http://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2011/rs/title14/rs14-95-2-1/
LA Rev Stat § 14:95.2.1 §95.2.1. "Illegal carrying of a firearm at a parade with any firearm used in the commission of a crime of violence"
Speedy: My personal issue: as a layperson, I would think a good lawyer would have a field day with seeing as open carry is NOT "illegal carry" and concealed carry with a permit is also legal and also that you are do not posses "any firearm used in the commission of a crime of violence," one should be able to fight this.
Owen Courreges: It's a minor exception. The offense already requires that the person also use the gun during a crime of violence, and how many would-be criminals would open carry to a parade to commit a crime of violence? They'd be seen and stopped very quickly. With respect to concealed carry, there's a separate law saying you can't carry concealed at a parade even with a CHL, I believe.
Speedy: Now, you could also open carry at a parade without committing a crime of violence... The law doesn't seem to cover that, at least not here... But it's just not a great idea and thus I've never heard of anybody doing it (retention issues, difficulty of using a firearm defensively in crowds, you'll probably want to drink because parades are boring without alcohol, etc.).
Owen Courreges: Yeah, it's La. R.S. 40:1379.3(N)(9) that says CHL holders can't legally carry at a parade.
Speedy: I realize I'm picking nits but law/lawyers, that's what ya do, right? "N. No concealed handgun may be carried into and no concealed handgun permit issued
pursuant to this Section shall authorize or entitle a permittee to carry a concealed handgun *IN* any of the following: (9) A parade or demonstration for which a permit is issued by a governmental entity."
What constitutes being *IN* a parade Owen?
Owen Courreges: Hmmm... You have something there. The most natural reading of being "in" a parade is actually participating, not merely attending. That said, I suspect a judge would throw the rule of lenity out the window if the issue actually came in front of them and find the accused guilty.
Just look at how the courts have handled the new gun rights amendment. I think it pretty clearly guaranteed constitutional carry by omitting language that allowed restrictions on concealment and also adding language subjecting all gun restrictions to strict scrutiny, but thus far the courts have basically ignored those facts and argued that everyone simply intended to preserve all existing gun laws (a preposterous notion not supported by the text). Judges don't like radical outcomes.
So while you're correct legally, I doubt it would pan out that way in practice. Basically, the one major decision on the issue decided that the people of Louisiana basically superimposed "new" before "restriction," so that all traditional restrictions were basically grandfathered in. They essentially just amended the text arbitrarily. It's a very frustrating decision.
