guess it's still a good idea to consult a lawyer, but I would still want to avoid getting caught up in the legal system entirely.

To each his own. I have absolutely no problem participating in the legal system, especially when I haven't broken any laws.

 

[wolfindagger]

Thanks guys for all your help. Risen, you helped me out a lot, thanks!
very good news indeed if I can carry my pocket knife with me!
I don't think my parents know any DAs, but my aunt does. He's in the district I just moved from though. He would be able to help right?


“Personally I like to focus on staying out of jail rather than what my defense will be after arrested.”

KennyB, haha, yeah, well put.


I will definitely find some lawyer-type person to talk to as well as the Police Department.

I have a few more questions though that I've thought of since posting. If the length of the blade is going to be one of the main deciding factors if the knife is “dangerous” or not, is it from handle to tip, or cutting edge? Also, is it legal then to have “dangerous weapons” in your house as long as you don't take them out with you?

The other thing is, a fixed blade knife on a sheath on the belt, would that be legal? If perhaps it is under three inches? Is “immediate possesion” mean on your person, or in your hand running around like a serial killer freaking people out?

Thanks again for your help guys!

Peace out.

 

[MORIMOTOM]

Thanks guys for all your help. Risen, you helped me out a lot, thanks!
very good news indeed if I can carry my pocket knife with me!
I don't think my parents know any DAs, but my aunt does. He's in the district I just moved from though. He would be able to help right?

he may be able to give you a working translation of the law, ie, general guidelines which should keep you within the letter of the law.

keep in mind that all these individuals have different roles within the legal system, and their views will be skewed in that direction.

I have a few more questions though that I've thought of since posting. If the length of the blade is going to be one of the main deciding factors if the knife is “dangerous” or not, is it from handle to tip, or cutting edge?

it will be measured from tip to scale/handle.

Also, is it legal then to have “dangerous weapons” in your house as long as you don't take them out with you?

depends on the item. some items are illegal in and of themselves, others are legal to own, but not carry, etc.

The other thing is, a fixed blade knife on a sheath on the belt, would that be legal? If perhaps it is under three inches? Is “immediate possesion” mean on your person, or in your hand running around like a serial killer freaking people out?

Thanks again for your help guys!

Peace out.

immediate possession generally means within reach or under immediate control. the level of control will be determined by the proximity of the indidviual to the item.

if you're running around freaking people out, that would probably be "assault with a deadly weapon" or similar.

 

[MORIMOTOM]

I think if one has it on qualified authority (so to speak) that they're legal, there's nothing to avoid.

.

for practical purposes, i don't see how this will matter. in order to be qualified to render an opinion on the legality of an item, the authority would have to come in the form of a judge, ag, da's office, or similar.

eg, my opinion, while qualified in many respects, has no legal standing as it pertains to another officer's opinion (unless testifying in trial as an expert).

therefore, me telling the op that, in my opinion, his knife is perfectly legal does not preclude his being arrested by another officer based on that officer's opinion the item is illegal.

in any event, such a converstaion would be heresay, and difficult to quantify and reproduce as evidence.

 

[risen]

...I don't think my parents know any DAs, but my aunt does. He's in the district I just moved from though. He would be able to help right?

If you're able to speak with him, absolutely. Deputy/Assistant DAs are an excellent source since they directly follow up on initial police charges. Basically, it's up to them to prosecute (decide whether or not the charges stick).

...If the length of the blade is going to be one of the main deciding factors if the knife is “dangerous” or not, is it from handle to tip, or cutting edge?...

I've given this suggestion before on other threads, check out the company/maker of your knife. Go to their website and see if they've got a PDF doc listing all the specs of your model. Download it, print it out in reduced size (so it doesn't take up much space in your wallet), and always carry it with you.

*If* an officer was to ask about your knife, show him/her the specs. I believe the officer would appreciate it, and it'll help keep the whole situation more mutual.

Btw, it helps if the spec sheet shows a pic of your knife model. It's such a simple thing to do with questionable knife models, but goes a long way towards helping to prevent confusion.

...Also, is it legal then to have “dangerous weapons” in your house as long as you don't take them out with you?

The main thing is that it not be an "illegal weapon".

...The other thing is, a fixed blade knife on a sheath on the belt, would that be legal? If perhaps it is under three inches?...

Since I saw no reference to "fixed" blades in the Muni Codes you posted, I believe any fixed-blade definitions/requirements would automatically follow State guidelines, unless there are County guidelines, too.

Btw, are these Muni Codes for Placentia? If so, then you're in Orange County? I don't believe they have County-level knife laws, so it's CA Statutes.

Because you're under 18, I'm guessing you're still a student in high school? If so, you should already know how that goes.

The main point with fixed-blades, you can't conceal them. It's not rocket science, has to remain in plain view.

...Is “immediate possesion” mean on your person...

For me, it means on your person and/or within reach/control. This may vary.

Again, I'm not a lawyer.

 

[risen]

for practical purposes, i don't see how this will matter. in order to be qualified to render an opinion on the legality of an item, the authority would have to come in the form of a judge, ag, da's office, or similar.

When I mentioned a "qualified authority" (which btw, I did follow with "so to speak"), I was specifically referring to a criminal defense attorney, which I believe would fall under "similar". Btw, many seasoned criminal defense attorneys have done stints at the DA's Office early on in their careers.

Also, with an experienced criminal defense attorney, you're talking about someone who's already dealt with the DA & Judge in court. So, in a way, the info you're getting from that criminal defense attorney is also partly coming from them (DAs & Judges). I know each case may be different. I'm just talking about the legality of a specific knife model, nothing more.

For example, OP has knife model XYZ. The defense attorney just dealt with that very model last month and the knife was determined legal and the case was thrown out. A local Judge has already decided on the matter.

eg, my opinion, while qualified in many respects, has no legal standing as it pertains to another officer's opinion (unless testifying in trial as an expert).

therefore, me telling the op that, in my opinion, his knife is perfectly legal does not preclude his being arrested by another officer based on that officer's opinion the item is illegal.

Excellent point. I agree, which is why it may not even be worth asking a cop in the first place.

in any event, such a converstaion would be heresay, and difficult to quantify and reproduce as evidence.

With a cop in a verbal exchange, probably. Different story when consulting an attorney, especially if it's the same attorney representing you in court, if it came to that.