The jury was adequately instructed on the mental state required for possessing methamphetamine while armed with a firearm under Health and Safety Code section 11370.1(a) even though the version of CALJIC 12.52 read to the jury did not include an express knowledge requirement. The appellate court disagreed with People v. Singh (2004) 19 Cal.App.4th 905, in which another court held that it was error to fail to instruct the jury that a defendant must knowingly have a firearm available for immediate defensive or offensive use in order to be guilty under section 11370.1(a). While the court here agreed that the offense requires knowledge of the firearm’s availability, this court held that such a knowledge requirement was implicit in the instruction as given, since it would be unreasonable to find that a defendant had a firearm “available” if he did not know of its existence.