BobCav
Founder's Club Member
imported post
David, the best I can find so far is1839-1840when the constitutionalityof concealed carry was brought before the courts in Alabama. Perhaps there were other cases in other states a bit earlier?
State vs Reid is an historic case that actually defends Open Carry as being more effective for self defense:
THE STATE V. REID
1. The act of the 1st of February, 1839, "To suppress the evil
practice of carrying weapons secretly," does not either directly,
or indirectly tend to divest the citizen of the "right to bear arms
in defence of himself and the State;" and is, therefore consistent
with the 23d section of the 1 Art. of the constitution.
[snip]
“But the court say that it is a matter which will not admit of legislative regulation, and in order to test the correctness of its opinion, supposes one Legislature to prohibit the bearing arms secretly, and a subsequent Legislature to enact a law against bearing them openly; and then asks the question, whether the first, or last enactment would be unconstitutional. Under the provision of our constitution, we incline to the opinion that the Legislature cannot inhibit the citizen from bearing arms openly, because it authorizes him to bear them for the purposes of defending himself and the State, and it is only when carried openly, that they can be efficiently used for defense.”
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/state_v_reid.txt
I need to research that act if the 1st of February 1939!
David, the best I can find so far is1839-1840when the constitutionalityof concealed carry was brought before the courts in Alabama. Perhaps there were other cases in other states a bit earlier?
State vs Reid is an historic case that actually defends Open Carry as being more effective for self defense:
THE STATE V. REID
1. The act of the 1st of February, 1839, "To suppress the evil
practice of carrying weapons secretly," does not either directly,
or indirectly tend to divest the citizen of the "right to bear arms
in defence of himself and the State;" and is, therefore consistent
with the 23d section of the 1 Art. of the constitution.
[snip]
“But the court say that it is a matter which will not admit of legislative regulation, and in order to test the correctness of its opinion, supposes one Legislature to prohibit the bearing arms secretly, and a subsequent Legislature to enact a law against bearing them openly; and then asks the question, whether the first, or last enactment would be unconstitutional. Under the provision of our constitution, we incline to the opinion that the Legislature cannot inhibit the citizen from bearing arms openly, because it authorizes him to bear them for the purposes of defending himself and the State, and it is only when carried openly, that they can be efficiently used for defense.”
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/state_v_reid.txt
I need to research that act if the 1st of February 1939!