Interstate transportation of firearms

[QuackXP]

In doing research about taking my firearm into a state where I may not be allowed to carry I wanted to get a quotable source on the interstate transportation of firearms. Most posts where either a summarization or if the text was copied verbatim there was no refrence to a credible source for the text. So some further Googling found these two links.

Enjoy:

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C44.txt

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18...6---A000-.html

Ill add a question to this to further discussion. Is there any state where someone over 21 (I'm 30) cannot legally own a firearm? I'm only talking about ownership not carrying.

[ErSwnn]

Ill add a question to this to further discussion. Is there any state where someone over 21 (I'm 30) cannot legally own a firearm? I'm only talking about ownership not carrying.

Assuming a non-prohibited person, no. But there are people attempting to make this idea a reality. There are states that seek to make ownership difficult but none who actually have made gun ownership illegal....yet.

BTW, good job on doing your own research for interstate transportation. Nothing answers the questions like solid, confirmed facts.

[tl_3237]

Below is a response I gave regarding the issue of 18 USC 926A that some might find worthy of consideration before attempting to fathom what the actual law means. As of yet the jury is still out but you might want to take the comments under advisement.

Just to be clear, I am not all that familiar with NJ law, but if he can legally own (and subsequently) carry in his home (private property) then it seems to make sense to me that he can legally transport (under the guidelines he has already outlined) that he can transport from once place of legal carry to another (in this case PA), even though he doesn't have a carry permit in NJ. (As stated, he will not be carrying in NJ.)

First, what you're missing is the definition of 'carry'. Remember that FOPA was passed in 1986 BEFORE the 'shall issue' wave of on-person carry came about and the more contemporary usage of the word as referring to OC/CC. SCOTUS was presented with defining the word 'carry' for a challenge to 18 USC 924 and in MUSCARELLO v. UNITED STATES (96-1654) [1998] said this:

We begin with the statute’s language. The parties vigorously contest the ordinary English meaning of the phrase “carries a firearm.” Because they essentially agree that Congress intended the phrase to convey its ordinary, and not some special legal, meaning, and because they argue the linguistic point at length, we too have looked into the matter in more than usual depth. Although the word “carry” has many different meanings, only two are relevant here. When one uses the word in the first, or primary, meaning, one can, as a matter of ordinary English, “carry firearms” in a wagon, car, truck, or other vehicle that one accompanies. When one uses the word in a different, rather special, way, to mean, for example, “bearing” or (in slang) “packing” (as in “packing a gun”), the matter is less clear. But, for reasons we shall set out below, we believe Congress intended to use the word in its primary sense and not in this latter, special way.

This is the defininition that seems to comport with most of my reading on the subject. And yes, at the instant that he leaves his premises, he is 'carrying' in NJ.

Second, the issue of 'place' as used in 926A has not been defined by Congress. However in several legal proceedings the court of record held that it meant the state of origin/destination (see Third Circuit in post #11 for example). It would be very accommondating if the 'place' was your own residence as many would like but, to date, I can't find any support for that more lenient definition.

Third is the issue 'when does a trip become interstate?' Is it sufficient for the OP, upon embarking from his home and still in NJ, to claim an out-of-state destination as his intended path or does it require the actual traversing of a state boundary before becoming interstate?

Fourth is the issue whether the FOPA protection begins while within the origin state or after that state's boundary is crossed. Again, based on my readings the intent was to not pre-empt the laws of the origin state but only those of intervening states.

With all that said, I admit that I don't have the answers (at least not yet) but I continually attempt to caution those who want to use a simplistic interpretation of FOPA and hopefully indemnify themselves while transporting firearms within a gun-unfriendly state (such as NJ) to take serious pause in their deliberations.

The 'rabbit hole' that we call the justice system is far more complex than any of us can imagine and it is further complicated by what many (most) times seem to be totally illogical rulings.

Each person must assess their own risk acceptance level and proceed accordingly but to tell the OP that he is covered without any supporting documentation is doing him a disservice IMO.

This and other discussion is found in thread:
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-carry-145/96533-cc-philly-zoo.html

[QuackXP]

The two places I visit most outside of my resident city of Pittsburgh are Erie, PA and Youngstown/Warren, Ohio. Erie is no problem being in PA and all. But Ohio is a different story. Ohio does not issue non-resident licences. To carry I will need one from another state that Ohio has a Reciprocity Agreement with. Utah seems to be the best bet from a cost/benefit standpoint of obtaining a permit that is valid in the most amount of other states specifically Ohio. My research led me to the Ohio Attorney General's website where they have posted copies of the agreements with other states including Utah.

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/E...ity-Agreements