That is not 100% correct, thats what the NRA says about it but we already received a clarification on a thread that I posted weeks ago.
I will not post a link to it so I dont "start" trouble again but I will quote it for clarification purpose.
QUOTE:
It centers around the way the state views people and their personal private property, as evidenced in statutes like LARS 14:95.2, where it states
...(5) Any constitutionally protected activity which cannot be regulated by the state, such as a firearm contained entirely within a motor vehicle.
I always said that you cannot take that clause from 14:95.2 and try to apply it to 14:95 because they were separate laws.
While that general "rule" is correct, in this particular case, the fact that the statute specifically defines what a constitutionally protected area is (the car), then that fact can be applied to other statutes as it is applying the constitution to a statute rather than the other way around. Basically, that statement, within 14:95.2, shows the legislative intent of the law. Since the legislative intent is known, that same intent can be applied to other similar laws.
Now, we must understand that it is in the courtroom that these issues will come to bare. Many LEO will not have this level of knowledge, and it is unreasonable for us to expect them to. It is still possible that you could be arrested for it, but you would have strong ground to support a defense if the DA would even accept the charges, and even further if a court would actually find you guilty.
BOTTOM LINE- Our state holds the rights of a person's private property to be absolute, therefore, you are much more protected on your personal property, or in it if it is a car, boat, etc, than when you are not. That does not mean you can do whatever you want, but it would appear you can conceal carry in your car or home or on personal property without a permit.
Kinda sort of, but not exactly. A person with diplomatic immunity can't be convicted of a crime committed while protected, but immunity can be revoked and then the person must leave the country immediately. He still can't be convicted of the original offense, but if he remains he will be an illegal alien and liable for any future offenses.One that I can think of.
Any person with Diplomatic Immunity
Kinda sort of, but not exactly. A person with diplomatic immunity can't be convicted of a crime committed while protected, but immunity can be revoked and then the person must leave the country immediately. He still can't be convicted of the original offense, but if he remains he will be an illegal alien and liable for any future offenses.
Most likely, the response to an immune person committing an offense would be to complain to the embassy and hope their officials will discipline the person appropriately. An un-permitted, immune person carrying a defensive firearm in the US would probably be tolerated if he conducted himself properly. I wouldn't be surprised if diplomatic permits are issued to some of them to head off arguments at the pass.