[Carry_Okie]

The historical tradition is travelers always had the right to carry. They were treated with more respect because it was known they were more vulnerable.

While I agree with you about this functionally, legally it is another matter. This is where the 14^th Amendment Selective Incorporation doctrine of the SCOTUS runs aground. It will be a very interesting test between State Sovereignty under the 10^th Amendment v. the 2^nd Amendment right to bear arms. It will depend upon whether the Justices read the 10^th correctly:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The power to control who is armed is NOT "delegated to the United States;" as the right to keep and bear arms is instead acknowledged by the Constitution as a pre-existing right in the 2^nd Amendment. We shall see if they get it right.

[edwinland]

Excellent analysis. Thanks

[Macoozie]

“The power to control who is armed is NOT “delegated to the United States;” as the right to keep and bear arms is instead acknowledged by the Constitution as a pre-existing right in the 2nd Amendment. We shall see if they get it right.”

Very nicely put.
Carry on.

[Ancesthntr]

Under McDonald, the states (and their subdivisions) are as bound by the 2nd Amendment as the federal government is under Heller (and thus Bruen or any other 2nd Amendment case). The 14th has incorporated the 2nd against the states. Thus, this is a pure 2nd Amendment case -the 10th has nothing to do with it, just like in Caetano (which the federal courts would have noticed and ruled upon if that were the case).

[rednesss]

Does your state driver’s license end at your state’s border? Or are you able to continue driving in a different state?