FRS 790.25(5):

POSSESSION IN PRIVATE CONVEYANCE.--Notwithstanding subsection (2), it is lawful and is not a violation of s. 790.01 for a person 18 years of age or older to possess a concealed firearm or other weapon for self-defense or other lawful purpose within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use. Nothing herein contained prohibits the carrying of a legal firearm other than a handgun anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful use. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm or other weapon on the person. This subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided in s. 776.012.

FRS 790.001:

(16)  "Readily accessible for immediate use" means that a firearm or other weapon is carried on the person or within such close proximity and in such a manner that it can be retrieved and used as easily and quickly as if carried on the person.

(17)  "Securely encased" means in a glove compartment, whether or not locked; snapped in a holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access.

GRS 16-11-126:

(d) This Code section shall not forbid the transportation of any firearm by a person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129, provided the firearm is enclosed in a case, unloaded, and separated from its ammunition. [red]This Code section shall not forbid any person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129 from transporting a loaded firearm in any private passenger motor vehicle in an open manner and fully exposed to view or in the glove compartment, console, or similar compartment of the vehicle;[/red] provided, however, that any person in possession of a valid permit issued pursuant to Code Section 16-11-129 may carry a handgun in any location in a motor vehicle.

SCRS 16-23-20:

Unlawful carrying of pistol; exceptions.

It is unlawful for anyone to carry about the person any pistol, whether concealed or not, except as follows:

(1) Regular, salaried law enforcement officers and reserve police officers of a municipality or county of the State, uncompensated Governor's constables, law enforcement officers of the federal government or other states when they are carrying out official duties while in this State, deputy enforcement officers of the Natural Resources Enforcement Division of the Department of Natural Resources, and retired commissioned law enforcement officers employed as private detectives or private investigators.

(2) Members of the Armed Forces of the United States or of the National Guard, organized reserves, or the State Militia when on duty.

(3) Members of organizations authorized by law to purchase or receive firearms from the United States or this State, or regularly enrolled members of clubs organized for the purpose of target shooting or collecting modern and antique firearms while these members are at or going to or from their places of target practice or their shows and exhibits.

(4) Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing or going to or from their places of hunting or fishing.

(5) Any person regularly engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing, repossession, or dealing in firearms, or the agent or representative of this person while possessing, using, or carrying a pistol in the usual or ordinary course of the business.

(6) Guards engaged in protection of property of the United States or any agency thereof.

(7) Any authorized military or civil organizations while parading or the members thereof when going to and from the places of meeting of their respective organizations.

(8) Any person in his home, or upon his real property, or fixed place of business.

[red](9) Any person in a vehicle where the pistol is secured in a closed glove compartment, closed console, or closed trunk.[/red]

(10) Any person carrying a pistol unloaded and in a secure wrapper from the place of purchase to his home or a fixed place of business or while in the process of the changing or moving of one's residence or the changing or moving of his fixed place of business.

(11) Any prison guard while engaged in his official duties.

(12) Any person who is granted a permit under provision of law by the State Law Enforcement Division to carry a pistol about his person, under conditions set forth in the permit.

Persons authorized to carry weapons pursuant to items (6) and (12) of this section may exercise this privilege only after acquiring a permit from the State Law Enforcement Division as provided for in Article 4 of Chapter 31 of Title 23.

Quoted:
I'd like to thank you all for the valuable info. Hopefully one day we will have a national CCW and avoid all the hassle of different regs in different states.

Quoted:
If there is a federal law on this, please post it, I'd really be interested.

Quoted:
I think that the purpose of this federal law is to ensure that you can ship guns from state to state (i.e. interstate commerce). Without this law, it potentially would be illegal for the postal service, UPS or Fed-Ex to have a gun in the back of their truck for delivery and drive through a state that prohibits that type of gun. It would cause big problems for delivery companies (or private citizens) to have to drive around various states that are not gun freindly to get to their final destination.

Staples v. U.S., - U.S. - (1994)

([url]http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/staples_v_us.txt[/url])

This is also a very interesting case, where the Supreme Court reversed the 10th circuit and decided that in order to convict someone under the NFA of possessing an unregistered (untaxed) weapon, they must prove the defendant knew it was the sort of gun regulated by the NFA. In this case they had to show the defendant knew the rifle in question was fully automatic. This case was really answered in the Freed case ([url]http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/us_v_freed.txt[/url]), where the court said part of a violation of the NFA was the defendant's knowing the weapons in question were the sort subject to regulation. Freed held explicitly, and Staples didn't touch, that the government need not prove the defendant knew about the registration stuff, only the nature of the weapon that made it subject to registration. Lower courts had however been ignoring Freed, claiming the government needed to only show the guns were in fact the sort regulated, regardless of whether the defendant knew they had that feature. In Freed the NFA weapons were hand grenades, which made showing the defendant knew the nature of the weapons sort of irrelevant, although I guess there could have been an issue about whether he knew there was explosive material inside them. However with an mg, it can appear to be a regular semi-auto. This case will end a lot of stupid prosecution, for possessing a weapon that didn't work, but the feds could work on till it did, or for the feds to tape together parts kits - they can do whatever they want, but they will have to prove the defendant knew the thing was a machine gun, not just that they could make it behave as one.

Bryan v. United States, - U.S. - (1998)

([url]http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/bryan_v_us2.txt[/url])

In this case the court affirms the 2nd circuit ruling ([url]http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/us_v_bryan.txt[/url]), which essentially equates the state of mind "wilfully" with "knowingly" in the Gun Control Act, even though both terms were used, and wilfully traditionally means a greater state of mind (awareness of what you are doing, whether it you it on purpose, versus whether you know you are violating the law in question) than knowingly. Justice Stevens, who believes gun owners are evil, decides that all the government need show is that the defendant knew he was violating any law, and not the specific requirement the defendant is being charged with. The addition of states of mind was a reform in the 1986 FOPA, before that ATF regularly got convictions against persons who had no idea they were doing anything wrong at all, and in fact thought they were just selling off their gun collection. This in essence repeals part of that reform, by judicial decision.

Quoted:
Most of the gun laws use the word knowingly. The supremes have interpreted this to mean that if a person is unaware that they are doing something it's ok.