IMO Interstate Travel via a Carrier is NOT illegal

[Thomas]

THIS IS ALL IN MY OPINION AND NOT LEGAL ADVICE

I believe there is a common misconception that it is illegal by Federal law to travel interstate with a concealed handgun if you have a concealed handgun license on a common or contract carrier such as a private bus service.

Those who believe it is illegal point out this law:

18 USC §922 Unlawful Acts
(e) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to deliver or cause to be delivered to any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors, any package or other container in which there is any firearm or ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or ammunition is being transported or shipped; except that any passenger who owns or legally possesses a firearm or ammunition being transported aboard any common or contract carrier for movement with the passenger in interstate or foreign commerce may deliver said firearm or ammunition into the custody of the pilot, captain, conductor or operator of such common or contract carrier for the duration of the trip without violating any of the provisions of this chapter. No common or contract carrier shall require or cause any label, tag, or other written notice to be placed on the outside of any package, luggage, or other container that such package, luggage, or other container contains a firearm.

Those people who believe this is illegal say that for it to be legal, you have to hand over your handgun and ammunition to the pilot/captain/conductor/operator. However this exception is only valid if the person in possession of the handgun is only doing so to accompany it's transfer.

EDIT: txmatt points out that this applies to commerce. So if you're not selling your handgun or ammunition, this law does not apply to you.

EDIT: Keith B points out that traveling to work may be considered commerce. I counter that almost any reason for travel could include commerce. So unless the handgun and ammunition itself is a part of the commerce, I still don't think this law applies.

Remember, everything after the word "except" is conditional that everything before the word "except" is met.

Everything in green I meet, until the red part, is not met by a person with a concealed handgun and a concealed handgun license, because the firearm and ammunition is not going to another person. The word "deliver" is used because this is talking about a delivery person. This becomes clear in the section after the "except" in blue EDIT: (wording is a passenger attached to a handgun, not a handgun attached to a passenger). EDIT 2: Actually, it just depends on the definition of "with"

It might help if the law is spaced so that it is easier to follow:

It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to
_____deliver or cause to be delivered to
_____any common or contract carrier
_____for transportation or shipment in
_____interstate or foreign
_____commerce,
to persons other than
_____licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors,
_____any package or other container
in which there is any
_____firearm or ammunition
without written notice to the carrier that such
_____firearm or ammunition
_____is being transported or shipped;

except that any passenger who
_____owns or legally possesses
_____a firearm or ammunition
being transported aboard
_____any common or contract carrier
_____for movement with the passenger in
_____interstate or foreign commerce
may deliver said
_____firearm or ammunition
into the custody of the
_____pilot, captain, conductor or operator of
_____such common or contract carrier
_____for the duration of the trip without violating any of the provisions of this chapter.
No common or contract carrier
_____shall require or cause any
_____label, tag, or other written notice
_____to be placed on the outside of any
_____package, luggage, or other container that such
_____package, luggage, or other container
_____contains a firearm.

[Kythas]

Good luck arguing that in court

[Thomas]

Good luck arguing that in court

Do you think that "any person ... to deliver ... to persons" covers me delivering to me?

[txmatt]

I'm no lawyer, but my understanding of that section of law is that it only pertains to commerce. Transporting your personal firearm is not commerce.

[PappaGun]

IA definitely NAL.

It does not matter what you think.

It depends on legal precedent.

For something like this I would get legal advice, not Internet advice.

[Thomas]

I'm no lawyer, but my understanding of that section of law is that it only pertains to commerce. Transporting your personal firearm is not commerce.

For the benefit of others, could you please explain why.

IA definitely NAL.

I don't know what those acronyms mean.

[JJVP]

IA definitely NAL.

I don't know what those acronyms mean.

IA definitely NAL = I Am definitely Not A Lawyer

[txmatt]

I'm no lawyer, but my understanding of that section of law is that it only pertains to commerce. Transporting your personal firearm is not commerce.

For the benefit of others, could you please explain why.

Sure, it's the "in interstate or foreign commerce" part. If I drive across a state line in my car with my gun I'm not involved in interstate commerce. I don't really think that's different if I'm on a bus. It would apply if I were taking my gun across a state line on the bus to go sell it to someone in another state.

The courts may very well disagree with me, however, as they tend to have a very liberal interpretation of what constitutes interstate commerce. Or I may be reading it completely wrong; like I said, I am no lawyer.

[Thomas]

I'm no lawyer, but my understanding of that section of law is that it only pertains to commerce. Transporting your personal firearm is not commerce.

For the benefit of others, could you please explain why.

Sure, it's the "in interstate or foreign commerce" part. If I drive across a state line in my car with my gun I'm not involved in interstate commerce. I don't really think that's different if I'm on a bus. It would apply if I were taking my gun across a state line on the bus to go sell it to someone in another state.

The courts may very well disagree with me, however, as they tend to have a very liberal interpretation of what constitutes interstate commerce. Or I may be reading it completely wrong; like I said, I am no lawyer.

Great point. I didn't even give that word a second thought until now. Thanks

[ScottDLS]

18 USC §922 Unlawful Acts
(e) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to deliver or cause to be delivered to any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors, any package or other container in which there is any firearm or ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or ammunition is being transported or shipped; except that any passenger who owns or legally possesses a firearm or ammunition being transported aboard any common or contract carrier for movement with the passenger in interstate or foreign commerce may deliver said firearm or ammunition into the custody of the pilot, captain, conductor or operator of such common or contract carrier for the duration of the trip without violating any of the provisions of this chapter. No common or contract carrier shall require or cause any label, tag, or other written notice to be placed on the outside of any package, luggage, or other container that such package, luggage, or other container contains a firearm.

It says deliver a package for shipment without written notice... Lawfully carrying a CCW on your person is not delivering a package for shipment to a common carrier. The exception is so that passenger baggage can go on a contract carrier without written notification (i.e. filling out the bill of lading).

No one has showed how a CHL has violated this statute by carrying on his person.

[wgoforth]

Man goes through a cemetary at night, and trips over a grave. He looks up from the ground level and there before him is a headstone that reads "I am not dead, but only sleeping." Fellow brushes himself off and says "You can believe that if'n you want to, but aint foolin nobody but yessef..."

[PappaGun]

...The courts may very well disagree with me, however, as they tend to have a very liberal interpretation of what constitutes interstate commerce. Or I may be reading it completely wrong; like I said, I am no lawyer.

The current administration might be able to get a court to say that NOT transporting anything is an act of commerce and therefore subject to regulation.

[Keith B]

There may one 'gotcha'. If you are traveling to another state to work, you are being paid and you are by definition engaged in Interstate Commerce.

I had a long discussion with the USDOT and FMCSA about this as they were claiming a balloonist who was traveling to a festival or competition in another state and entered into the competition for prize money was in Interstate Commerce. I told them if they thought I had any chance of winning money, they had never seen me fly. The issue for us was if you were going to make money or get paid, it required you to have a USDOT number on your vehicle and keep logs and have a medical certificate if it was over 10,000lbs GCWR.

Anyways, we got further into the discussing about the retired couple who have a big travel trailer rig and were going over to Louisiana to the casinos. The guys stated it was the same requirement because they were in Interstate Commerce and over the 10K GCWR. He did state that while the laws existed, they were rarely enforced that way unless the DOT could see indications they were engaged in true commercial business.

So, long story short, if you are traveling for more than pleasure or have the chance to make money or get paid, then if you cross state lines you are in Intestate Commerce.

[speedsix]

...I think I remember Amtrak changing their rules to allow CCW...last year...and I've never heard anyone having any trouble on Greyhound...research time again...

...OK Greyhound's items list prohibits guns and ammo in carry-on....allows "licensed"??? guns and ammo in checked baggage...packed as they specify...

...Amtrak's list allows firearms and factory ammo CHECKED baggage only...NO blackpowder or percussion caps...no personally reloaded ammo...

...so illegal or not...those two companies won't be getting any of my money...

[The Annoyed Man]

...I think I remember Amtrak changing their rules to allow CCW...last year...and I've never heard anyone having any trouble on Greyhound...research time again...

IIRC, Amtrak changed their policy to match that of TSA in so far as traveling with your gun is permitted. You may not carry your weapon concealed on an Amtrak train any more than you may do so on a plane; but you can declare it, and it will be stored in a 'locked and secured' part of the baggage car.......or something along those lines.

Here's an idea.... Pay an FFL to ship your gun to another FFL at your destination, THEN take the bus if the savings over driving yourself allows room for that expense.