Traveling through states without reciprocity?

[baddarryl]

Hi all. I will be traveling through Maryland, NJ and NY next month. My NC CCL has no reciprocity there. What is the legal way to transport a pistol through those states? I will be spending a couple of days outside of NYC in NY as well. Thank you.

[cslinger]

Fopa states that you may travel from point a where arm is legal to point b where arm is legal if firearm is unloaded, cased out of passenger reach and totally separate from ammo. Do not load speed loaders, strips, clips or magazines as Maryland at least used to view those as a loaded arm. You likely cannot stop in New York as afaik they require various permits which you won't have so you will have an illegal gun. Basically a good rule of thumb when traveling into jersey or New York is to tie a string to your gun and hang it off the bridge before entry and retrieve on the way back.

[Aguila Blanca]

Are you traveling "through" New York, as you wrote, or are you traveling "to" New York? Unless you are truly traveling through NY to a state where you can legally possess a handgun (which would mean Connecticut or Vermont), you cannot even enter New York state with a handgun unless you choose to be an instant felon. You can't even touch a handgun in NY state unless you have a NY permit -- and NY doesn't issue non-resident permits.

[mikejonestkd]

I'll second what AB said - don't bring a handgun through NYS to another destination state if you plan on stopping any longer than getting gas or a bathroom break.

if NY is a destination state, even for a day, then its a felony to have one here, and the NYS police will gladly enforce the law.

leave it at home.

[Closing The Gap]

Considering the Op states he will be "spending a couple of days outside of NYC in NY as well" I'd say he should leave the gun home since its a felony otherwise.

[Shadow9mm]

you probably gonna have to leave it behind, sorry. I'm planning a visit to NY state here shortly and I'm Law Enforcment in my state. I can carry but I still have to be under the new 7rnd mag limit but I have to carry copys of my training records and some other stuff and fully comply with state law and city ordinances. I am opting to go up without because there are too many issues, its just too much of a liability. From waht i understand though you are good in the state with knives though, just not gravity blades or autos, but a decent sized folder should be fine, just make sure to check the city ordinances for New Your City, I think there are some restrictions there. If all else fails just look up and cal the information lines for the local PD and ask what ok, that what helped me the most.

[seeker_two]

Why go at all?.....

[GJSchulze]

People have been arrested in both NY and NJ because they had a gun in their luggage and were forced to stay over one night because of weather or mechanical failure that delayed their flight. It's a felony and the closer you are to NYC the more unforgiving they are.

If you must travel through them with a gun, don't stop and don't get a speeding ticket. In NYS, everyone in the car will be considered to be in possession of any gun in the car.

[Theohazard]

Even if his destination wasn't NY, I still wouldn't drive through any of those anti-gun states. It doesn't seem to matter what federal law is, some states seem intent on arresting and prosecuting people regardless:

http://gunssavelives.net/blog/reason...ars-in-prison/

That guy is doing 3 to 5 years in prison because he had the audacity to pull over and sleep and because he didn't have a trunk.

[Don P]

Hi all. I will be traveling through Maryland, NJ and NY next month. My NC CCL has no reciprocity there. What is the legal way to transport a pistol through those states? I will be spending a couple of days outside of NYC in NY as well. Thank you.

Do yourself a very big/huge/tremendous favor and leave your gun at home. If you are stopped by chance inside NYC limits its 1 year mandatory jail time under the Sullivan Law which dates back to the early 1900's.
NJ will place you under arrest and you most probably after the dust settles after all this not get you handgun back. Hunters have had rifles confiscated and waited years to get them back.
Just my thoughts being a former New Yorker.

[lamarw]

Even with leaving your firearm at home, make sure you don't have a single round of hollow point ammunition in your vehicle while New Jersey.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by baddarryl

...I will be spending a couple of days outside of NYC in NY as well....

Just to be completely clear, under these circumstances you would not be protected by the federal FOPA. And in that case, your possession of a handgun in New York State would be a state law felony.

[baddarryl]

Thank you everyone. Warning noted. How on earth is this Constitutional?

[Theohazard]

That's a very good question, a question that may be addressed by the courts in the near future as more and more states pass more draconian gun laws.

[SgtLumpy]

Here's an odd state to state gun law.

If I understand it correctly, in the state of Oklahoma, residents need a state issued CCW to carry. But a resident of Arizona, without a CCW, is authorized to carry in OK. As long as the usual restrictors like felons, adjudicated mental etc don't apply.

So OK residents need a permit. But visitors from AZ don't.


Sgt Lumpy

[baddarryl]

That's a very good question, a question that may be addressed by the courts in the near future as more and more states pass more draconian gun laws.

I would think a victim could make a case against a state based on claims of "state mandated inability to defend oneself" against criminals or something.

Shouldn't this be in the Law and Civil Rights forum at this point?

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by baddarryl

I would think a victim could make a case against a state based on claims of "state mandated inability to defend oneself" against criminals or something....

Nope. First, various reason that wouldn't work were discussed in this thread.

Second, here's roughly how things work:

1. The Founding Fathers provided in the Constitution (Article III, Sections 1 and 2):

   Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish....
   
   Section 2. The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,...

2. And thus disagreements concerning the application of the the Constitution to the resolution of particular disputes is the province of the federal courts. The exercise of judicial power and the deciding of cases arising under the Constitution necessarily involves interpreting and applying the Constitution to the circumstances of the matter in controversy in order to decide the dispute.
   
   
3. And that is no doubt what the Founding Fathers would have expected. Many were lawyers. They were familiar with English Common Law (the basis of our legal system) and that for a long time it had been customary for the courts, under the Common Law and understood the exercise of judicial power in such terms.
   
   
4. Any gun control or gun ban law enacted by Congress or by any State is subject to judicial challenge on constitutional grounds. That thus becomes "a case arising under [the] Constitution" and thus as the Founding Fathers provided a proper subject for the exercise of the judicial powers of the federal courts.
   
   
5. In the course of deciding Heller (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (United States Supreme Court, 2008)) and McDonald (McDonald v. City of Chicago (Supreme Court, 2010, No. 08-1521)), the rulings made by the United States Supreme Court on matters of Constitutional Law, as necessary in making its decisions in those cases, are now binding precedent on all other courts. Now the Supreme Court has finally confirmed that (1) the Second Amendment describes an individual, and not a collective, right; and (2) that right is fundamental and applies against the States. This now lays the foundation for litigation to challenge other restrictions on the RKBA, and the rulings on matters of law necessarily made by the Supreme Court in Heller and McDonald will need to be followed by other courts in those cases.
   
   
6. There is judicial authority going back well before Heller and McDonald for the proposition that constitutionally protected rights are subject to limited regulation by government. Any such regulation must pass some level of scrutiny. The lowest level of scrutiny sometimes applied to such regulation, "rational basis", appears to now have been taken off the table, based on some language in McDonald. And since the Court in McDonald has explicitly characterized the right described by the Second Amendment as fundamental, there is some possibility that highest level of scrutiny, "strict scrutiny" will apply, at least to some issues.
   
   
7. The level of scrutiny between "rational basis" and "strict scrutiny" is "intermediate scrutiny." To satisfy the intermediate scrutiny test, it must be shown that the law or policy being challenged furthers an important government interest in a way substantially related to that interest.
   
   
8. Whichever level of scrutiny may apply, the government, state or federal, seeking to have the regulation sustained will have the burden of convincing a court (and in some cases, ultimately the Supreme Court) that the regulation is acceptable under the applicable level of scrutiny.

[baddarryl]

And thus disagreements concerning the application of the the Constitution to the resolution of particular disputes is the province of the federal courts.

I don't like the idea of the Feds suing states, but they certainly are not afraid to do it. Ala Az, and SC. Couldn't a Federal Prosecutor theoretically at least sue a state alleging it was denying US Citizens (thus protected by the Constitution) their 2nd Amendment rights?

Although I concede this probably won't happen before I go in August!

[baddarryl]

Also, how do these laws pertain to say a shotgun? What if I had an unloaded shotgun in the trunk in those states?

[Aguila Blanca]

Not sure, but I believe a non-resident cannot possess or even handle ANY firearm in New York State (except for the narrow exception covering participation in sanctioned competitions).

Seriously -- stop trying to find a loophole that would most likely get you in trouble anyway. Face up to the reality that the northeastern states are NOT gun-friendly or 2nd Amendment friendly, and make a decision: travel without a gun, or stay home.

I have a friend in NC who carried while on a band tour that included stops in both NY and NJ ... including the Big Apple itself. He came through unscathed, but he didn't have to use his carry piece for its intended purpose so it wasn't an issue. If he HAD used it, he would probably still be staying at the Graybar Hotel in upstate NY.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by baddarryl

I don't like the idea of the Feds suing states, but they certainly are not afraid to do it. Ala Az, and SC. Couldn't a Federal Prosecutor theoretically at least sue a state alleging it was denying US Citizens (thus protected by the Constitution) their 2nd Amendment rights?...

In general it's very rare for the federal government to sue a State. And when the federal government does sue a State it's usually over some established federal policy or program -- very seldom to vindicate individual rights or interests. Furthermore, the federal government, as well as States, regulates guns. So in general it will be up to individuals (in many cases with the support of various RKBA advocacy groups like the NRA or Second Amendment Foundation) to challenge in court federal and state gun control laws.

Remember also that it wasn't until 2008 (Heller) that we finally had a Supreme Court decision explicitly ruling that the Second Amendment describes an individual, rather than a collective, right. And until 2010 (McDonald) the Second Amendment did not apply against the States (as the Supreme Court had previously ruled in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876)).

So now we have something on the order of 70 RKBA lawsuits at various stages of litigation in various federal courts (see here for a rundown and current status information).

[ClydeFrog]

I, for one, wouldn't take any firearms to New York or the NYC area(CT NY NJ).
I travel up there on business(Stamford CT & New York City) often and wouldn't want to draw any heat from the new SAFE Act or Sullivan Law(gun laws).
I wouldn't want to go from Grey's Papaua or Juniors Cheesecake to the "Tombs"(Rikers Island) .

As for travel & gun laws, Id drop a few $$$, and grab a travel guide or 2;
www.gunlawguide.com www.knifelawsonline.com www.nra.org www.handgunlaw.us www.mylegalheat.com .