Can You Carry A Gun At The Post Office? – The Legal Brief ~ VIDEO

The Gun Collective
The Gun Collective

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- Welcome back to The Legal Brief, the show where we CRUSH the various legal myths and misinformation surrounding various areas of the gun world.

I’m your host Adam Kraut and today we are talking about carrying firearms on postal property. And no, we are not discussing shipping firearms through the mail.

The topic of post offices comes up rather frequently in conversation with regard to firearms. It is a place that many of us travel to in order to send certain things and a place that some of us have to travel to in order to collect our mail since the post office does not actually deliver to all residences. For instance, Jon has a PO Box for TGC.

As we have previously discussed, federal law prohibits the possession of firearms in federal facilities. This would include post offices. I think most of you were already aware of that given the signs you usually see posted all throughout the post office. And no, it doesn’t only ban revolvers….

While this is relatively straight forward the question arises in the context of the post office parking lot.

Can you carry a firearm to the post office, park in the post office parking lot and leave your firearm in the car while you retrieve your mail or ship something? The answer which may surprise some of you, is no.

The federal regulations state “[n]otwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, … either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.” In other words, a person cannot carry or store a firearm on postal property, unless it is for official purposes. I know some of you are going to say “but Adam, my car isn’t postal property.” You’re right, but it is parked on postal property and that is where the problem lies. buhdaddum

Tab Bonidy, a Coloradan who lived in a rural area, felt that such a restriction violated his Second Amendment rights and brought suit against the US Postal Service. He claimed that the restriction was unconstitutional as applied to him because it violated his Second Amendment right to bring a gun into the post office and store a gun in his car while he picked up his mail. Mr. Bonidy lived in an area where he had to retrieve his mail from the post office as they did not deliver. The District Court held that the postal regulation prohibiting Mr. Bonidy from carrying his firearm into the post office was constitutional but the prohibition on storing a firearm in his car was not.

As you may have guessed, the Government wasn’t quite happy with that outcome, so it appealed the decision to the Tenth Circuit. The Tenth Circuit ruled that the parking lot adjacent to the actual building was considered postal property and as such, the post office could prohibit firearms from being stored in a vehicle. In part, it relied on language found in Heller which stated “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions…or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.” For what it is worth that particular sentence as a whole has been the subject of a lot of controversy and interpretation.

The Court offered two approaches which it could find that the prohibition was constitutional. First, it looked at the layout of the parking lot, finding that it was attached to the postal building and was for the exclusive use of it. It also noted there was a postal drop box, which meant postal transactions took place in the parking lot. As such, it found that the language quoted in Heller applied to the parking lot as well as the building. However, because the Court felt that the parking lot was a matter which was closely contested, it offered an alternative analysis.

The Court posited that the right to bear arms recognized in Heller in the home, would apply, although with less force, outside of the home. The Court stated that the Post Office acting as a proprietor (not a sovereign) has broad discretion to govern business operations according to rules it deems appropriate. It also found that the differences between the ban in Heller and McDonald were starkly different than the one in this instance. It stated “[T]he regulation challenged here applies only to discrete parcels of land owned by the U.S. Postal Service, and affects private citizens only insofar as they are doing business with the USPS on USPS property. And the regulation is directly relevant to the USPS’s business objectives, which include providing a safe environment for its patrons and employees.”

Applying an analysis, the Court determined that the regulation was sufficiently tailored to the US Postal Service’s important interest in safety. Remember, intermediate scrutiny requires that the government’s stated objective be important and there has to be a reasonable fit between the challenged regulation and the asserted objective. In this instance, the fit between the important interest in safety and the prohibition of carrying firearms on the property. As such, it upheld the constitutionality of the regulation. I’ve included the decision in the description for your reading pleasure. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court which denied certiorari. Two of the attorneys at the firm I work for drafted an Amicus Curiae Brief which was filed prior to the denial. You can find that in the description as well.

Adam Goes Postal
Can You Carry A Gun At The Post Office? – The Legal Brief ~ VIDEO

So what should you do if you have to go to the post office and you have your gun? Well, there are a few options. You could leave your gun at home, but I know that most of you won’t view that as an option and I don’t blame you. You could park in a parking lot that is not on post office property, store your firearm securely, walk to the post office, conduct your business and then return to your car. Or you could send someone else to handle your mail for you.

Hopefully that clears up some confusion that exists surrounding firearms and postal facilities. If you guys liked this episode, you know what to do, hit that like button and share it around with your friends. Be sure to check out my website adamkraut.com. Remember, if you have a question you want answered on this show, head over to The Legal Brief section on theguncollective.com. Don’t forget to like The Gun Collective on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Full 30, Snap Chat and wherever else you can catch us on social media.

And as always thanks for watching!

Links for this episode:

  • 18 U.S.C. § 930 – Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities : https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930
  • 39 C.F.R. § 232.1 – Conduct on postal property : https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/39/232.1
  • Bonidy v. USPS : https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-1374.pdf
  • Amicus Brief : https://princelaw.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/no-15-746-proof-prince-law-office-final.pdf

About The Gun Collective

The Gun Collective is dedicated to bringing you the highest quality, fast paced gun content possible. Started in June 2015 by Jon Patton, TGC has rapidly taken off to become a go-to source for the things you need to know without a bunch of BS. Please check out TheGunCollective.com to learn more and see what the hype is all about!

167
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
37 Comment threads
130 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
45 Comment authors
OldmariineJim MacklinAlanbigaldeprjim sheldon Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Jim Macklin
Guest
Jim Macklin

Justice Scalia is always misquoted and taken out of context. The HELLER case did NOT uphold the constitutionality of any federal law, rule or regulation. The USPS has authority to set work rules for postal workers but not the general public. The SCOTUS limited its investigation and ruling to the Washington, D.C. case and the rules on storage and carrying guns in the home. What Justice Scalia said was [ until the Court ] has a case where the other issues are considered, those laws on the books can still be enforced. HELLER did not consider USPS work rules, general… Read more »

bigaldepr
Guest
bigaldepr

Here is the Catch 22. You can ship long guns to unlicensed persons through the USPS but you cannot bring the gun on USPS property. So how do ship via the USPS without breaking the law?

Alan
Guest
Alan

You might pose this question to The Law Makers, aka your Elected Things. You might get some interesting, honest answers, though I seriously doubt the honest qualification. The answers you get, assuming you get any, might prove “interesting”.

Najee
Guest
Najee

But does law fall under the Postal Police tho????

Najee
Guest
Najee

Ah but does fall under LEO’s off duty or Federal LEO’s like the Postal Police Force

oldvet
Guest
oldvet

Word has it the Senate Homeland Security committee will hold a hearing Wednesday on the USPS allowing employees to take leave to work for the killery campaign , which violates the Hatch Act. Incurring extra expense because others had to work overtime. Of course this is killery so nothing will come from it.

Alan
Guest
Alan

Re your closing observation, no doubt that you got that right.

Alan

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

GRRRRR!

Oldmariine
Guest
Oldmariine

Oldmarine >>> Wild Bill I feel the same way as you. There is all kind of confusion over many laws, that is because in 1893 the Supreme Court decided that any law repugnant to the Constitution is null an void making many statutes obsolete and illegal. The trouble with the anti gun laws is that they are not only illegal according to the Constitution. but violate other laws . example = First it violates the 2nd, is personal endangerment and any enforcement assumes responsibility for your life without your permission, all contradicting existing laws. That can go even farther into… Read more »

JIm
Guest
JIm

I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV however common sense dictates… Despite a court “OPINION” which is not the same the rendering of law. Only Congress can make law, and unless they have given the USPS that power in writing via a separate law, THEY HAVE NO SUCH AUHORITY, the USPS cannot make law only rules and guidelines! These rules and or guidelines are those of a government contractor, just as there are other government contractors they are also fee to make their own RULES and guidelines with respect to their property. However the USPS… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Jim, One must follow judge made law and legislature made law, so what is the difference, you have to follow it? What is “Law”?

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

@Jim, @Wild Bill, the problem most people don’t understand is that judges, no matter if they are municipal, district or federal, cannot legislative from the bench and must follow WRITTEN and ESTABLISHED law that is written and authorize by congress. One of the biggest problems we have in this nation for the past 40 years was taking our marriages / divorceed out of the criminal court arena and putting it into the civil law arena where judges spew / issue, “court orders” at the sounding of the gavel, UNLESS THESE ORDERS ARE ISSUED BY LAW CLERKS and only a judges… Read more »

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

@Wild Bill, you know that only the SCOTUS are the ONLY JUDGES allowed to, “change” law. NO JUDGE has any authority to legislate from the bench. They, (judges) MUST FOLLOW,WRITTEN LAW. If WE, The Sheeple allow a judge to legislate from the bench and we follow along then it is OUR fault!

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@GR, I know that even the SCOTUS can not “legislate” law. What ever “law” is. Only Congress has legislative authority. The districts and circuits make rulings that tell us what legislation means, and what agency made rules mean, and what S Ct. opinions mean, in their own circuit or district until that circuit court of appeals or that federal district court gets overturned or Congress acts. All of these agencies, courts, and legislators make rules for us to obey. They make them in different ways, but all impact us in the same way, so… I ask again which is ”… Read more »

Oldmarine
Guest
Oldmarine

Hi Wild Bill, The way I see any law ” For or Against the 2nd Amendment is breaking the Law of The Land and also against the nature of Mankind, and can NOT do any good in the end. Any Law against nature will never work and makes any attempt look pretty stupid. I agree with you “WHAT IS LAW ?”. Laws passed that take away natural requirements can really put the law maker into a very liable position legally when anyone that obeys that law suffers danger because of it, can sue those Law makers and even judges that… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@OM, I can not disagree with you.

JIm
Guest
JIm

Judges cannot render law, but their decisions in a perfect world would be made on the letter of law. Unfortunately all too often their OPINIONS are just that based upon personal feelings political agenda and thoughts. These could easily be referred as (legal term coming) Prima Vera Law.. That is a term meaning that if I say it is the law and you believe it, then it bears the weight of law. If on the other hand you call BS and put me to task to prove it by the letter of the law and I cannot then it looses… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Jim, Actually, judges have been in the “law” rendering/making/delivering business long before legislatures were even thought of, and still do today. Each federal judge, appellate judge, and supreme court judge makes some rule or interpretation of a rule that you will obey or suffer the consequences. Local bureaucrats district bureaucrats, regional bureaucrats, and national level bureaucrats also make rules that you will obey or suffer the consequences. If you have to obey or suffer the consequences, then isn’t that “law”?

jim sheldon
Guest
jim sheldon

that is called “Prima Vera Law” (not sure on the SP) but short version, if I tell you it is against the law to wear blue socks, and you believe it and follow it then it is the same as a law, If however you say BS prove it I cannot so it is rendered invalid….

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

Unless you are 100% disabled and file a Pauperous Afidavit, then you have no limits on your filings as the filing fees are waived.

Alan
Guest
Alan

A question to posters here, if I may. How many here spent the brief time necessary to contact their elected representatives regarding concerns here mentioned, and their ideas for fixing the problem.

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

I do all the time and not only on this subject but a wide variety of issues, mostly abused of government power(s), veteran’s issues and in all contacts made, I always offer either solutions or pieces of the legalese puzzle that would lead to. solution(s).

Jim Macklin
Guest
Jim Macklin

Your grade school English teacher will say the question is not properly written.
The question isn’t “can I” but “may I” or really “should I.”
Should you is the question and that is followed by will you?

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

How about this….

Just walk in to your USPS facility ARMED and concealed. Do your business. Walk out. No one is the wiser. That is why it is called CONCEALED carry.

Once again “….shall not be infringed” is ignored and infringed.

Screw “the law”.

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

In my experience, those who say, “screw the law,” are those likely to get screwed BY the law! If you really want to be able to carry SAFELY in the PO, or any other Govt offices, the most appropriate response is to write your congressmen and senators and try to get them to pass a law something like the REINS Act, to remove the offending regulations. It may also help to write to the POTUS and point out that he IS the Executive Branch and all those regulations we find so onerous can be reversed with a stroke of his… Read more »

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

There’s another old saying that, “When there’s 60 armed citizens standing amongst six armed police officers, the citizens make the law.”

Review the Battle of Athens, Tennessee. The second Revolutionary War in the United States.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldshooter, “….write your congressman and senators and try to get them to pass a law….” Hahahahahahaha…. 1. Write one’s congress weasel ? I wish you were joking, but you are not. 2. Get them to pass ANOTHER law ? Ever been in a law library ? Walls and walls and volumes and volumes of your beloved “laws”. Just what is needed, ANOTHER law. You are just another statist; a collectivist. 3. You FEAR the US government….that is tyranny in action and you are accepting of it. Hahahahahahahah….write one’s congress weasel ? Don’t forget to enclose a certified check for $10,000.00.… Read more »

Doug
Guest
Doug

What they don’t know, won’t hurt them !!
It’s better to be judged by twelve than carried by six !!
That’s my viewpoint of this situation !!

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

Do a risk analysis here Doug. Which do you think is the more probable event, that you will have to get into a potentially lethal shootout in or adjacent to, the PO, or that you will be caught carrying there and arrested for it? Both are events that will change your life for the worse, and both will have very long-term, if not permanent effects.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldshooter,

Good Lord….you are a most cowardly Amerikan. Just stay in your abode. If not you “may”, “might”, “could”….catch a cold or worse….excercise what little Liberty remains in fUSA.

You are truly despicable.

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

@ DAN – Personally, I’m real careful about bandying the word “coward” around. You know nothing about me, my history, my beliefs, etc. except what you’ve seen here, and I rarely discuss my personal history except in relation to the topic under discussion. Your rhetoric suggests that you haven’t spent much time in any sort of actual combat. I say that because most of the combat vets I know are much less “bloody minded” in their talk, but I could be wrong, since I don’t know you either, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Personalities aside though,… Read more »

Alan
Guest
Alan

well said sir.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldcoward and/or oldstatist, So, you’re an old, retired badged thug are you ? Your lengthy diatribe reminds me of the extensive pages of bullsh*t opinions the members of the judiciary often write justifying their wrongful legal opinions. Yes, I consider your words here as descriptive of one who is cowardly in the extreme. Methinks you have hidden your entire life behind the cloak of government as one of the many scoundrels who are part of that criminal enterprise. Your extreme advocating of following the “law” is that of a blind fool. As you tend to ignore that written which you… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Dan III, Take it easy. There are plenty of leftists, socialist, and elitists that deserve this kind of insult. The older gentlemen that come to this site do not. What you write says a lot about you, but proves noting about your subject.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Wild Bill @ 2025, 13 JUL,

Your “older gentlemen” are quite adept at their efforts to manipulate us untermenschen. Try to refrain from supporting such.

BTW, thank you for your ridicule. Rule #5, courtesy of Saul Alinsky. Correct ?

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Dan III What ridicule? Nothing that I have written in responding to you has been meant to be ridicule. It is too bad that you can’t turn your vitriol in a direction that deserves it.

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

DAN, It is a sad thing to see a person who can only define himself and his life in terms of a lost lawsuit. You may well have been wronged, but you seem to have allowed this event to color the rest of your life – indeed, you seem to let it define you. I gave you a polite way out with my comment earlier that I’d give you the benefit of the doubt because I don’t know you. You seem to have been too angry or stupid to take it, and still think I am a statist, “badged thug,”… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldcoward/oldstatist, First off, you are FAR from being a Libertarian. Far from it. You are without a doubt, a statist, a collectivist. “Sad” ? You are also far from “sad”. Please. Spare me anymore or your self-righteousness. You think mighty highly of yourself. Your alleged time in Vietnam should not be listed as a badge of honor. For all I know you were an E-3 clerk working in one of the S-4 warehouses at Danang. Instead you want to use the unnecessary deaths of 58,000+ men and untold hundreds of thousands wounded to justify your belief that I am just… Read more »

Oldshooter
Guest
Oldshooter

Well DAN, you are proving my earlier point. I wasn’t looking for a “Holier than thou peeing contest” but I see from your response, that you can’t seem to do anything but try to denigrate others, from the country to individuals like myself. And since you can’t seem to even imagine or admit, that there may be others more honorable and less embittered than yourself, it seems unlikely that you will change. I’m not the one bloviating here, YOU are. You consider our wars “imperialist,” yet obviously don’t understand the meaning of the term (for example, which colonies do we… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldcoward/oldstatist, “….one of the 20+ wars of imperialism this country has engaged in since 1947.” There you go know-it-all. There’s an extract from my last reply to you. Yet, you have the audacity to try to frame my remarks outside the scope of what I actually stated. Again, in effort to justify yourself you question me on the sanctity of American involvement in “The Good War”. You dare ask me if our WW2 involvement was imperialism, per my “+20 wars of imperialism since 1947” remark. “Since 1947” doesn’t fit your meme so you back up six years to 1941. How… Read more »

tomcat
Guest
tomcat

@danIII, I think you should stop and consider the comments by the “older gentlemen” on this subject as being constructive rather than regressive. As an example I could say if you stick your hand into a buzz saw to stop it, what do you think will happen? It is very clear that the saw will cut your hand off. Taking on the government as you post would be the same type of punishment. You may not get your hand cut off but it sure will hurt your pocketbook. We are all to blame because we have allowed the government to… Read more »

Lawrence Rupp
Guest
Lawrence Rupp

Video said prohibition applied to property “owned” by PO/Federal Govt..

Many PO are in leased property/buildings.

Any clarification?

Alan
Guest
Alan

From what I’ve seen here, it appears that the post office, via regulatory authority, which seems little understood, can do most any damned bit of foolishness it’s little hearts desire. Of course, such postal authority antics might well serve to drive ever more customers to other suppliers of similar, possibly better, more efficient services, a possibility that the post office, being s government entity cares naught about, it appears. Given that postal authorities appear to have powers, but lack responsibility, we have the mess that we have. Funny thing is the following. Criminals aren’t much bothered by or concerned with… Read more »

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

The courts have repeatedly held that the person or agency leasing a property, including the federal govt, can impose their own regulations on behavior on the leased property as if they were the owners, so long as those regulations are otherwise within the law, and do not conflict with their leasing contract with the actual owners.

Alan
Guest
Alan

What one CAN do, and what is the SMART thing to do are often markedly different, a basic premise that seemingly escapes some people, notwithstanding the sometimes maudlin ramblings of our courts.

Jim Macklin
Guest
Jim Macklin

A few years ago when I applied for Social Security I was surprises to see armed guards at the only public enterence with a table and sign that read no weapons of ANY kind.
I asked about pocket knife and was told :nothing.”
So I went back out to the car and left my gun, knives, spare ammo and pocket change.
I wonder why the SS offices are more fearful than the other government offices?

Alan
Guest
Alan

Jim Macklin:

I could be wrong, but I suspect what you reference is simply more bureaucratic bullshit. when I filed for Social Security, I saw no guards, armed or otherwise, though Pittsburgh PA. Might be more peaceful than your location, who knows.

Jim Macklin
Guest
Jim Macklin

I’m over 70 and hope for two things that are possible. I hope that the United States government will get as much legal sense as te State of Kansas now has. You can carry almost any weapon anywhere in the State. In general, the only places “off limits” are federal and a few named places. In Kansas we can carry into the Legislature, colleges, most schools, churches, hospitals, even the governor’s mansion if the governor invites us. The only edged weapon restriction is a sharpened throwing star [ I guess somebody watched too many Kung Fu movies ].[ Note I… Read more »

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

I live in San Antonio, TX. When I went to the SS branch Office to sign up for Medicare back in 2013, they had an armed guard but no metal detectors, etc. When I went there two years ago to straighten out paperwork, they had 3 armed guards and metal detectors, and I had to go through a procedure similar to the airport (although I didn’t have to take off my shoes). As an aside, I asked the armed guard back in 2013, how often he went shooting. He said he just qualifies annually. I practice weekly, and my standard… Read more »

Alan
Guest
Alan

Jim Macklin:

Re the observation at the end of your post, funny that you should notice and mention that.

Jim Macklin
Guest
Jim Macklin

You mean about airline pilots guarding the mail?
Laws don’t stop crime, they define crime and prescribe punishment.

Criminals don’t care about the law and they don’t expect to be caught. Honest people are raised to behave honorably. Children are taught to be nice, to share toys, not steal and certainly to not hurt their friends.

Criminals learn slightly different rules to live by.

Chief
Guest
Chief

What makes a Post Office mightier than Fed Ex or UPS. They both offer exactly the same services. Nothing more and nothing less. They deliver mail and packages. Why would the Post Office be in danger more than the other places that offer the same services. Also, this ruling would mean that you could never ship a gun through the Postal Service as you need to take it into the building to send it out. You would be in possession when entering the building. Is that illegal also?

Bob Woodcock
Guest
Bob Woodcock

Where I live fed ex and ups are both posted.

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

You can have guns sent to you, (By a gun dealer or manufacturer) in the mail in Texas.

Joseph Johnson
Guest
Joseph Johnson

If all ccw/gun owners would boycot anti gun establishments , ie. Electronic email , don’t buy stamps, movie stars. I think they would re visit their anti gun stance!

Lennon S.
Guest
Lennon S.

I have stopped using the USPS for everything, I get all my bills electronically. I send all my packages and mail via UPS or FedEx. I’m not going to disarm just to retrieve my mail or to ship a package.

Mark Are
Guest
Mark Are

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED trumps all the PO BS. I carry all the time into the PO and darn, never a body has died in my presence. SCREW them. I decide. Not some fool “law.”

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Mark,

My exact same thoughts.

Alan
Guest
Alan

Perhaps I’m thick headed, but viewing the back and forth on this topic I find myself curious re the following. I’m a law abiding citizen licensed by my state of residence to carry concealed forearms. Additionally, my state of residence states in it’s statute law,that open carry of a firearm without any sort of permit is allowed. I enter a post office facility for some lawful purpose, having secured my pistol in my vehicle, parked off site of the post office, in accordance with what appear to be regulatory law. While in the postal facility,I attacked by another person, suffering… Read more »

Gordon Miller
Guest
Gordon Miller

It’s “One cannot eat his cake and have it too.” Same difference.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

The USPS has no duty to protect you. In your hypothetical, the USPS has not taken on any duty to protect you.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Bill,

Correct. USPS has no duty to protect citizen customers. But what they HAVE done through their diktats/regulations is DENY, through threats of prosecution, fines and Club Fed time, those same citizen customers their right to protect and defend themselves.

USPS, in the scenario presented, is culpable.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Dan III, Well and succinctly stated.

Alan
Guest
Alan

And the law allows the p.o. to get away with this sort of crap. Anyone ever wonder at the diminished degree of respect for the law displayed ever more often.

Alan
Guest
Alan

HankB

Sounds like you might be on the verge, or perhaps past that point, of speaking in favor of what has been otherwise been described as Jury Nullification, long may it wave.

Sam Adams
Guest
Sam Adams

Disregarding for a moment (not really) that ALL gunlaws are offensive to the restrictions placed upon government by the Second Amendment, PLEASE explain how (d)(3) DOES NOT APPLY? (d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to— (3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes. How is this not applicable? Section 930: a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall… Read more »

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

The argument has been made before that, under subsection d.3, “self-defense” is a “lawful purpose” for carrying a firearm, thus, if a concealed carry licensee carries on the PO property s/he should theoretically be fine. Of course, this would probably have to be decided in a federal court and you are taking your liberty in your hands and offering it up to the federal (IN)justice system if you try to test it. Remember what happened to the Bundy Ranch and Malheur Refuge folks when THEY tried to stand up for their rights against the feds. As for the folks who… Read more »

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

oldshooter,

“Remember what happened to the Bundy Ranch and Malheur Refuge folks when THEY tried to stand up for their rights against the feds.”

You may want to read the successes of those Patriots at Oathkeepers.99th

You would be surprised at what some backbone, knowledge of their rights and standing their ground in “the system” provided them.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldshooter,

Just stay in your abode. Insure you lock all the windows and doors.

“Despicable”. Your cowardly advice is indicative of what many Amerikans have chosen to do….bend over and grab one’s ankles.

Jim Macklin
Guest
Jim Macklin

Going to a public area of a Post Office to buy a stamp or collect mail from a Post Office Box or get mail from General Delivery at the counter IS a lawful purpose. Years ago the heavy leather mail bags carried by the postman as he delivered the mail contained a holster that fit a Colt or S&WV 1917 revolver. No postal worker “went postal” until after the Postmaster General under LBJ imposed his anti-gun ideas. That rule change also resulted in te Post Office dropping the requirement that Airline Pilots carry a gun to protect the mail carried… Read more »

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

And any one of millions of idiots would have thought that it was only Congress that can make law?

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@OV, I would not test the reg with my freedom and treasure at stake against any federal agency or quasi-agency in a federal court. @Greg R, Federal agencies with the “authority” to make regulations with the force and effect of law have only existed since FDR talked Congress into it. Congress loves it because they never get the blame. The president loves it because he just tells the agencies the regulation that he wants and how it will read and orders it done, without the consent of Congress. The federal agencies and quasi-agencies love it because they develop huge fiefdoms… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Bill, “….not Constitutional….” Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5….”a natural born citizen”. So much for that as the usurping scoundrel soetoro-obama, was pushed by the Marxist media and supported by the fed courts and CON-gress, in violation of the nearly worthless U.S. CON-stitution. Amendment 2, The right to Keep and Bear Arms. 2A….compromised, ridiculed and violated hundreds of thousands of times by the courts, the Alphabet agencies, the CON-gress and numerous POTUS’s. Above are two examples. 1A, Free speech, is another Freedom pretty much in the toilet by the fedgov scum folks like to call “government”. Bill, the CON-stitution was… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Dan III The Constitution worked while they followed it. I presume by “still birthed” you mean the Supreme Court creating for itself the power of judicial review of Congressional Acts in Marbury. Yes, the S Ct. justices were the first to subvert the Constitution, but no one subverted the Constitution like FDR.
FDR talked Congress into giving away its exclusive authority legislate to agencies. And now, Congress loves it. The people get regulated out of their Constitutional rights. Congress is never the villain. And Congress can spend their time raise in election funds (i.e. selling influence).

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

The issue is not whether you are at the PO for a “lawful purpose,” but whether you are carrying a gun “for a lawful purpose.” In any case, as I said earlier, it is YOUR freedom you are risking if you decide to challenge the federal govt on this issue. You might want to keep in mind that two past IRS Commissioners have publicly stated that the Income Tax is a voluntary tax, that no one is legally required to pay, yet there are many in prison today, or destitute after being fined, because they didn’t pay it. When a… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldcoward, errrr oldshooter,

“….it is your freedom you are risking if you decide to challenge the federal govt….”.

Do you read what you write oldcoward ? What “Freedom” is it one risks when one fears to exercise that Freedom ? Truly, one has NO Freedom when they fear to exercise such because they fear the scum one calls “the federal government”.

Were this 1775 it appears to me you would be branded a Tory, a Loyalist, and rightfully so.

Your expressions of fear and cowardice are truly, truly despicable.

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

@DAN III, I have to give you a, “Job well done!” as I believe you have worked to lose the respect of practically everyone if not everyone in this forum. THIS TO I would blame on that mean ole federal judge that sunk your case. It’s obvious that your trial experiences wore,you down both monitarily as well as mentally, but do you actually believe that you and only you put up The Good Fight? Remember, YOU CHOSE THAT BATTLE, not us! Not OldShooter, Wild Bill and as much as,it itches my ass to say it, neither did “GIL”! Do some,soul… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Romeu, I lost “respect” of you and ” and practically everyone….in this forum” ? How so ? Did you take a secret poll I am not aware of ? Because I don’t worship at the altar of laws and regulations created by the ruling elites to control the masses, I should succumb to your criticisms ? While you throw out your scattergun criticism of my remarks, you offer no specifics to your disrespect. Although, not that it matters. If you want to enter this fray than challenge my remarks with specifics. Your pooh-poohing of my federal court case, by a… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Dan III, Greg R is right. You are so insulting that it is impossible to have respect for you. Your pronouncements, often correct, are so bitter, and ranting that you are difficult to read. You even insult people that agree with you.
Sorry that your case went south on appeal. There must have been something there or you would not have won at trial, but only one appellate judge screwed you. Not any one other person in government, or on this forum, or anywhere else in America.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Wild Bill @ 1015, I am insulting ? Because I challenge folks for with remarks they rightly deserve ? It has always amazed me how you anonymous folks take umbrage at remarks made by other anonymous pogues, like myself. Folks such as yourself describing your hurt feelings because you take remarks personally is unfathomable to me. You act as though I just physically spit in your eye and by name specific, called your wife a dirty whore ! My remarks against some of the big government advocating folks here are certainly intentional. When folks like your anonymous pal oldshooter advocate… Read more »

Alan
Guest
Alan

Seems to me that Any firearms case would require the strictness possible scrutiny, as NOTHING LESS IS ADEQUATE re the issue or issues involved, postal matters being no exception.

Woodman
Guest
Woodman

Adam, please talk about section h of 18 U.S.C. § 930. My post office does not have anything posted so I assume I can carry. (h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual… Read more »

Oldshooter
Guest
Oldshooter

There is a larger issue in play. There is no LAW prohibiting carry on USPS property, only departmental REGULATIONS. However, those regulations are enforced with the force of law. This really should be addressed with a law requiring that any departmental regulation that infringes on citizens rights must be done with an actual LAW, something similar to the REINS Act. The Postmaster General should be able to forbid his employees from carrying if he wants, and punish infringements by docking psy, etc. up to firing them. But he should have NO effective power to infringe civil rights of members if… Read more »

Joe Martin
Guest
Joe Martin

BATFE and all the other Federal agencies, including the Forest Service and BLM do the same thing. It’s called administrative law as opposed to Legislative Law. A Federal agency proposes a regulation, publishes it in the Federal Register for a period of time (anywhere from 30 to 90 days), solicits comments from the public (which they ignore) and then it become a Federal Regulation with the authority of law. It is as unconstitutional as anything that has ever existed. If some 2-bit Federal bureaucrat wants to stop you and me from buying a certain type of ammo (5.45 X 39)… Read more »

HankB
Guest
HankB

If I were ever on a Federal jury, I would NOT convict anyone of violating a REGULATION . . . I would only – ONLY! – consider convicting someone of violating the exact terms of an actual law that was explicitly voted on & passed by Congress in its entirety, signed by the President, and allowed to stand by SCOTUS. And even then, only if it was written in a form intelligible to John Q. Public; dense legalese intelligible only to lawyers and judges can’t possibly apply to anyone OTHER than lawyers and judges, IMHO. And text generated solely by… Read more »

Alan
Guest
Alan

Jury Nullification has a singular ring to it. You are so referring, no?

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

WOW! That’s a great idea, and one well worthy of mentioning to the FIJA (Fully Informed Jury Association) guys, for publication in their newsletter and on their website. Are you a member?

Alan
Guest
Alan

The name of the organization you mentioned is not familiar to me. By the way, while I served on a trial jury once, in an armed robbery case, I was never on a trial jury where Second Amendment Rights were concerned. Serving on a trial jury in such a case might well prove more than a little interesting, given my understanding of the amendment’s, clear to me, meaning. Given my leaning, I might well be excused from serving, depending on questions posed by counselor prosecution. The thing could be quite interesting, especially the nature of jury discussions.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Joe, You say, and I quote, “… it become a Federal Regulation with the authority of law. It is as unconstitutional as anything that has ever existed.” Brother, I want to shake your hand and buy you a beer. You are on time and on target! If you keep preaching what you have written here, I think that we have a chance!

BJI
Guest
BJI

Is there a LAW that allows REGULATIONS to be established by government entities and such REGULATIONS ARE GIVEN THE FORCE OF LAW?

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

You could always go to the Black’s Law Dictionary and look at the definition of Regulation versus law but I think Webster’s would pretty much do the same hence that’s why they have two different words with two different meanings.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@BJI, Yes, there are many. You have to look to the enabling act by which Congrress created each individual federal agency. Those enabling acts do not, however, make Congress’s giving away their legislative authority constitutional.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Bill, “….constitutional.” My 1st Amendment rights were violated by local government. I filed a fedgov lawsuit. After close to 3 years of legal antics and tens of thousands of MY dollars, I had my 2 days in court. The civil trial jury ruled unanimously in my favor. I won. Or so I thought. The localgov appealed. The black-robed fedgov bastard, on appeal, ruled for the government. He THREW OUT my win for Freedom and your beloved CON-stitution. My 18-month long appeal in more time and money, to 3rd Circuit, was for naught. The circuit panel ruled 2-1(2 Dems vs 1… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Dan III, I too sued government. My reverse discrimination case was successful. It took ten years and almost three months. The federal judge bent over backwards to explain to the federal agency what they had done wrong, in a thirty-four page decision. The agency appealed. The federal appellate judge, bitch slapped the agency in a one page decision telling the federal agency that they were wrong, and dismissed the appeal with prejudice.
I am sorry that your case did not go well on appeal. There must have been something to it if you won at the trial level.

Porkchop6209
Guest
Porkchop6209

Been there, done that Brother! You are spot on. I wished I had the time and place to spill the tale over a good beer and a great steak. It would heat the beer and ruin the steak. They do what they want to get what they want, to Hell with the rest of us. Please see my other two comments.

James Bailey
Guest
James Bailey

Lawyers and those in Black robes on benches are the real criminals!

The whole sorry lot have destroyed the Constitution with their fine print, and they’re truly evil case law!

What lawyers and judges are doing with their fine print, and their shyster wording, is to precipitate a civil war.

Lawyers and judges of the bane of civilized Humanity.

Porkchop6209
Guest
Porkchop6209

Well on, many times judges prohibit the mentioning of jury nullification to juries, for the exact reasons that the whole of the legal system greatly fears an informed and well read electorate. Exactly what our Founders were versus what the government run educational system has turned us into today, TV Police shows included. I did jury duty once on a self defense/second degree murder case(I really don’t have time to get into all the details), but I was stunned and saddened at the utter ignorance of both God’s Laws and man’s that my fellow jurors exhibited. I also wished I… Read more »

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

My personal belief is that, if evidence is presented to the judge in the absence of the jury, or if the jury is denied access to any evidence, (and they are aware that has happened), they should automatically vote to acquit, on the basis of the fact that they have not seen/heard all the evidence, and therefore have doubts about the defendant’s guilt. If you are interested in the area of jury nullification, google “FILA/AJI” which is the “Fully Informed Jury Association/American Jury Institute.” The AJI presents legal continuing education seminars to lawyers and publishes a journal, while the FIJA… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Porkchop, What good is a jury in a federal, civil trial if the presiding judge can overule, negate, dismiss the jury verdict ? Why even have a jury trial ? My 1st Amendment lawsuit never stood a chance when at the opening sidebar between the fed scum judge and the two attorneys, told my attorney “You have a weak case.” Yeah, so “weak” the jury ruled against the government, but never fear….the judge practiced his own brand of “jury nullification. You are correct….the trial is decided long before the opening gavel falls. Needless to say, I no longer trust government… Read more »

Oldmarine
Guest
Oldmarine

I can’t find any way to get email to you so trying this way Shepherd Scopes
https://shepherdscopes.com/gallery/
Find a law that THEY broke or put people in danger and then CHARGE and SUE them personally…. make them stand in court as a defendant and explain their actions to a jury. Fight Fire with Fire. Use Their weapon against them “THE LAW” . Go after them personally like they came after you. >>>> Oldmarine

Ed Hines
Guest
Ed Hines

This is all mute because any Law against the Constitution is illegal and can be defeated in court and there are other legal criminal Laws that can be enforced against this illegal Law. 1. Charges against the Government for not upholding the 2nd Amendment rights. 2. Reckless endangerment of customers. 3.. Denial of Protection from criminal activity. 4 .If any criminal occurrences happen then the Post Office could be charged with aiding and abetting in a crime. 5. Violating a person’s Constitutional Rights. Remember that any law MUST adhere to the Constitution or it is an Illegal law and politicians… Read more »

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

Well, we are ALL victims of our government already. The simple fact is that there is a YUGE gap between “is illegal,” and “can be defeated in court,” and that gap has left thousands of innocent victims in prison. The PO is a federal government agency, hence they cannot be prosecuted without their own permission, which certainly will not be given. Those who have already tried to use 2nd Amendment rights to refute this “administrative law” so far, have all failed, and most went to prison for trying it. The best bet is either refuse to use the PO at… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Ed Hines, I think that you mean moot, not “mute”. You say, “…any Law against the Constitution is illegal and can be defeated in court …” I say 10 million dollars will get you there, but one branch of the government may likely support the others. Your 1-4 are not even worth addressing barracks lawyer.

Alan
Guest
Alan

Where might the charges against the U.S. Postal Service be litigated, I wonder.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Jim S,

“….write President Trump.” ?

Why ?

You live in freakin’ Kaleeforneeya, the sanctuary state for illega and foreign invaders. A state with the most laws ever created usurping the US CON-stitution. You need to worry about your own backyard first. You can start with those two pieces of excrement, Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsome. Until then, don’t concern yourself with POTUS Trump.

Need I state more ?

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Ed Hines,

“….can be defeated in court.”

Hahahahahahaha !

Have at it money bags. Initiate a fedgov lawsuit against fedgov violating your CON-stitutional “rights”.

You bloviating blowhards crack me up !

Hahahahahahahahahaha….

TomR
Guest
TomR

The only blowhard I’ve seen in this thread is you. Want some cheese with your whine?

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

TomR,

I suggest you try to hook up with Eddie there. The two of you can pool your resources and challenge the denial of Freedom by USPS in federal court.

Thanks for your imaginative and trolling remark. Next time offer an argument of substance.

Oldmarine
Guest
Oldmarine

You sound like a panty waist that can’t fight any thing but yourself… kind of makes you immaterial ????? you need an attitude correction,

Porkchop6209
Guest
Porkchop6209

Marbury v. Madison, 1805, is the precedent and authority on those very points you state, more people need to study and memorize that one ruling, it either re-enforces or blows apart all subsequent rulings. Period. It’s a rigged system against us all, has been for far too long. For most people it also falls into the NEM Theory of actual living and fighting for true justice. Not Enough Money While enriching themselves they have broken and impoverished too many of the rest of us and they meant it that way. The “Law” no longer cares about right, wrong, good, bad,… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Porkchop,

WORD !

sam jones
Guest
sam jones

As a Texas LTC Instructor, I must teach the correct aspects of the law – including the prohibition on postal property. Personally, I do not wish to take the risk (although slight) of violating Federal Law. So, I have begun to use private postal centers – including UPS and FedEx for any postal transactions. Most handle postal matters, as well as their own shipping transactions.
Can’t remember the last time I set foot on the PO’s hallowed ground.
Capt Sam

Tionico
Guest
Tionico

The risk of trouble for carrying into the Post Office is minimal. First ,you’d have to get made…. concealed IS concealed, so how ya gonna do dat? Second, it would have to be some sort of FEDERAL level law enforcer to be there and deal with it. That is a federal offense, not local. So no city or county cop can bust you. Nor can they legally hold you till the Feds show up, as you have committed no crime over which they have jurisdiction. Remember, the Feds got all over Arizona when state government tried enforcing FEDERAL immigration laws….… Read more »

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

So what would you do if a local cop were present, noticed you carrying in violation of the posted signage, and said he was arresting you? He’d promptly handcuff you and they’d call in the federal postal Inspector, who would then take charge of you. What would you do? At the very least, this would cost you a fortune in legal fees. I don’t think it’s worth the, minimal risk. There is nothing the PO provides that I have to have, and if they are going to deny me my rights, I’ll avoid them like I do any other “posted”… Read more »

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldshooter,

“….if a cop were present.”

If my aunt had balls she would be my uncle.

Cease with the hypothetics. Just understand that as an Amerikan citizen or illegal invader, you live in an oligarchy and treasonous government of citizen scoundrels. Do what yoh want. But cease justifying your sheeple mentality with hypothesis.

Charles
Guest
Charles

The same dumb ass laws apply to Social Security and the VA. If you’re in their lot you’re breaking the law! Knives are also forbidden in the VA and Social Security. MY opinion is don’t advertise the fact if you leave it in your car.

Pat
Guest
Pat

I believe every case of Postal shooting was done by postal workers themselves . So why deny the rest of the public their 2nd Amendment rights? Sounds like the Post Office has internal problems not caused by the armed public.. Besides, who’s gonna know if I park there for 3 min to retrieve a letter from my PO box and I have a gun in my trunk? Do they patrol the parking lot with gun sniffing dogs??

Alan
Guest
Alan

Because they can. Their actions or edicts need not make sense, which as you noted, they don’t. Old saying explaining the forgoing follows. Room For Abuse Is Always The Largest Room In The Hotel.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

oldshooter,

“….if a cop were present.”

If my aunt had balls she would be my uncle.

Cease with the hypothetics. Just understand that as an Amerikan citizen or illegal invader, you live in an oligarchy and treasonous government of citizen scoundrels. Do what yoh want. But cease justifying your sheeple mentality with hypothesis.

Jim s
Guest
Jim s

Everyone who reads this should take a moment and write President Trump and your Republican senator (Im screwed there as Feinstein is my senator – blah). Its good to vent but we must then do something. We must be heard.
Write and say this is a ridiculous law. Be polite and respectful so they bother to count it.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Jim S,

“….write President Trump.” ?

Why ?

You live in freakin’ Kaleeforneeya, the sanctuary state for illega and foreign invaders. A state with the most laws ever created usurping the US CON-stitution. You need to worry about your own backyard first. You can start with those two pieces of excrement, Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsome. Until then, don’t concern yourself with POTUS Trump.

Need I state more ?

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

DAN III, Another nail hit squarely on the head! You and Wild Bill make excellent carpenters.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Greg,

Thank you.

Brad
Guest
Brad

So what a USPS facility that is leased and located in a strip mall with a parking lot by the post office and other businesses? Still seems vague as it seems that if you use any mail box and are carrying you could be in violation. Just apply the 2nd Amendment which is clear and concise.

SteveK
Guest
SteveK

Fred762: You got it right, Fred, but YOU don’t get to pick what’s constitutional. So it comes down to the preferences and ideology of the judge.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@SteveK, Actually one does get to pick what is constitutional… at first. And it does come down to the preferences and ideology of the judge… who is second guessing you.

Oldmarine
Guest
Oldmarine

That judge can be charged for breaking the Law and a Federal suit filed against them.
Judges of all kinds must obey the law no matter what .
Oldmarine

oldshooter
Guest
oldshooter

By and large, Judges CAN’T just be charged with breaking the law – they generally have to be impeached to remove them from the bench. That is a much more difficult proposition, and highly politicized In my experience, most of the judges I’ve met tended to be very arrogant folks, who thought they knew better than John Q citizen, and wanted to “maintain control of THEIR court,” even if they had questions about the case. Back in the early ’90s I was an expert witness for the defense in a rape trial of a former Navy SEAL. There was NO… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@old shooter, I can not agree with your last sentence more.

gcm
Guest
gcm

Ill second that @wild Bill.

Porkchop6209
Guest
Porkchop6209

That’s for sure, Brother!

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Oldmarine,

“charged” ?

“….lawsuit filed” ?

By whom ? Your statements are idiotic. It COSTS MONEY and time to do what you advocate. Why haven’t YOU and the other CON-stitutionists filed a suit yourself in fedgov court ?

Yeah. That is what I thought. Blustering and bloviating. IOW….bullcrap !

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

OldMarine, the problem is that, We, The People, have not applied scrutiny and maintenance over these corrupt officials or bother to REMOVE THEM from the bench BEFORE they cause any harm to us.

Until WE vigilantly work to maintain our elected and appointed officials, we are subject to their corruption.

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@GR, While I agree with your sentiment, I note that We the People do not have the tools to remove judges from their life appointments to the bench. There is no consequence if these judges get “it” wrong, so what do they care? They are free to social engineer us according to their own theories and preferences.

Oldmariine
Guest
Oldmariine

Old marine Judges can be charged with a crime. NO ONE is above the Law. Do not sue a judge …useless,….but charged with a crime is competently legal and it then sets the DA to prove the crime and recommend trial. Ask any Lawyer and they will tell you and many judges get caught and end in prison. Abusing the law is a felony for anyone . The best weapon any citizen has is using Felony laws, but as many times the crooked lawyers make deals or try to reduce charges but even then there is more unseen consequences to… Read more »

Oldmariine
Guest
Oldmariine

Oldmarine >>> GR & Will bill Judges can be charged with Violation of civil rights and personal endangerment and and also taking responsibility for a person life. That violates every thing that the Law stands for. The law dosen’t work as it should but sometimes it does because judges do go to jail once in a while, all they have to do commit a felony and that is a tricky subject. Judges can’t be sued for most decisions but they must comply with their Oath of Office or they easily commit a felony. Oath of office violations are a Perjury… Read more »

Porkchop6209
Guest
Porkchop6209

Not in Virginia.

Joe Martin
Guest
Joe Martin

Good laws should be obeyed, bad laws should not. The reality is that no one who is legally carrying a hand gun is going to do anything other than possibly leave it in the car when they go into the Post Office and the majority of people, especially in rural areas, aren’t even going to bother to do that. Who is going to know? Is there a Post Office parking lot inspector? Hell, the USPS can’t even handle processing the mail in an efficient manner, why would anyone imagine they could enforce a prohibition on guns in private vehicles on… Read more »

Peter Scarborough
Guest
Peter Scarborough

You stated “property owned by the Postal Service” does this extend absolutely to property leased by the Postal Service? I assume it does since many facilities are such.

Tionico
Guest
Tionico

a lease is a form of ownership, but with limited time and usage. Thus, a leaseholder in most cases has the same rights and priviedges as an outright owner. So, not a iikely defense.

Michael Arnold
Guest
Michael Arnold

Has anybody figured out how an FFL dealer can legally mail a gun (PS Form 1508 – to another dealer, etc …), without taking it onto the post office property?

Tossing it out of the car, while driving by would probably not be a good idea.

oldvet
Guest
oldvet

@Michael FEDEX and UPS are private not USPS carriers have had no problems with either.

Tionico
Guest
Tionico

OldVet….. USPS can legally handle firearms… long guns anyone can mail, and handguns only FFL can mail and then only to anoher FFL. UPS and FedEx both will carry handguns, but for some insane reason they INSIST they be shipped ONLY via Priority Overnight… at about eighty bux the pop, instead of fifteen for the Mdeium Flat Rate Box optioin available to FFL’s but NOT we peons. As to HOW one can legally SHIP a firearm through the Postal Service and still comply with the gun prohibition on USPS property….. well, the only explanation I can come up with is… Read more »

HankB
Guest
HankB

I remember hearing (second or third hand) about Chicago-area FFLs who, 3 or 4 decades ago, allegedly used to ship “handguns” to each other with a bright red “FIREARM” label on the package via USPS – except the “handgun” packages contained scrap and were heavily insured. MANY did not make it through Chicago’s central post office without disappearing . . . but the USPS quietly paid the insurance fees without question, as they did not want to admit to a massive level of postal worker thievery. Profit!

oldvet
Guest
oldvet

@HankB That would have been my guess to explain Priority Overnight. Rush it thru reduce chance of package growing legs and wandering off.

BJI
Guest
BJI

I just had a semi-auto handgun Next Day Air shipped via UPS to my FFL for $17!

BJI
Guest
BJI

Shipper was an on-line FFL.

Alan
Guest
Alan

So much for the rubbish of on line purchase of arms, without background checks.

oldvet
Guest
oldvet

@Michael it seems gil or one of the other moderators did not like my answer to you and totally deleted it.
So here it is again… FedEx and UPS are private not USPS carriers. Have had no problems with either.

Gregory Romeu
Guest
Gregory Romeu

In Texas it’s legal to ship the firearm right to your house.

Darkman
Guest
Darkman

Been carrying concealed in post offices and banks for years. That’s the whole purpose of carrying CONCEALED.

Just1Saddletramp
Guest
Just1Saddletramp

I, likewise, have done the same for years. However, it is not illegal to carry a firearm into a bank unless it is so posted. A bank is a private entity, not federal.

Tionico
Guest
Tionico

If you DO carry into a bank in Montana, make certain you dn’t get “made”… for some reason banks are “speshull” places in that state, and its illegal to carry in them. SOme states outlaw carry in church. Most states that allow private property owners to ban firearms also prescribe precisely HOW and WHERE proper notice must be posted to be binding. Know those rules. My state does that, and when I see the stupid “buy at the business supply house” signs I know I can walk right on in, as the signes are not per state specs, and not… Read more »

Pistol Packin Preacher
Guest
Pistol Packin Preacher

@tionoco love your comments. Keep them coming. I am a pastor in Tennessee and I carry when I preach concealed of course. My congregation knows this and a big percentage of our members carry concealed also. It is Tennessee but we are a 501c 3 with the understanding that our pulpit will declare very strongly what we believe and how and who to vote for according to the best we can with biblical principles. This limits many candidates unfortunately but my main point being we will not be told by the fed to be quiet or not carry. The very… Read more »

Roy D.
Guest
Roy D.

That’s funny, I am not confused at all as to whether I am going to carry a gun into the Post Office. The things people worry about.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Roy,

Simply and perfectly stated.

+ 100 !

Fred762
Guest
Fred762

The Second Amendment to the US Constitution clearly states that the “RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. There4, banning guns on USPS property is unconstitutional.

Oldmarine
Guest
Oldmarine

Well Said

LesWol
Guest
LesWol

All of you folks planning to carry concealed at the USPS or any other federal building need to be very, very careful. Being caught with a firearm will lead to a world of hurt. There are cameras all over the place, inside and out, so even if you don’t think there are any witnesses you could be on film. There are also peepholes that the Postal Inspectors use to gather evidence. With the proposed reductions to the federal workforce being discussed there are a lot of managers desperately trying to find any way they can to justify their continued employment.… Read more »

Roy D.
Guest
Roy D.

LOL!

LesWol
Guest
LesWol

Laugh if you like but if you are found to be in violation of any so-called “rules” they can and will make your life a living hell. My friends and I have been through it. It ain’t pretty.

Clark Kent
Guest
Clark Kent

What part of CONCEALED don’t you understand? P.S. The USPS works for ME; not the other way around.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Les,

Your mangina is showing !

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Fred762,

“….banning guns on USPS property is unconstitutional.”

Really ? So what ?

Other than your tough guy remarks here, what are you prepared to do to challenge the USPS and fedgov to their unCONstitutional diktats ? Yeah. That is what I thought. Nothing.

Put your money and time where your mouth (keyboard) is.

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Fred762,

“….SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”.

Are you living in effing La-La Land ? Tell your bull to the people of the nation’s capitol, Washington District of Columbia about “shall not be infringed”. Then after that, tell those in New York, California, Massachusetts, Maryland, every school zone in Amerika, and other venues across the fruited plain that their alleged “right” to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”.

Wake up and smell the treachery and treason perpetrated upon Freedom and Liberty by your friends, family and neighbors, in what one calls “government”.

Porkchop6209
Guest
Porkchop6209

As I have frequently lamented to many around in conversations, people talk about all the “rights” they have, I say to them “You don’t have any more “rights” than the government is willing to let you have at any point in time, providing you are paying your taxes or not causing them a problem. Stop doing one or start doing the other, you’ll find out exactly how many “rights” you really have.”

DAN III
Guest
DAN III

Porkchop,

Some folks, many actually, refuse to awaken to the oligarchy, the tyranny exercised by the scum one calls “government”.

Don’t give up trying to inform the sheeple. As you can read, many of them are commenting here.