Am I allowed to drive in a car with a gun in my car?? Cause If I get pulled over with one, I will be arrested, but wont the 2nd Amendment protect me from being arrested?
2006-10-06 05:05:18 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Unless you are a convicted felon or have otherwise had your rights restricted or revoked, you have a right to carry a gun, even in your car. Each state, however, can restrict the type and manner in which you can carry a gun or they may require registration or licensing. Most states prohibit carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, so leave it on the seat of your car, not under the seat. There are many other restrictions, depending on the state where you are planning to carry a gun. Consult a lawyer in your area for specific details. If you do get arrested, call a lawyer.
Good luck!
2006-10-06 05:55:10 · answer #1 · answered by www.lvtrafficticketguy.com 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It depends on the laws of the locality where you are stopped.
The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution has NEVER been interpreted by the courts to give a blanket permission for people to own firearms. Reading both the history of the constitution and the court opinions over the years will show that the Courts have consistently held that the 2nd amendment prohibits Congress from restricting the states from forming a militia.
It is generally accepted constitutional theory that a state (and perhaps Congress) could completely outlaw certain types of firearms, and indeed, in some cases they have. In addition, the states and congress have restricted (and quite constitutionally so) the instances in which a firearm can be owned.
Concealed carry laws vary greatly from state to state and even from city to city. Before concealing a firearm, you must consult your local police department or an attorney to determine the status of the laws in your state.
2006-10-06 05:14:43 · answer #2 · answered by Phil R 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Since the times have changed, that amendment doesnt mean exactly the same thing. The fathers of the Constitution made the second amendment so ordinary civilians could join the militia and fight the Indians to the west. That has changed quite bit since we dont have any indians to fight and now with the invention of machine guns, pistols, revolvers etc, guns are quite a bit more dangerous than a single shot musket like they had back then.
2006-10-06 05:17:44 · answer #3 · answered by gt6985 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The 2nd amendment is being perverted and trampled on.
You should not need a permit for a CCW or CPL, the 2nd amendment is your permit.
check this out:
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
The Second Amendment's recognition of a "right" that belongs to "the people" indicates a right of individuals. The word "right," standing by itself in the Constitution, is clear. Although in some contexts entities other than individuals are said to have "rights," the Constitution itself does not use the word "right" in this manner. Setting aside the Second Amendment, not once does the Constitution confer a "right" on any governmental entity, state or federal. Nor does it confer any "right" restricted to persons in governmental service, such as members of an organized military unit. In addition to its various references to a "right of the people" discussed below, the Constitution in the Sixth Amendment secures "right[s]" to an accused person, and in the Seventh secures a person's "right" to a jury trial in civil cases. By contrast, governments, whether state or federal, have in the Constitution only "powers" or "authority." It would be a marked anomaly if "right" in the Second Amendment departed from such uniform usage throughout the Constitution.
In any event, any possible doubt vanishes when "right" is conjoined with "the people," as it is in the Second Amendment. Such a right belongs to individuals: The "people" are not a "State," nor are they identical with the "Militia." Indeed, the Second Amendment distinctly uses all three of these terms, yet it secures a "right" only to the "people." The phrase "the right of the people" appears two other times in the Bill of Rights, and both times refers to a personal right, which belongs to individuals. The First Amendment secures "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances," and the Fourth safeguards "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." In addition, the Ninth Amendment refers to "rights . . . retained by the people." We see no reason to read the phrase in the Second Amendment to mean something other than what it plainly means in these neighboring and contemporaneous amendments.
A feature of the Second Amendment that distinguishes it from the other rights that the Bill of Rights secures is its prefatory subordinate clause, declaring: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, . . . ." Advocates of the collective-right and quasi-collective-right interpretations rely on this declaration, particularly its reference to a well-regulated militia. On their interpretation, the "people" to which the Second Amendment refers is only the "people" in a collective, organized capacity as the state governments, or a small subset of the "people" actively organized by those governments into military bodies. "People" becomes interchangeable with the "State" or its "organized militia."
This argument misunderstands the proper role of such prefatory declarations in interpreting the operative language of a provision. A preface can illuminate operative language but is ultimately subordinate to it and cannot restrict it.
2006-10-06 05:07:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You must have a permit to carry a gun. The government is not revoking your right to have a gun, the permits just regulate who can have one. Nobody wants convicted felons running around with guns...We are protecting citizens by enforcing this law, not imposing on their 2nd amendment rights. Criminals and the like gave up their rights when they decided to take the law into their own hands! I am in support of citizens being allowed to protect themselves, I am not in support of removing all regulations so that the people we need protection from can have guns too!
2006-10-06 05:17:41 · answer #5 · answered by Beth 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think you'll get arrested if the gun isn't LOADED.
The Second Amendment isn't about being some kind of Wild West gunslinger and turning our city streets into a shooting gallery; it's about American citizens being able to defend themselves and their homes -- both from criminals, and from a government that crosses the line.
2006-10-06 05:08:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
The Second Amendment was set up to provide a militia when the US had no standing army. It's been so perverted now the founding fathers would probably puke to see what the NRA and others have used it for.
2006-10-06 05:13:17 · answer #7 · answered by Kevin C 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The second amendment allows you to possess a firearm.
Where and how is up the the state.
It's called gun control laws.
For example, you have the freedom fo speech,
but you're not protected by it if you falsely yell, "Fire!" in a crowed movie theater...
Our rights are limited.
2006-10-06 05:09:33 · answer #8 · answered by The Mac 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
1 - Huh?
2 - Depends on the state you live in; more than 35 states let you legally carry a firearm in your motor vehicle.
3 - Not necessarily - you may need a concealed-carry permit; check with your local police department - they will be able to answer all your questions.
2006-10-06 05:09:01 · answer #9 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The second amendment ptotects you from the Federal government. States and local laws sre not included. It was written to prevent the feds from disarming the people not the local government. Because of this even though you are not breaking a federal law you might be breaking a local law.
2006-10-06 05:10:01 · answer #10 · answered by my_iq_135 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋