Supreme Court May Expand Right to Carry Firearms.

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Fordfella

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jul 8, 2018
    133
    28
    Lafayette, Louisiana
    I'm not an attorney!!! A South Louisiana Rig Pig's understanding of Harper vs Virginia Board of Elections, where the Supreme Court ruled that your civil rights were granted by your creator, and, any effort to make you pay for the exercise of those rights were unconstitutional. The court ruled that the exercise of your civil rights were not contingent on your "affluence." Therefore IMHO, any number of National Firearms Acts, The Pittman-Robertson Act, multiple state concealed carry schemes, and others should have been declared unconstitutional in 1966. The preceding should not be construed as legal advice, only a rant from a Rig Pig.
     
    Last edited:

    Jstudz220

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Oct 14, 2020
    1,075
    83
    Harvey Louisiana
    I would love to see every gun control law passed in the last 100 years removed and declared unconstitutional. Bring back full autos, mail ordering firearms to your house and do away with needing a FFL.
    If criminals can get away with doing all of the above and only get a slap on the wrist I see no good reason law abiding citizens shouldn’t legally be able to do the same
     

    Trailboss

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 2, 2013
    350
    28
    Norwood LA
    I hate compromises of our rights! The auto ban was a result of a compromise with the Dems to allow interstate travel with legally owned firearms through highly restrictive states.
     

    machinedrummer

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Apr 5, 2010
    3,164
    63
    Kingwood, Tx
    Thank to Good Ole Ronald Regan! Repubicans have a track record of being Anti Gun too.
    Yep! And mr trump got the ball rolling with the bumpy things. The right seems to have put more restrictions on the 2A than the left in my lifetime. Mr O was a great salesman but I don’t believe took anything away. Reagan and Trump did some real damage.
     

    Xeon64

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 26, 2021
    518
    43
    Prairieville, LA
    Yep! And mr trump got the ball rolling with the bumpy things. The right seems to have put more restrictions on the 2A than the left in my lifetime. Mr O was a great salesman but I don’t believe took anything away. Reagan and Trump did some real damage.
    Do not forgot George H. W. Bush banning the importation of H&K rifles too.
     

    Core

    Salt
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 5, 2011
    183
    18
    Maine
    I'm not an attorney!!! A South Louisiana Rig Pig's understanding of Harper vs Virginia Board of Elections, where the Supreme Court ruled that your civil rights were granted by your creator, and, any effort to make you pay for the exercise of those rights were unconstitutional. The court ruled that the exercise of your civil rights were not contingent on your "affluence." Therefore IMHO, any number of National Firearms Acts, The Pittman-Robertson Act, multiple state concealed carry schemes, and others should have been declared unconstitutional in 1966. The preceding should not be construed as legal advice, only a rant from a Rig Pig.
    You are correct. Lower courts have long been stepping on our rights. Article VI moreover implies and explains that the enforcement of the Bill of Rights and other Articles within the US Constitution may only be partnered with reasonable laws, rules, regulations, treatises, etc. At no point does Article VI say or imply that states or locales can create any law that regulates the right to bear arms. Article VI known as the Supremacy Clause is Supreme Law, and any entity in government not in good standing is in violation of Article VI and subsequently all of the US Constitution. This falls back to search and seizure and collection of private property, and right to privacy, etc. etc. Unless someone is being detained or arrested for an alleged crime, said property cannot be confiscated. This protects law and order but holds the system accountable.
     

    Dieselhorses

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 26, 2011
    27
    3
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Would be so nice to be a fully armed society. This WOULD deter crime, thin the number of victims and give LE somewhat of a break. Seems the government is more worried about civilians not being "trained" than they are considering the fact that the average person's chances of surviving drastically goes up IF they were, in fact, armed. The more gun laws enacted- the more crime follows.
     

    pptpe45

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 29, 2012
    66
    18
    Trailboss! Wait! What agreement? If you go thru NY or NJ and your license plate is from a gun friendly state, you will be pulled over and if a gun is found, even locked away, you will be prosecuted! Evidently that agreement does not apply to anti-gun states
     

    Trailboss

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 2, 2013
    350
    28
    Norwood LA
    Trailboss! Wait! What agreement? If you go thru NY or NJ and your license plate is from a gun friendly state, you will be pulled over and if a gun is found, even locked away, you will be prosecuted! Evidently that agreement does not apply to anti-gun states

    As long as you are actively travelling and have not interrupted your travel (like staying in a motel in MD, NJ or NY) you are protected from prosecution.

    18 USC § 926A (2011)
    §926A. Interstate transportation of firearms

    Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
    (Added Pub. L. 99–360, §1(a), July 8, 1986, 100 Stat. 766.)
    Prior Provisions
    A prior section 926A, added Pub. L. 99–308, §107(a), May 19, 1986, 100 Stat. 460, provided that any person not prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm be entitled to transport an unloaded, not readily accessible firearm in interstate commerce notwithstanding any provision of any legislation enacted, or rule or regulation prescribed by any State or political subdivision thereof, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–360, §1(a).
    Effective Date
    Section effective on date on which Firearms Owners’ Protection Act, Pub. L. 99–308, became effective, see section 2 of Pub. L. 99–360, set out as an Effective Date of 1986 Amendments note under section 921 of this title.
     

    Niwsbuc

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 10, 2013
    95
    8
    Baton Rouge
    Yep! And mr trump got the ball rolling with the bumpy things. The right seems to have put more restrictions on the 2A than the left in my lifetime. Mr O was a great salesman but I don’t believe took anything away. Reagan and Trump did some real damage.
    Unfortunately, you are correct.
     

    Horrible

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 18, 2020
    438
    28
    SE LA
    I hate compromises of our rights! The auto ban was a result of a compromise with the Dems to allow interstate travel with legally owned firearms through highly restrictive states.
    And, to your point, states like NY and NJ have not kept up their part of the bargain
     

    Horrible

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 18, 2020
    438
    28
    SE LA
    As long as you are actively travelling and have not interrupted your travel (like staying in a motel in MD, NJ or NY) you are protected from prosecution.

    18 USC § 926A (2011)
    §926A. Interstate transportation of firearms

    Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
    (Added Pub. L. 99–360, §1(a), July 8, 1986, 100 Stat. 766.)
    Prior Provisions
    A prior section 926A, added Pub. L. 99–308, §107(a), May 19, 1986, 100 Stat. 460, provided that any person not prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm be entitled to transport an unloaded, not readily accessible firearm in interstate commerce notwithstanding any provision of any legislation enacted, or rule or regulation prescribed by any State or political subdivision thereof, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–360, §1(a).
    Effective Date
    Section effective on date on which Firearms Owners’ Protection Act, Pub. L. 99–308, became effective, see section 2 of Pub. L. 99–360, set out as an Effective Date of 1986 Amendments note under section 921 of this title.
    This has not stopped people traveling through NY and NJ from getting stuffed in a jail cell
     

    Trailboss

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 2, 2013
    350
    28
    Norwood LA
    Yeah, there are horror stories of people arrested because their connecting flight through Newark was cancelled and their checked baggage (containing a firearm) was returned to them for the night. As they were heading to the motel, to wait for the next day's flight they were arrested.

    You can't interrupt your travel through the state.
     

    Horrible

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 18, 2020
    438
    28
    SE LA
    This is what gun owners have received for “compromise”. And the media wonder why we “refuse to budge” and “compromise” our rights away.
     

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    183,562
    Messages
    1,485,812
    Members
    27,127
    Latest member
    mcalamia1
    Top Bottom