Man arrested at LAX with a trunk full of guns and 1,000 rds of ammo

[ericire12]

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_11427154?nclick_check=1

Man stopped with guns at LAX says he's law-abiding
By ROBERT JABLON Associated Press Writer
Posted: 01/10/2009 11:33:09 PM PST

LOS ANGELES—The man arrested at Los Angeles International Airport with a trunk full of guns and nearly 1,000 rounds of ammunition said Saturday that he is a law-abiding weapons enthusiast who had no idea he might be breaking the law.

A day after he was arrested for suspicion of felony transportation of an assault rifle, Phillip Dominguez said he's confident he'll be exonerated.

"Our Second Amendment rights are being trampled in the name of law enforcement," Dominguez said. "I'm a law-abiding, taxpaying gun enthusiast. I have no felonies—up until now."

Airport police saw it a little differently.

"In the post-Sept. 11 environment, it is well-known by weapon owners that airports and weapons simply do not mix," Los Angeles Airport Police Chief George Centeno said.

Dominguez, 47, of Orange, said he went to LAX to pick up a friend from Baltimore on Friday. They intended to go target shooting at an outdoor range in San Bernardino County.

As Dominguez entered the airport's ring road, his truck was pulled over for inspection. Dominguez says he knew police would want to look inside the locked cover of the truck bed so he got out, opened it and declared that he had firearms there.

Dominguez said he had 16 pistols, including an 1858 black-powder Army revolver. He also had five rifles—one of them an assault rifle—and nearly 1,000 rounds of ammunition.

Dominguez said he didn't think he was breaking any laws since
all the weapons and ammo were in separate, locked boxes. At least half a dozen times since Thanksgiving, Dominguez said he made similar stops at the airport carrying his guns and never saw a police checkpoint.

He showed officials the paperwork proving the assault rifle was registered and gave them the keys and combinations of all the lockboxes, he said. The Bushmaster "Shorty," a semiautomatic rifle modeled on the military's AR15, was the reason he was finally arrested.

"It posed no threat to nobody," said Dominguez.

Dominguez said he got state permission to own and use the assault rifle last month but the approval letter didn't mention it was illegal in California to make a pit stop while transporting the weapon from his home to the gun range.

That code requires that "registered assault weapons may be transported only between specified locations," according to the Web site of the California attorney general's office.

Dominguez said he was handcuffed, taken to a jail, and held for six hours before he was booked. He was released at around 11 p.m. after his family posted $50,000 bail. But his guns and his truck were confiscated.

He faces a Feb. 6 arraignment.

Dominguez, who owns a construction company, says he doesn't blame airport authorities for stopping his truck for inspection but he believes he isn't the target of the gun law.

"I am being charged for a law that is meant for ex-felons and bank robbers, that kind of individual," Dominguez said.

Dominguez' laywer, Bruce Colodny, said it's true that carrying weapons at airports is a sensitive subject but "there's nothing sinister about this. Despite the fact they're controversial, assault weapons continue to be lawfully possessed."

Another man who was randomly stopped at a checkpoint Saturday was found with two shotguns in his SUV, airport police said. The weapons were confiscated but no arrests were made because the guns were not loaded.

[MikeBjerum]

It is clear that there is more information to consider, but the reporter did a fine job of not making Mr. Dominguez look like a lunatick.  On the surface, from an upper midwest perspective, everything seems above board and fine, but I'm sure the land of "fruits and nuts" sees it different.

I just pray that we don't start seeing more and more of this type of thing Nation wide in the coming years.

[TAB]

He actually did brake the law, There is a very limited number of places you are aloud to transfer a Assult weapon( under CA law).
Basicly registerd AW in CA are treated very simlar to Mguns federally.   We can't get any more and they are very restricted on thier use and must be transported with paper work... etc.  Even a bad Law is still the law.

Granted all of this could have been avoided if had just kept his mouth shut... he didn't have to let them search his truck and if he had not mentioned them, they most likly would not have.  Infact if he had refused the police officers would have had 2 choices. Let him go to LAX( see below) or impound the car.


i would also like to point out on the road he was stoped on, it only goes to LAX. If your on it, your going to LAX rather you want to or not.

[SigShooter]

He actually did brake the law, There is a very limited number of places you are aloud to transfer a Assult weapon( under CA law).
Basicly registerd AW in CA are treated very simlar to Mguns federally.   We can't get any more and they are very restricted on thier use and must be transported with paper work... etc.  Even a bad Law is still the law.

Granted all of this could have been avoided if had just kept his mouth shut... he didn't have to let them search his truck and if he had not mentioned them, they most likly would not have.  Infact if he had refused the police officers would have had 2 choices. Let him go to LAX( see below) or impound the car.

i would also like to point out on the road he was stoped on, it only goes to LAX. If your on it, your going to LAX rather you want to or not.

I don't know about CA law, but I'm reasonably certain that had they impounded his vehicle, the would have been within their powers to search his vehicle for inventory purposes, which would have resulted in these charges anyway.

His only option was to use his 5th amendment rights and hope the cops didn't have anything on him. They pulled him over for an inspection, but that's a little hokey for a basis to search his locked truck bed.

TAB, the law is the law, but obedience to an unjust law is not patriotic. I'm sure there will be AWB and later, mandatory registration or all guns. I have no inclination to participate in a registration process for any of my guns. It's call civil disobience and Ghandi proved it works.

[TAB]

yes they would have had to search it, but with out probable cause they would have no such power to impound the truck.( yeah, they could still have done it, but it would have held up in court)

Now its entire possible that the weight of the guns and all the ammo, made the truck ride low, which could indcate a bomb in the truck and would have have given them probable  cause to search it.  I don't know, I was not there... but its best to say as little as you can when dealing with the police...

old saying, there are only 3 words you need to say during a traffic stop.

yes
no
sir

[Sponsor]

[HAWKFISH]

I don't know about CA law, but I'm reasonably certain that had they impounded his vehicle, the would have been within their powers to search his vehicle for inventory purposes, which would have resulted in these charges anyway.

His only option was to use his 5th amendment rights and hope the cops didn't have anything on him. They pulled him over for an inspection, but that's a little hokey for a basis to search his locked truck bed.

TAB, the law is the law, but obedience to an unjust law is not patriotic. I'm sure there will be AWB and later, mandatory registration or all guns. I have no inclination to participate in a registration process for any of my guns. It's call civil disobience and Ghandi proved it works.
[/quote]


Something to think about..

[MikeBjerum]

TAB,

I don't think, based on the info in the article, that the transfer of the weapon was an issue.  It sounds like he had the necessary permit to purchase and poses the gun.  It sounded like a transportation problem.  He was going from home to the range and picking up a shooting partner at the airport in between.

Based on this he should have done a mapquest route based on the shortest distance from residence to range and not deviated from it.

[TAB]

no the issuse is if you have an registerd AW, you can only take it strait too the fallowing places:

A gun smith( if he is not lic by the CA doj to work on AW, you must be present the entire time he works on it,)
A shooting range.( nat'l forest that allows shooting would also work.)
too a FFL for sale to a LEO.
Traveling too and from a mass transit hub( air port, bus stop, dock... etc) where you are departing/ returning. 

Stoping at an air port to pick some one up  is a no- no.   Techincally stoping and eating some where is a no-no, but I doubt that would hold up in court.

[GlockMeister]

My take, he should have just left what he had at home, picked whomever up at the airport and gone back home, gotten the stuff and THEN gone shooting.

To me, something about this just seems hinky. I mean, most people know that in a post 9-11 time, bringing firearms onto airport property is a no no. So where has this guy been? On a remote island? I mean, I assume he can speak English, that's based on the article. If not, well, that might explain a thing or two?

[Rob10ring]

Yep, this guy has been getting torn up by readers in the Orange County Register. I've been posting comments to at least state that these are dumb laws, but he shouldn't have driven onto airport property, at least with the "assault" weapons. Hopefully, he'll at least get his charges reduced. He's got a great attorney that specializes in gun cases.

It's funny that if you are carrying these "dangerous" weapons that we also have to carry the papers that prove they are registered with the DOJ (the Attorney General happens to be Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown). You'd think that if the transporter of these arms were up to any mischief, that if you're close enough to read their papers, you're too close. Also, it's suspicious of Government to have a group of people that is allowed to have the, simply because they got them before a certain time, and everyone else is out of luck.