Audio here. We only talk about the 2A issue (the other was motion to suppress).

#Peterson

Peterson’s counsel Richthofen and Chief Judge Elrod briefly debate on Congress defining firearm as a silencer under 28 USC § 5845(a)(7) and 18 USC § 921(a)(3)(C). Elrod asks if it is a leap, but Richthofen doesn’t think so (I personally think it is), as he believes that if a silencer is a firearm, then it should be itself a bearable arm. Elrod then asks about whether registration unduly burdens Peterson’s rights, and noted that it’s somewhat similar to shall-issue blessed by Bruen in footnote 9. Peterson responded by citing to Murphy v. Guerrero, a Mariana Islands case that struck down the weapons ID card requirement because of the wait time. Richthofen said that the average wait time is 8 months (which the US rebuts). What’s funny is that when Elrod asks about whether it would create a circuit split with 10th Circuit’s US v. Cox, Richthofen said that he was unaware of it. Richthofen then addresses the leap by mentioning about the can itself. He says that the suppressor alone is not a firearm, but rather an accessory to be attached to one (there are integrally suppressed firearms, in which the suppressor is a component permanently attached to the firearm). He then argues against himself by saying that while bullets are necessary to exercise 2A per Jackson v. City and County of SF, suppressors like hollow bullets aren’t necessary, despite Jackson saying that the hollow point sale ban implicates 2A-related conduct. He then cites to Ezell v. Chicago, which held that the right to keep and bear arms implies maintaining proficiency in firearm operation, which implied that Chicago’s ban on shooting ranges implicated 2A, and hence shooting ranges are not categorically unprotected. Richthofen then cites to US v. Miller, which held that arms not only include firearms, but also accoutrements that rendered firearms useful and functional. In regards to the historical step, he says that there was no historical analogue in 1791, and the first suppressor regulation according to him occurred in 1934. He then cites a 5th Circuit case US v. Anderson, saying that the inclusion of the suppressor in the NFA is s tricking because no data or info regarding lawful and unlawful use of silencers was provided, and no reason was provided as well. He then says that history shows that if Americans had guns, they had to register who they are and that they had a gun (which is for militias).

#US

US’s counsel Berman says that if the panel strikes down the NFA as applied to suppressors as violative of 2A, it would create a circuit split with the 10th. Berman then says that since suppressors themselves aren’t bearable arms, no need to do the historical analysis. US points out the source for the 8 month average waiting time was accessed in June of 2019, and points out that today, the average processing time for suppressor is a few days (median is 5 days). Berman then says that as Peterson didn’t register to firearm, he’s bringing an as-applied challenge, so one can’t allege that the waiting time wouldn’t infringe his 2A rights (i.e. he doesn’t have standing). Berman then says that the average waiting for Form 1 and 4 overall is 26 days, and cites McRorey v. Garland that background checks are presumptively constitutional. He therefore proposes the following test:

1. Is the suppressor a bearable arm in common use for lawful purposes like self-defense?
2. Does the regulation at issue infringe on that right?
3. If so, is it consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation?

As for the historical analysis, US cites an analogue in its response brief (which is the closest IMO), which is a 1631 Virginia law that mandated recording of new residents as well as the arms and ammo coming in. Anyway, Berman says that under current case law, no need to do historical analysis.

#Rebuttal

Richthofen cites Willett’s concurrence in Mock v. Garland, which said that there’s no historical tradition of requiring an ordinary citizen to endure such a process like the NFA’s for an accessory that makes firearm operation safer, and that there’s no relevantly similar analogue in the Founding era that permanently disarmed people for failing to file paperwork and pay the tax.

Richthofen then stumbled in his rebuttal, and then makes a filler general statement to tell the court to interpret the Constitution and grant Peterson relief.

#Personal Take

Richthofen in my opinion did a subpar performance. His source for the wait time to show that the burden was very severe was outdated, he wasn’t aware of the Cox case, and said that suppressors aren’t necessary to firearm operation.

If you haven’t been following the case, Richthofen relied on interest balancing in his argument against the NFA, and I don’t think he explicitly referred to Bruen in his oral argument (I may be wrong). He, however, relied on text, history, and tradition besides the severity of burden analysis, in the oral argument.

If I were Richthofen, I would have said this for the textual level: suppressors are “arms” (which is a leap), but even if they aren’t arms themselves, a regulation on suppressors is essentially a regulation on a class of arms (i.e. suppressed guns), like how a regulation on high cap mags is essentially a regulation on arms that can fire more than the limit without reloading. Richthofen has already rebutted US’s argument that suppressors are not in common use by pointing to statistical data. Right now, there are millions of suppressors nationwide. To recap, the steps are as follows:

1. Is the conduct at issue covered by the plain text? Here, the conduct is suppressor possession, so yes.
2. Is the scheme like the NFA consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation (i.e. is the suppressor “dangerous and unusual” and hence the acquisition can be regulated)? The answer is no.

Given McRorey and the panel, I expect the panel uphold the NFA as constitutional 2-1. Besides the 5th, there are other NFA criminal cases in all but the 1st, 2nd, and the DC circuit as far as I know.

US v. Peterson (5th Circuit, NFA as applied to suppressors, interest balancing): CASE CALENDARED for oral argument on Wednesday, 12/04/2024 in New Orleans in the En Banc Courtroom -- AM session.

Panel: Patrick Higginbotham, Jennifer Elrod, Leslie H. Southwick

Reagan (anti-gun), GWB (pro-gun), and GWB (anti-gun).

What a bad draw for the criminal case.

I’m going to be in New Orleans for business for a few days and I know our group is going to be out and about a lot. Is it worth checking a CCW or will I probably be fine?

I know NoLa doesn’t have the best reputation crime-wise. We’re staying in some pretty nice hotel/conference center.

I'm looking for somewhere to sight in my hunting rifle without a membership. I just need to fire five to ten rounds one day before my hunting trip out of state in January. Any thoughts?

I’ve called a few places - but I’ve been turned away because everyone hates working on AK’s.

I tried to search for this question but didn’t see anything. I know places of worship are generally off-limits for concealed carry. But has anyone ran into issues carrying into thrift store that’s owned and operated by a church?

The one we go most often shares a name with the church. It’s not in the same building—it’s across the street on a different lot. The others we like are clearly affiliated with a church but don’t share a name and aren’t really close to the church (as far as I can tell).

Howdy ya'll,

I have a buddy in the BR/NOLA area looking to get a little more training for pistol and rifle shooting. He's already got his CC and is fairly familiar with firearms but he has yet to take any basic/intermediate/advanced rifle or pistol courses and certainly hasn't taken any more "tactical" oriented courses. I know my neck of the woods here in Texas better and despite that he's willing to travel, LA should have its fair share of excellent firearms training courses. Do any of ya'll have recommendations on specific ranges/courses/programs in the BR/NOLA area or large Louisiana?

Opening brief here. Despite being procedurally behind US v. Peterson, this case actually uses Bruen.

Comeaux, whose rap sheet only consists of an instance of DUI, got arrested for possessing 5 homemade suppressors. What led to this arrest was that on May 31, 2022, the police went to Comeaux's home because a neighbor reported that Comeaux discharged a gun in a threatening manner, which the latter admitted, only to scare the neighbors who have been harassing him. Comeaux has reported to the police that his neighbors had repeatedly trespassed his property, had killed his grass with weed killer, and had put cooking oil in his equipment. He also reported that he felt his firearms were "the only self-defense he had against his neighbors."

After Comeaux admitted to firing the shot, the police executed a search warrant and seized his firearm collection with firearm accessories and fabrication tools. His 5 silences were included in the seized property.

Comeaux filed a MTD challenging 26 USC §§ 5861(d) (possessing NFA items not registered to the possessor, which is the subject of appeal) and 5861(i) (possessing unserialized NFA items), but the district judge David C. Joseph, who got appointed by Trump, denied the motion to dismiss on 2A grounds by saying that they are "dangerous and unusual" because of the potential criminal misuse due to the suppressor's features, and the historical legislative record on the state level that reflects the public's negative perception of suppressors after they were patented in 1908. Judge Joseph erred on two reasons:

a. He did not undergo the full Bruen analysis. He skipped over the text and didn't use the historical analysis on why suppressors were historically considered unusual (in reality, per the American Suppressor Association, there are 3.15 million suppressors in circulation). Rather, he used interest balancing to point out the potential criminal misuse of suppressors due to their features to conclude that they are "unusual."

b. While it is true that the suppressors got regulated quite quickly on state level besides the federal level when the suppressors came out in the early 1900s, those regulations came way later after 1791. See Defendant's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss.

Comeaux pled conditionally guilty and filed an appeal raising two questions:

1. Is 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d), which prohibits the personal possession of silencers that are not registered with the Treasury, facially unconstitutional under the Second Amendment?
2. Is 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d), which prohibits the personal possession of silencers that are not registered with the Treasury, unconstitutional as applied to a gun collector who made five homemade silencers to protect his hearing and make his self-defense actions more effective and who only possessed those silencers in his rural personal residence? (note that this is the alternate route to the first)

In his appeal, Comeaux says that silencers are "arms" because per US v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, "arms" included the "proper accoutrements" or related items and accessories like "gun-cleaning equipment." Comeaux also uses the textual definition of the arm to bolster his statement that one can take a silencer “into his hands” and can use the instrument in “wrath to strike another.” He also says that silencers are "necessary to use ... weapons effectively" because they can mitigate hearing loss, as pointed by Kolbe I and Mock II in the latter's concurring opinion.

Alternatively, silencers are implicitly protected, with the hearing loss mitigation being one reason.

In regards to the historical inquiry, Comeaux points out to the dearth of evidence and information regarding silencer use in the congressional record regarding the NFA. He also points out that firearm registration didn't appear until 1911, in which the Sullivan Act was the first registration law, and that only 11 out of 48 states in 1934 had registration statutes. In regards to the tax, he points out that there are no founding laws permanently disarming individuals who failed to register and pay a tax on a weapon. Though not mentioned, while there were arms-related taxes, those were scant during the 19th century. Finally, he points out that the government's proffering of historical laws that regulated firearms commerce doesn't work because § 5861(d) prohibits one from acquiring or possessing suppressors, not selling them.

Overall, a good brief. What could have been better is that in the explicit protection (or implicit), a law regulating or even banning suppressors is respectively a ban or regulation on suppressed firearms, and perhaps not rely on the "necessary" requirement.

Your Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) Legal Action Team is urgently looking for qualified FPC members and supporters in Louisiana who wish to sue the government and help us defeat an unconstitutional law.

But we're running out of time and need to find 2 more potential plaintiffs ASAP!

For this lawsuit, we are looking for the following:

Individuals:

• Location: Resides in Louisiana, specifically one of the following parishes: Acadia, Allen, Avoyelles, Beauregard, Benville, Bosser, Caddo, Calcasieu, Caldwell, Cameron, Claiborne, Concordia, DeSoto, Evangeline, Franklin, Grant, Iberia, Jackson, Jefferson Davis, La Salle, Lafayette, Lincoln, Madison, Morehouse, Natchitoches, Ouachita, Rapides, Red River, Richland, Sabine, St. Landry, St. Martin, St. Mary, Tensas, Union, Vermilion, Vernon, Webster, West Carroll, Winn.

• Age: 18-19

• Issue(s): Would apply for a carry permit in LA but can't because of age-based restrictions and travels within 1000 feet of the grounds of any public, parochial or private elementary or secondary school.

Background: Legally eligible to possess and acquire firearms; no criminal or serious mental health history.

Sign up here: https://forms.firearmspolicy.org/landing/2024-1019-la-18-20-carry

Hi yall! I, 19f am aware of the laws stating that I can only aquire a handgun if it is bought for me (wont happen with my liberal family) or if I get it through a private sale. I have no Idea how I would set up or find a trustworthy person to buy from, arm dealers from film with guns displayed in suitcases in the trunks of their cars come to mind lol. New Orleans is not safe and im tired of feeling defenseless. I have shot guns in the past, am aware of safety rules and will practice regularly. I plan on being a responsible gun owner.

Visiting from out of town this weekend

Can non residents legally conceal carry with the new law going into effect in 5 minutes?

I’m sure everybody has seen the new law about to go into effect tomorrow (7/4/24).

This law gives people ages 18+ the ability to conceal carry.

But what about actually purchasing a handgun? Will it be possible for those age 18+ to purchase a handgun ?

I’m not too knowledgeable on guns but I’d like to be able to practice my newly given right and take safety courses, etc.

Hey, good evening. I have a 1911 and just installed a WC extended slide stop. Unfortunately now the slide rarely locks back when the mag is empty. I'm looking for someone to fit it to the gun so that it locks the slide. I'm in New Orleans but willing to travel.

Saw the following posted on a Louisiana state Rep's Facebook: https://countrywideconcealed.com/louisiana/registration?c=20062&clck=333437579&s1=1061&s2=&s3=&s4=&s5=

My interpretation is now that Constitutional carry has passed, they have made it much easier to take the course previously required for CCW permit applications, and that this site is providing that course. I watched the video and took a 10 question quiz. I now have the option of purchasing a certificate of completion from them for $88. Does anyone know if this training certificate can now be submitted to Louisiana State Police in order to receive a CCW permit? Despite Constitutional carry, I would be interested in having the permit anyway, for reciprocity, etc.

I am the Vice President of the Louisiana Shooting Association (LSA), as well as an Attorney and Concealed Carry Instructor in Baton Rouge. The LSA and I have worked with the legislature on Constitutional Carry for years now, and since it was signed yesterday, I wanted to make this post as a public service announcement to provide useful information for anyone who may wish to take advantage of this new law.

I will try to answer any questions I can. I would personally prefer if this stays on topic rather than descend into a political debate, however, I will try not to simply ignore any good-faith political questions and discussion, time permitting. This is not meant to convince anyone to carry a gun or not, nor is it meant to persuade anyone to either side. Rather, this is intended as a guide to help keep people in compliance with the law, as it is a bit complicated.

Also, it is important that I include this disclaimer: though I am an attorney, nothing in this post constitutes official legal advice and is for educational purposes only. Reading this post does not form any attorney-client relationship, and you assume full, personal responsibility for being in compliance with any relevant law.

First, some background information. Louisiana is now the 28th state to enact a form of Constitutional Carry legislation, so really this is no longer new and cutting edge. It has been the majority of the country for a few years now. Further, Louisiana has always been a “Permitless Carry” state in a sense, as permitless open carry for anyone 18 or older has always been legal since the State’s inception in 1812. It is constitutionally protected in Louisiana, and has been even before our 2012 Amendment to Article 1, Section 11 of the State Constitution. See State v. Bias, 37 La.Ann 259 (La. 1885). The first iteration of our current Concealed Handgun Permit statute came about in 1996, and has been modified over the years to change the regime slightly here and there. So people carrying guns open and concealed is nothing new.

I provide this background information for two reasons – one, it will help make sense of some of the legal issues that regulate the area under the new law. Second, to hopefully ease the concerns of some people out there who may not understand this area of law well. As I hope to show below, this change to the law is not all THAT substantial relative to what has been the status quo in Louisiana for a long time. Permitless open carry has always been the law, but concealed carry is by far the more socially acceptable and generally desired method, both from a social and practical standpoint. In a sense, this just modernizes what has always been.

1. What does the law do?

First things first, the new law does not go into effect until July 4, 2024. DO NOT CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN WITHOUT A PERMIT PRIOR TO THIS DATE.

In short, the current law now allows anyone who could have legally open carried with no permit to legally carry concealed with no permit. However, anyone carrying concealed with no permit still has all the same duties and restrictions of people carrying with permits on top of what they would if they were open carrying.

What that means is that, if you are 18 or older and can legally be in possession of a handgun, you can carry that handgun concealed on your person. However, you must abide by all the rules and restrictions that have been in place both for open carry AND for permitted concealed carry, as follows:

A. You cannot carry under the influence of alcohol or a controlled dangerous substance (including prescription drugs). For the purposes of concealed carry, the maximum blood alcohol concentration allowable is 0.05, lower than for driving. (La R.S. 40:1379.3 I(1))

B. If a law enforcement officer approaches you in an official manner or with an official purpose, you must inform the officer that you are carrying a concealed handgun, and, if the officer chooses to, you must submit to a pat down and be temporarily disarmed for the duration of the encounter. (La R.S. 40:1379.3 I(2))

C. You cannot carry a concealed handgun in any of the following prohibited locations from the Concealed Handgun Statute (La R.S. 40:1379.3 M, N, and O):

(1) A law enforcement office, station, or building.

(2) A detention facility, prison, or jail.

(3) A courthouse or courtroom, provided that a judge may carry such a weapon in his own courtroom.

(4) A polling place.

(5) A municipal building or other public building or structure, only if the building or structure is utilized as the meeting place of the governing authority of a political subdivision.

(6) The state capitol building.

(7) Any portion of an airport facility where the carrying of firearms is prohibited under federal law, except that no person shall be prohibited from carrying any legal firearm into the terminal, if the firearm is encased for shipment, for the purpose of checking such firearm as lawful baggage.

(8) Any church, synagogue, mosque, or other similar place of worship, unless authorized by the person who has authority over the administration of the church, synagogue, mosque, or other similar place of worship.

(9) A parade or demonstration for which a permit is issued by a governmental entity.

(10) Any portion of the permitted area of an establishment that has been granted a Class A-General retail permit to sell alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises (in short, a bar and some other places)

(11) Any school, school campus, or school bus as defined in R.S. 14:95.6.

(12) in the private residence of any person without first receiving their permission.

(13) any other place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by the lawful custodian of the property (i.e., posted “no guns” signs).

D. You also cannot carry in the following places which are prohibited for open carry, but not for permitted carriers, as will be discussed in the next section:

(1) Within 1000 feet of any school (a “school zone”) (La R.S. 14:95.2 and 95.6)

(2) in ANY place that sells alcohol for consumption on the premises (including restaurants). (La R.S. 14:95.5)

Carrying in violation of any of the above is still a crime.

2. Are there still permits, and why would I get one?

A careful reading of the above will show that getting a concealed handgun permit is still necessary if you intend to carry concealed regularly and in most places. It is EXTREMELY critical to point out that those two places in section D above do NOT apply to concealed handgun permits.

If you have a permit, you can legally be within 1000 feet of a school. This is both a state AND a federal law, and the only exception to both is for permits issued by the state. Violation of this is also the only prohibited location that is a felony. You can check maps for most cities to show where the school zones are, and a quick glance will show you that a huge amount of most cities is included in these zones. Here is the map of East Baton Rouge Parish, for example: https://data.brla.gov/Public-Safety/School-Gun-Free-Zone/rft4-hjp5

Second, the blanket prohibition on carrying firearms in alcoholic beverage outlets (14:95.5) has an exception for permit holders allowing them to carry in restaurants that serve alcohol. So you have to have a permit to be in most restaurants, as most restaurants serve alcohol.

Obviously, if you intend to carry a concealed handgun with any regularity, you will still need a permit if only for the restriction on carrying in these two places. You will almost certainly go eat at a restaurant that serves alcohol, and it would be VERY difficult to manage to avoid these school zones at all times.

Please note that having a firearm in your vehicle is an exception to the school zone law as well, so you can drive through the school zone, or otherwise legally leave your gun in your car if necessary. However, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD YOU LEAVE A FIREAM IN YOUR VEHICLE THAT IS NOT LOCKED IN SOME KIND OF SECURE CONTAINER. This is how most stolen guns are stolen, and they make many different kinds of vehicle safes. Even a simple one will stop most smash-and-grab vehicle burglaries.

Finally, having a permit grants you concealed carry reciprocity with most other states. While 27 other states (which we have reciprocity with) also have permitless carry, there are some that don’t, and some of these states may also have similar laws to ours where permit holders have greater rights.

So, in short, constitutional carry is great for people who may wish to carry a concealed handgun on a limited basis, only to certain places where it is lawful to do so. It also clarifies a long-standing question of law as to whether it is legal to carry a concealed handgun on your own private property with no permit (your private property is also exempt from the gun free school zones). It may also be good for people who wish to experiment with concealed carry to decide if they wish to pursue getting a permit to carry with greater regularity. Permits are expensive (about $300 every five years) which significantly disadvantages people of limited means, who often have the highest need for self-defense. Finally, it is my hope that it means fewer guns are left in cars, as now people will be able to keep the gun on them more often, where it is much less likely to be stolen.

As a final thought, while training is not mandatory for the new permitless carry law, training is ALWAYS advisable. If you've read this far, you've seen just how much there is to know about this to stay in compliance with the law. There's also a lot to know about how to carry a concealed handgun effectively, safely, and comfortably, in addition to shooting skills themselves.

I’m sure there are questions people have that I have left out here, and I will try to answer all that I can.

If you support these legislative efforts and victories, and would like to help us in our continued efforts to clarify and improve Louisiana’s concealed carry and other gun laws, please consider joining the Louisiana Shooting Association, as we are always on the forefront of these efforts.

https://louisianashooting.com/

https://www.wbrz.com/news/governor-jeff-landry-calls-special-session-on-crime-set-to-begin-feb-19

BATON ROUGE - Governor Jeff Landry issued his plans for a special session to take place from February 19 to March 6 in attempt to address crime.

Among the many items to be addressed include restricting parole eligibility, expanding criteria for revoking parole and probation, increasing penalties for carjacking, granting immunity from liability based on certain criteria for peace officers, allowing concealed carrying of weapons without a permit to certain people, and legislating with regard to the prosecution of third-degree rape.

I have an AR12 I’m going to bring to a Gunshop and get a couple hundred bucks for. I also have one of those Polymer80’s and a jig. From what I’ve read as long as it isn’t drilled out and completed it isn’t a firearm. Mine has sat in a box since 2021 undrilled and un molested. Before I try to bring it somewhere I was interested in seeing the legality of selling it to a shop. I think a private sale would probably be quicker but I don’t know if it is legal. Any input? Would I have to serialize it even though it’s just a chunk of polymer still?

I wanted to give everyone a heads-up that we have finally received what was promised over 10 years ago. Now when applying for the LA CHP, you will be able to get fingerprinted locally with identogo locations and it will be digitally submitted along with your online application. There is no longer a need to go to the headquarters in Baton Rouge to be fingerprinted in person.

Here is the notification from the LSP to instructors:

LSP has rolled out a new statewide applicant processing solution called "LAPS." This system makes it easier for applicants who need fingerprints to obtain them electronically close to their residence. This function is now available for CHP applicants, and we have already noticed a good bit of applicants utilizing this process.

Upon applying online, applicants will receive an email with instructions to schedule a fingerprint appointment in the LAPS system. Those who choose to submit paper applications can still utilize this process as well, and are encouraged to do so rather than sending us fingerprint cards. To schedule an appointment near their residence, applicants can visit the LAPS website at https://unroll.identogo.com/ and enter one of the below codes in the "Service Code" box:

27KBQ3 if you have lived in LA 15 years or more, or

27KBNN if you have lived in LA less than 15 years

We believe this process will make submitting fingerprints easier for applicants, as well as help reduce the large amount of print cards we receive in our office. As always, please let us know if you have any questions. Thank you!

As for as wait times, they have been very efficient over the last year. Most of my students receive the permit in about 2-3 weeks. This could make it 1-2 weeks.

Also, after receiving the approval email, you will likely find that the LA Wallet app will be updated to include your digital permit. Not familiar with the app? I have a video talking about it at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9r2HX1NIzO

​

Enjoy!

Just paid for my permit, does that mean I’ve been approved and should expect it soon? TIA