La Cour suprême américaine, arbitre de l'ambiguïté lexicale

Dans l'affaire Muscarello v. United States (1997), la Cour suprême américaine a été amenée à analyser l'expression "carries a firearm" et a jugé qu'en l'espèce, le verbe "carry" n'était pas limité au transport d'une arme sur soi et pouvait également s'appliquer au transport dans un véhicule.

Pour en arriver à cette conclusion, la Cour a consulté un nombre impressionnant de sources, dont la Bible, l'Oxford English Dictionary, Robinson Crusoe de Daniel Defoe, et Moby Dick d'Herman Melville.

Extrait :

Held: The phrase "carries a firearm" applies to a person who knowingly possesses and conveys firearms in a vehicle, including in the locked glove compartment or trunk of a car, which the person accompanies. Pp. 127-139.

(a) As a matter of ordinary English, one can "carry firearms" in a wagon, car, truck, or other vehicle which one accompanies. The word's first, or basic, meaning in dictionaries and the word's origin make clear that "carry" includes conveying in a vehicle. The greatest of writers have used "carry" with this meaning, as has the modern press. Contrary to the arguments of petitioners and the dissent, there is no linguistic reason to think that Congress intended to limit the word to its secondary meaning, which suggests support rather than movement or transportation, as when, for example, a column "carries" the weight of an arch. Given the word's ordinary meaning, it is not surprising that the Federal Courts of Appeals have unanimously concluded that "carry" is not limited to the carrying of weapons directly on the person but can include their carriage in a car. Pp. 127-132.