What is the difference between a dangerous weapon and a deadly weapon?

This distinction between deadly and dangerous weapons was highlighted in People v. Raner (1948) 86 Cal.App.2d 107, 194 P.2d 37. There it was conceded the defendants were armed with an unloaded gun. (Id., at p. 110, 194 P.2d 37.) On appeal, they contended they could not be convicted of first degree robbery (which at the time required being armed with a deadly or dangerous weapon) and were not ineligible for probation under section 1203 (which precluded probation for robbers who were armed with or used a deadly weapon) because their weapon was, at most, a dangerous weapon. (Id., at pp. 110-111, 194 P.2d 37.) The court rejected the first claim and accepted the second. Since first degree robbery could be committed while armed with either a dangerous or a deadly weapon, and since unloaded guns are at least capable of use as dangerous weapons, the degree was properly fixed. (Id., at p. 111, 194 P.2d 37.) But the converse was not true. A dangerous weapon is not necessarily a deadly weapon and hence the restriction in section 1203 against granting probation to those armed with or using a deadly weapon did not apply. Under the undisputed facts, "the court could have properly found the unloaded rifle to be at most a 'dangerous' weapon; and that, although such a finding would support a conviction under section

Page 245