All posts by tadmin

Due to popular demand, we have come up with a guard to protect against accidental damage to the lock mechanism, especially with 1911 style guns. This unit will be added to our safe for 2021 models and it will be available to purchase in mid-October. For those customers who have run into this issue, please contact us to arrange one sent to you.

On August 14, 2020, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in the CRPA and NRA supported lawsuit Duncan v. Becerra. This historic decision strikes down California’s statewide prohibitions on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds as unconstitutional. In doing so, the Ninth Circuit upheld the 2019 decision from the United States District Court in San Diego that resulted in hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of magazines being lawfully purchased by California gun owners during what has become known as “Freedom Week.”.


Naturally, many gun owners have questions regarding the impact of the most recent ruling in Duncan, and its effects on gun owners and those who want to sell, buy, or possess magazines that can hold over ten rounds.


To answer the many question that CRPA has been receiving, we have prepared the following list of commonly asked questions with answers to assist our members and gun owners.

  1. What did the Ninth Circuit three-judge panel hold?
    The Ninth Circuit held that the entirety of California Penal Code section 32310—which bans the possession, manufacture, importation, sale, transfer, and receipt of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds (so-called “large capacity” magazines)—is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The ruling affirms the 2019 order of the Honorable Judge Roger Benitez of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. You can read the entire Ninth Circuit opinion here. There is a very concise and clear summary t the beginning of the opinion.
  2. What does it mean that the Ninth Circuit applied strict scrutiny in this case?
    When courts review constitutional challenges to government action, they can apply one of various levels of review. Three of the most commonly levels of review, called levels of “scrutiny,” are rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny. Whether a law will be upheld as constitutional can depend heavily on which level of scrutiny is applied to evaluate the constitutionality of a law. “Rational basis” is the most deferential to the government. It merely asks whether the challenged law is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose. Laws subject to rational basis review are almost always upheld as constitutional. What’s more, the challenger (not the state) bears the burden to prove the law does not satisfy rational basis.
    “Intermediate scrutiny” requires that the challenged law further an important government interest by means that are substantially related to that interest. As explained below, intermediate scrutiny is, when applied correctly, a stricter test that requires the government to justify its infringement on protected conduct. Unfortunately, in the Second Amendment context courts have often manipulated the intermediate scrutiny test to heavily favor the government, finding that just about any gun law will survive it this level of scrutiny and be deemed constitutional.

“Strict scrutiny,” however, requires the government to show that the challenged law is necessary to a compelling state interest; that it is narrowly tailored to that end; and that it uses the “least restrictive means” necessary to achieve it. When strict scrutiny is applied, the law is almost always found unconstitutional.
What makes the Duncan ruling so important is that it marks one of the few times strict scrutiny has been explicitly applied in a Second Amendment case. While CRPA is thrilled that this decision struck the ban on magazines over 10 rounds, the court’s application of strict scrutiny is also great news for current and future Second Amendment cases in California. This precedent will no doubt help CRPA in its challenges to numerous other infringements the state has imposed on the right to bear arms.

  1. What did the Ninth Circuit say about the use of intermediate scrutiny?
    Since the Heller and McDonald decisions, CRPA has been disappointed to see courts apply intermediate scrutiny in name only. Courts conduct what are effectively rational basis analysis and flout the Supreme
    Court’s holding that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental right. While strict scrutiny is certainly the appropriate test, CRPA has long believed that most of California’s gun rights restrictions would not survive even intermediate scrutiny if a fair intermediate scrutiny analysis was applied in good faith. Unfortunately, so far intermediate scrutiny in gun law cases has mostly been a toothless standard. Today, the Ninth Circuit finally gave us the fair analysis we’ve been waiting for. While the panel found that strict scrutiny applies, it also conducted a review of California’s magazine ban under intermediate scrutiny and found that it would not survive that more permissive standard either. According to the court, the statute was simply not a reasonable fit to the important public safety interests that it was enacted to serve. As the court writes, “[w]hile the precise contours of intermediate scrutiny may vary, this much is certain: It has bite. It is a demanding test.” And, in what appears to be a clear criticism of the bad-faith review of other circuits, the court states that “intermediate scrutiny cannot approximate the deference of rational basis review.”
    CRPA is pleased to see that, at least to some judges, intermediate scrutiny still has some teeth. And we are confident that this precedent will help us in future Second Amendment challenges whenever the court decides that intermediate scrutiny must be applied instead of strict scrutiny.
  2. Does this mean that it is now lawful to own or possess magazines over 10 rounds in California?
    YES! And that has always been the case. When California banned the manufacture, importation, and sale of magazines over 10 rounds in 2000, 1 and when it banned the purchase and receipt of such magazines in 2013, the state did not then bar the possession of such magazines obtained before the acquisition and manufacture bans took effect. In other words, the state “grandfathered” these magazines. California voters approved Proposition 63 in 2016, making possession of magazines over 10 rounds a potential misdemeanor offense. But on June 29, 2017, before Prop 63’s possession ban took effect, the Honorable Judge Roger Benitez issued a preliminary injunction in Duncan barring enforcement of the law.3

1 See Act of July 19, 1999, ch. 129, 1999 Cal Stat. §§ 3, 3.5 (codified as amended at Cal. Penal Code § 12020(a)(2)
(2000)) (superseded by Deadly Weapons Recodification Act of 2010, ch. 711, 2010 Cal. Stat. § 6 (codified at Cal. Penal Code §
32310)); see also Cal. Penal Code § 16740 (defining what constitutes a so-called “large capacity” magazine).
2 See 2013 Cal. Stat. 5299, § 1 (amending Cal. Penal Code § 32310(a)).


That preliminary injunction was upheld by a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit in 2018 and remains in effect to this day.4

It is also lawful to possess are all those magazines over 10 rounds purchased during “Freedom Week.” Recall, when Judge Benitez granted summary judgment in the Duncan plaintiffs’ favor, he immediately halted enforcement of the acquisition ban. This resulted in the lawful purchase of countless magazines over 10 rounds in California. A week later, Judge Benitez paused the importation and transfer of these magazines pending appeal, but he also held that enforcement of the possession ban remained
enjoined, ensuring that Californians could retain possession of those magazines acquired during “Freedom Week.”6
But be careful, not all police officers understand what happened. Consider keeping your paperwork showing the period when you bought the magazine handy.


If you are arrested or charged with possession of a “large capacity” magazine under the enjoined Penal Code section 32310(c) and (d), we urge you to contact CRPA attorneys by emailing [email protected] or by calling (562) 216-4444.


  1. Can I start buying or selling magazines over 10 rounds in California today?
    NO! The Ninth Circuit panel opinion may not have immediately ended enforcement of the statewide ban on the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer, or receipt of magazines over 10 rounds (“the acquisition
    ban”). While it is clear from the Duncan opinion that the law is unconstitutional, it is unclear whether the Ninth Circuit panel’s decision alone satisfied Judge Benitez’s 2019 order staying the injunction halting enforcement of the acquisition ban. Without an active injunction against enforcement of the law, it is the DOJ’s express position that the state’s ban “on the acquisition of new large-capacity ammunition magazines [remains] in effect pending further appellate proceedings.” (You can read the DOJ’s published position below.) This suggests that the state will continue to enforce the law, exposing sellers and buyers to a risk of criminal liability.
    According to the terms of Judge Benitez’s 2019 stay order, it remains in effect “pending final resolution” of the Duncan appeal. This may be open to various reasonable interpretations, but at this point the safest
    interpretation is that the stay will remain in effect until the Ninth Circuit issues its “mandate,” which signifies that the appeal is final and returns the case to the district court for final proceedings.7

3 Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, Duncan v. Becerra, No. 17-cv-01017 (S.D. Cal. June 29, 2017), ECF. No. 28, available at https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Duncan-v.-Becerra_Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf.

4 Duncan v. Becerra, 742 Fed. Appx. 218 (9th Cir. 2018) (memorandum opinion affirming preliminary injunction order available at https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Duncan-2018-07-17-Memorandum-Affirming.pdf).


5 Judgment in a Civil Case, Duncan v. Becerra, No. 17-cv-01017 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2019), ECF No. 88, available at https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Judgment-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf.
6 Order Staying in Part Judgment Pending Appeal at 1, Duncan v. Becerra, No. 17-cv-01017 (S.D. Cal. April 4, 2019), ECF No. 97, available at https://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-04-04-Order-Staying-in-Part-Judgment-Pending-Appeal.pdf.

7 There is a possibility that Judge Benitez might choose to lift the 2019 stay order at some other time. If that happens, we will inform our members and the public promptly. The “mandate” “issue[s] 7 days after the time to file a petition for rehearing expires, or 7 days after entry of an order denying a timely petition for panel rehearing, petition for rehearing en banc, or motion for stay of mandate, whichever is later.”

8 The State has up to 14 days to file a petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc.

9 And it may also ask the court to delay the issuance of the “mandate” pending petition to the Supreme Court. As such, it may be months (or years) before this appeal is finally resolved.
Put simply, EXERCISE CAUTION! It is unclear whether it is lawful for California residents to purchase magazines over 10 rounds yet. And the DOJ says it is going to enforce the law and prosecute people despite the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision. So – do you feel lucky?

  1. Can I use magazines over 10 rounds that I lawfully acquired at a shooting range?
    YES! Again, California does not currently prohibit the “possession” of magazines over 10 rounds. Only activities involving the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer, or receipt of such magazines remain
    prohibited until Judge Benitez’s 2019 stay order is lifted. The mere “use” of a magazine at a shooting range, for example, is not specifically prohibited.
    BEWARE: The use of any so-called “large capacity” magazine in either a semiautomatic, centerfire rifle with a fixed magazine or a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine could classify the firearm as an illegal “assault weapon” under California law.10
  2. Can I carry the magazines I lawfully acquired with a firearm pursuant to a carry license?
    YES! But your local licensing authority’s policies may still restrict such activity. Again, California law does not prohibit the “use” of any so-called “large capacity” magazine. However, department policies of a
    local licensing authority may prohibit individuals from carrying such magazines in connection with their CCW permits. Individuals should review their CCW license authority’s policies before carrying any
    “large capacity” magazine in connection with their CCW permit.
  3. I own magazines over 10 rounds that are currently out of state, can I bring them back to California now?
    NO! Again, until it is clear that Judge Benitez’s 2019 stay order is lifted, you should assume that California laws prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer, or receipt of any so-called “large
    capacity” magazine remain in effect. Attempting to bring back magazines into California, despite already being owned by you, might be construed as “importation,” exposing you to a risk of criminal liability.
  4. Can I travel outside of California with magazines over 10 rounds that I lawfully acquired and then bring them back into California?
    NO! Before the enactment of Prop 63 in 2016, California law allowed individuals to travel with their lawfully acquired magazines over 10 rounds outside of California and then return to California with
    them.11 But this provision was repealed by Prop 63. As a result, individuals can no longer travel outside of California with their lawfully acquired magazines unless they plan on leaving their magazines out of state.
    CCW holders take note: regardless of what you can carry in or outside of California pursuant to your license, the terms of the license to not overrule the statute. And the statute still prohibits importing
    magazines that can hold over ten rounds, whether you possessed them legally in California initially, then
    8 Fed. R. App. P. 41.
    9 Fed. R. App. P. 35(c); Fed. R. App. P. 41.
    10 See Cal. Penal Code § 30515(a)(2), (a)(5).
    11 See Cal. Penal Code § 32420 (repealed 2016).

took them out of state. Or not. Once you take them out, you can’t legally “import” them back into California.

  1. What are the penalties for violating California’s magazine restrictions?
    Anyone who “manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, lends, buys, or receives any large-capacity magazines” can be charged with either a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year imprisonment or felony punishable by up to 3 years imprisonment (known as a “wobbler”).12 Until it is clear that Judge Benitez’s 2019 stay order is lifted, law enforcement might seek to enforce these provisions, exposing you to criminal liability.
    Should California’s ban on the possession of magazines over 10 rounds ever take effect, the penalty is: (1) a fine up to $100 per magazine; (2) imprisonment up to one year; or (3) both a fine and imprisonment.13
    Lastly, California law declares any “large capacity” magazine to be a “nuisance” subject to confiscation and summary destruction.14
  2. How does the court’s ruling affect California’s “nuisance” provision?
    While law enforcement might in fact seize so-called “large capacity” magazines as a “nuisance” under Penal Code section 32390, it is our attorneys’ view that there is no legal authority for it to do so—at least
    not for those who lawfully acquired their magazines. In fact, our attorneys believe section 32390 is unenforceable against at least lawfully acquired “large capacity” magazines, regardless of this ruling, as it was never intended to apply to them.
    In 2010, the Legislature reorganized the state’s firearm laws to make them easier to understand by renumbering, breaking up, and rewording long, complicated statutes. All those alterations were expressly intended to make no substantive legal change to the existing statutes.
    The predecessor of section 32390 was an ambiguous provision that, at most, applied only to “large capacity” magazines that were unlawfully made, imported, sold, or acquired, but not merely possessed.
    This is because the previous statute applied to a whole host of weapons whose possession was illegal, while the “large capacity” magazine statute only applied to acquisition of new ones. The legislative history for the original “large capacity” magazine statute expressly stated that it did not intend to affect lawfully possessed magazines. It would make no sense, nor would it likely pass constitutional muster under the Due Process Clause, to construe section 32390 as applying to the lawful possession of magazines.
    In any event, even if our attorneys’ analysis of section 32390 is wrong, the Duncan decision makes clear that it is unconstitutional and thus unenforceable. The notion that an item whose possession is protected by the Second Amendment can be seized by government provided there is no criminal penalty is absurd.

If you have a “large capacity” magazine seized by law enforcement on the basis that it is a nuisance under section 32390, we urge you to contact CRPA attorneys by emailing [email protected] or by calling (562) 216-4444.

12 Cal. Penal Code § 32310(a). For the purposes of this restriction, “manufacturing” includes “both fabricating a
magazine and assembling a magazine from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and
floor plate or end plate, to be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.” Cal. Penal Code § 32310(b).
13 Cal. Penal Code § 32310(c).
14 Cal. Penal Code § 32390; see also Cal. Penal Code § 18010(b).


  1. What’s next for the Duncan appeal?
    At this point, that is largely up to Attorney General Becerra and the judges of the Ninth Circuit. The State might choose to accept the panel’s decision, or it could petition the three-judge panel to reconsider its ruling and/or petition the entire Ninth Circuit to rehear the case en banc. And even if the State chooses not to seek rehearing, a judge of the Ninth Circuit might call for a vote to take the case en banc anyway. If rehearing is ordered, additional briefing may be requested, another date for oral argument will be set, and another decision from the Ninth will issue. At that point, the losing party will decide whether to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in by filing a petition for writ of certiorari.
    Alternatively, the State could seek direct review by the United States Supreme Court. That avenue will require briefing by the parties on whether the Court should review the Ninth Circuit’s decision and, if the Court chooses to do so, additional briefing and oral argument.
    Either way, this process can take months or years. But rest assured, our attorneys will continue to work tirelessly to defend the panel’s decision and oppose any effort to overturn this victory.
  2. Where can I view the filings in the Duncan v. Becerra lawsuit?
    All case filings can be viewed online for free at http://michellawyers.com/duncan-v-becerra/.
  3. Who is responsible for litigating Duncan v. Becerra?
    The California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA), with financial support from the National Rifle Association and The CRPA Foundation (CRPAF) filed this lawsuit after hearing the concerns, outrage, and fear from members who were being forced by the passage of Prop 63 and Senate Bill 1446 to either surrender their magazines to the government or become criminals and face prosecution.

PUBLISHED BY CRPA.ORG

With the ongoing pandemic and continuing riots, it makes sense that more people want to become gun owners. As police are occupied with protests and looting, many citizens feel that they must take personal protection into their own hands, and rightfully so! The growing unrest does not seem to be going away soon.

We witnessed a surge in gun sales back in March due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and then the social unrest in June that followed George Floyd’s killing. It is now nearing mid-August and we continue to experience fear and paranoia in communities across America.

Of course, an increase in gun sales has led to an increase in gun permit applications. The NYPD has seen a 90% increase in gun permit applications; a reflection of nationwide trends. Most of the permits that will be issued will allow a weapon to be kept in a person’s home.

Proper firearm storage is essential to prevent accidental shootings or theft of your weapon. The Titan Vault was made for maximum security and ease of accessibility. It can be mounted under a desk, bed, to a wall, and many other possible applications! Additionally, in states where firearm transportation laws are applicable, you can keep your firearm in your vehicle and readily accessible.

The presence of so many guns in the hands of Americans warrants a discussion of public policy and safety! It will be interesting to see how firearm laws evolve during this time.

Do your part as a responsible gun owner and keep your firearms safe and secure!

-The Titan Vault Team

We are seeing many new gun safes with many fancy features. Text messages to alert you when the safe is touched or opened, text to open, biometric fingerprint readers, voice commands. All of these fancy new features have their own problems.

The first problem with these safes is that a lot of them emit bright lights and loud noises. The last thing you want to do is alert an intruder to your location and the location of your safe. Let alone let them know that you have a gun at all.

The next problem is that they all either take batteries or must be charged. The issue with batteries and charging is that they fail. The last thing you want when reaching for your gun in the case of emergency and realizing that your unit is not charged to open or that the batteries have died.

Biometrics are unreliable as well, we have seen people try multiple times to open a safe with their programmed fingerprint only to have it fail multiple times and then lock them out. This happens due to sweat as well. You may not be able to get in when you are sweating or shaking which are common in emergency situations. The last thing you need is to not be able to access your safe because of these failures.

Text alerts will be unreliable, what if your phone is off? What if the battery is not charged? What if you are in a meeting? A movie? On an airplane? The What If’s are endless.

With an all mechanical safe, like the tried and true Titan Pistol Vault…none of these issues will be a concern. The all-mechanical safe will open when you need it to – every single time. All we ask is that you practice your code and opening it until it becomes muscle memory. It’s like riding a bike. Simple. That is exactly what you and your family will need at moments when it really counts.

The FBI has released data in regards to violent crime in 2018. The US has been on a downward trend as far as violent crime goes, since 2016. Yet, more people are buying guns. It is the responsible gun owners that we applaud, that are buying guns in the case of an emergency. According to the report, there was a decrease in nearly EVERY type of violent crime.

In looking at a 10-year trend, violent crimes are down nearly 10% from 2009 through 2018, truly wonderful. in 2018, homicides with firearms are down 7% since 2017. Furthermore, only 2% of crimes committed were with riffles, as opposed to 11% using knives.

HOWEVER…

The gun death rate in the US is much higher than in most other nations, particularly developed nations. But it is still far below the rates in several Latin American nations, according to a study by researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

The US gun death rate was 10.6% per 100,000 in 2016. That was far higher than in countries such as Canada (2.1 per 100,000) and Australia (1.0), as well as European nations such as France (2.7), Germany (0.9) and Spain (0.6). But the rate in the U.S. was much lower than in El Salvador (39.2 per 100,000 people), Venezuela (38.7), Guatemala (32.3), Colombia (25.9) and Honduras (22.5), the study found. Overall, the US ranked 20th in its gun fatality rate.

We can still do better. If you are a responsible gun owner, please keep your gun locked away very safely. Of course, we recommend the Titan Pistol Vault if you own a handgun for self-protection. You will abide by the laws and keep your gun safe from strangers and children.

Always stay safe and stay positive.

The Titan Vault Team.

According to the Charlotte Observer, A 5-year-old girl died after she was shot in a South Carolina home Monday, the North Charleston Police Department said.

Police called the deadly incident an “accidental shooting,” WCBD reported.

Officers responded to shots fired call just after 3:30 p.m., according to WCSC. Up to four unsupervised children were inside the home when the shooting occurred, per the TV station. Police said the kids were playing with a gun they found in the home, WCIV reported.

This is just another tragedy that happened today that could have been different if the firearm was put away safely. Children are always very curious so taking away the curiosity and having the firearm locked away in a Titan Gun Vault with a passcode that the children don’t know can keep everyone safe all the time. Tragedies like this can always have a different outcome. Keep our children safe.

Critics have strong, passionate arguments that guns have no place in an educational setting. Their rebuttals are emotionally charged and driven by their moral belief systems. Some of their concerns are fear-based, that too many guns and bullets would be flying across classroom halls causing injury or fatalities. Some who lobby for responsible gun control have had the unfortunate experience of being a victim of gun violence.

Yes, it is true, guns in the wrong hands can harm or end a life. Likewise, in the right hands, they can protect and save lives. The challenge is in identifying and distinguishing between those individuals.

Defining responsible gun ownership is paramount. With such freedom comes great responsibility. Our society has put blind trust in the individual who purchases a firearm. The result is a lack of trust toward gun owners. This is where legislation has an important role.

As we address the gaps regarding gun ownership — education, certification, registration, and background checks — to the point where the public has faith that those with guns are going to act responsibly, then the fear that they will use firearms improperly will diminish.

Addressing mental health is complicated. We are no more able to control guns than we can rein in the dysfunction of the human mind. The first step in addressing mental illness is by identifying factors in our society that perpetuate instability in an already fragile individual. Educators should be utilized as a great resource in addressing this critical mental health piece known as social and emotional literacy.

Statistics show that schools are the No. 1 target for random shooters. As difficult as it is, the time has come to fully explore armed staff on school grounds. Parents hold teachers accountable for nurturing positive outcomes in their children, especially a safe environment.

Preventing a teacher from the ability to carry a concealed weapon magnifies the vulnerability of themselves and the children in their care. We must ask ourselves how our current or developing legislation is going to save our students and faculty from harm.

Until we find realistic ways to protect our classrooms all we can do is duck and pray. I ask you: Is that the best we can do for our children and their educators?

We here at Titan Security Products can provide the safest way to have a firearm safely in a classroom or office.

There are many reasons why you as a gun owner should seriously consider investing in a gun safe. The first is to prevent children who are too young to understand gun safety from gaining access to your firearms…and even if your children are well-educated and responsible, consider that their friends may not be. The Titan Pistol Vault is perfect to protect all children from the dangers of touching an unattended firearm!

The United States has the highest rate of gun ownership anywhere in the world, and this ownership has been continuously increasing. Although people carry firearms for a feeling of safety and control over their environment, failing to keep your firearm secure can lead to dangerous situations. With a multifunctional gun safe like the Titan Gun Safe, you are not only ensuring that you can easily access your gun to defend yourself in emergency situations, but that it will be safe from children and other people. If a child gets hold of a loaded firearm and uses it improperly, you may be fined or sent to prison or both

Safety

Because of recent and unfortunate events, there may soon be more guns in schools across America in the hands of teachers. Those guns need to be secured at all times, whether in a holster or inside of a gun safe.

On the surface, a biometric gun safe is the obvious answer to securing a firearm, but the poor reliability of these safes is well documented. Search for any biometric safe on Amazon and you will find many reviews complaining about the product not working as advertised.

Here are some of the issues you can run into with an electronically operated safe:

• Power failure- Total lockout.

• Electrostatic discharge (ESD)- Causes total system failure.

• Skin conditions can prevent access.

• Low battery – failure to open reading fingerprints.

• Many key pads/ biometric safe are prone to picking just watch it on YouTube.

• Lock and key – lock picking jeopardizes security.

• Water and moisture damage can cause malfunction.

• Temperature variation can cause malfunctions.

After considering these points, a biometric safe/ electronically operated safes may not be the best way to secure guns in schools. So, then what is the answer?

A mechanical safe.

But only the sturdiest, most reliable and tested gun safe should be brought on school grounds which is why we have created the Titan Pistol Vault.

The Titan Pistol Vault is a mechanical safe that has been around for more than a decade and has not failed any of its owners. Because it is mechanical and powder coated it is not susceptible to failure from water or moisture damage. There is also no lock and key system in place so the safe is only accessible by the individuals who possess the chosen safe code.

The Titan Pistol Vault has also been approved by the California Department of Justice. To win this approval the Titan Pistol Vault has undergone extensive and rigorous testing by an accredited and independent test lab. Some of these tests include locking mechanism manipulation, a drop test, an impact test, hacksaw test and force to open the lid test. It takes industrial steel cutting tools or an acetylene torch to cut open this safe and it can easily be mounted under desks or even inside of vehicles. I am confident that the Titan Pistol Vault will serve your needs.