Branch Post Office Carry?

[Frank Ettin]

...That is begging the question....

No it's not. You're just playing sophistry games here. It's law whether or not you think there's a point to the law.

But as NavyLT suggests you might not lose your guns. Still, it'll be a hassle. And there's always the possibility that the U. S. Attorney will also try to make a charge under 18 USC 930 stick. Of course there are some good arguments it doesn't apply, but that doesn't always stop a prosecutor. And if he charges you under that, you'd have to fight about it. You may win, but it'll still cost you a bunch of money.

But in any case, it's not my problem. Have a nice life.

 

[ar10]

NavyLT is right. Don't carry anywhere on the grounds, or locked in a car on the grounds of a Post Office.
I guess if someone wants to test the law they could make it known they are carrying in the post office, but I prefer to keep my license and can't afford to fight it in court.

 

[GonHuntin]

Gonhuntin - was that a handgun or long gun you were mailing?

Long Gun

I'm not an FFL holder, so I can't mail a handgun.

 

[KBintheSLC]

I have had similar concerns with my PO... located on private property shared by other businesses.

Luckily, the PO doesn't actually DO anything to enforce their funny rules, so I haven't had to find out the hard way.

... Unless you consider that little paper sign at the front door to be "enforcement".

I generally just refrain from bringing my CCW into the PO part of the building. I either leave it in my car in the privately owned, shared parking lot out front, or leave it at home if I am on my bike.

..

 

[chuckusaret]

The post office in my town leases two stores at a four store location and according to the Post Master you are not of his concern until you enter thru any post office entrance and into the lobby. The parking lot is open parking for the entire strip mall and allowed by the state to have a weapon in your vehicle.

 

[sohcgt2]

if the public entrance is not posted you are ok. I think. maybe.

§ 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities


(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 be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.


d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

(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 notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be.

I left out a lot but the way I read it is if you are lawfully in possesion of a dangerous weapon for lawful purpose and the property is not posted you may carry.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...if you are lawfully in possesion of a dangerous weapon for lawful purpose and the property is not posted you may carry.

Good, go for it. Find some federal property, maybe your nearest federal offices, carry your gun, get caught and let us know how it works out. Or are you just going to wait for someone else to take the risk, take the fall and incur the expense?

 

[warriorsociologist]

TAB,
you mean "BATFE" for #2.

 

[gc70]

I left out a lot but the way I read it is if you are lawfully in possesion of a dangerous weapon for lawful purpose and the property is not posted you may carry.

That might be true for some people, but not for sohcgt2 or anyone who read sohcgt2's post about § 930.

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 notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be.

Yep, when you have read the law, you have probably been adequately put on notice.

 

[NavyLCDR]

18 USC 930 does not apply to the post office!

39 CFR 232.1 does apply.

Notice what 39 CFR 232.1 starts with:

(l) Weapons and explosives . Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

"Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation" makes null and void 18 USC 930 and all other state and local laws that may be used to permit carrying or storing a firearm. 39 CFR 232.1(l) stands alone and by itself to ban weapons on postal property for purposes other than mailing them.

 

[Hawaiian]

Thanks for posting this thread. I have gone to the post office many times and left my gun in my car when I went in. I was not aware that the parking lot was included in the no firearms law. Now I know better.

 

[sohcgt2]

fiddletown responded

Good, go for it. Find some federal property, maybe your nearest federal offices, carry your gun, get caught and let us know how it works out. Or are you just going to wait for someone else to take the risk, take the fall and incur the expense?

I do carry, as for getting caught, the objective behind concealed is I am the only one who knows I'm carrying. The only reason I could forsee anyone finding out is if someone else had a dangerous weapon for unlawful purpose.

So if BG attempts to cause bodily harm and I use a firearm in the post office to intervein, I guess I'll take my chances with a jury. The rest of you can leave your knives and guns in your cars parked accross the street or at home when you go to buy stamps.

I did qualify... if the public entrance is not posted you are ok. I think. maybe.
I left out a lot but the way I read it is if you are lawfully in possesion of a dangerous weapon for lawful purpose and the property is not posted you may carry.

 

[TexasRifleman]

I left out a lot but the way I read it is if you are lawfully in possesion of a dangerous weapon for lawful purpose and the property is not posted you may carry.

So there are 2 schools of thought on this currently.

One is the US Code you reference here, where it says "lawful purposes". That one has been around a while and has been traditionally called out as a reason it's OK to carry.

But, there are Postal Service regulations that talk about this and those seem to conflict with the US Code.

Buckeye Firearms has a good writeup of this. Worth the read. Some Ohio specific stuff, but it's good reading on this anyway.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/Concealed-carry-in-a-post-office-may-lead-to-rude-awakening

 

[MSgtUSMC]

Attended a CCW class yesterday. The instructor stated carrying in a post office is illegal but then came a shocker. He stated we can't carry in a bank either because of the funds being insured by FDIC. An responses to that?

 

[TexasRifleman]

He stated we can't carry in a bank either because of the funds being insured by FDIC. An responses to that?

That's been debunked many times over the years. No one has ever been able to show any even remote connection there but it still comes up now and then.

If there is a restriction on bank carry, it's a state thing not Federal as far as anyone has ever been able to show.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Attended a CCW class yesterday. The instructor stated carrying in a post office is illegal but then came a shocker. He stated we can't carry in a bank either because of the funds being insured by FDIC. An responses to that?

My response to that is it is B.S. And it is simple. The definition of Federal Facility is right in 18 USC 930 and it has absolutely, positively NOTHING to do with FDIC:

18 USC 930:
(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term “Federal facility” means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.

There are only 12 (I believe) banks that are federal buildings, those are the Federal Reserve Banks. They are in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atalanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas, and San Francisco. Your local bank is not property owned by the Federal government, nor is it staffed with employees of the Federal government.

Firearms may be prohibited in Banks by state law, but not by Federal law. Also, banks, as private corporations, have the right to restrict firearms on their property by their own policy.

 

[SMMAssociates]

Some States, like OH, have specific rules prohibiting Law Abiding Citizens from carrying in a Post Office....

However, I hold with Ken Hanson's view that it would be otherwise legal if our friends in Columbus hadn't mucked it up for us.

This seems to be similar to the mess with School Zones, where the Federal attitude seems to be that possession of a firearm on school property (i.e., locked in your vehicle) is OK if you're licensed, or "other lawful purpose". However, OH law (with one exception) restricts licensees off the PROPERTY entirely....

(As of February 2009, you can carry or transport while picking up or dropping off your kids. It appears that you should stay in the vehicle, but this restriction seems impossible to comply with if you've got booster-seat-class kids, not to mention minor emergencies while loading & unloading. Hell, what do you do if the kid falls and hurts him/herself and the Nurse is necessary? Drive home and lock up your gun? This change, however, makes no provision for a spouse or other "family member", so if the wife works there, you can't transport her unless there's a kid involved, too....)

Some states also do appear to restrict carry in banks. At least one (can't remember which one) restricts carry in funeral homes, and OH has a goofy negative option on Houses of Worship where you either need specific individual permission or a sign saying "Licensed Carry is OK"....

It's a little confusing....

Finally, I ran into somebody who feels that the CFR regulations are NOT law, and should be subordinate to the actual Federal Laws involved. IANAL, though, but that's my opinion. IOW, if the applicable law says "you can carry on your front porch", and the CFR regulation says "only on Wednesdays", the latter is invalid....

Regards,

 

[rondog]

Concealed means concealed, IMO.

 

[rondog]

There are only 12 (I believe) banks that are federal buildings, those are the Federal Reserve Banks. They are in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atalanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas, and San Francisco. Your local bank is not property owned by the Federal government, nor is it staffed with employees of the Federal government.

There's one in Denver too, I look out of my office window right down on top of it. No public access though, to my knowledge. Kind of a mini-fortress.

 

[TAB]

Concealed means concealed, IMO.

yeah, nothing like knowingly and willing breaking the law to show that you have both the moral and legal high road.

 

[sohcgt2]

There are only 12 (I believe) banks that are federal buildings, those are the Federal Reserve Banks. They are in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atalanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas, and San Francisco. Your local bank is not property owned by the Federal government, nor is it staffed with employees of the Federal government.

Recent Wall Street events may have changed that since now the federal government is now a primary shareholder in AIG who is a primary shareholder in many banks and other businesses.

 

[NavyLCDR]

However, I hold with Ken Hanson's view that it would be otherwise legal if our friends in Columbus hadn't mucked it up for us.

That's an interesting statement to make considering that Ken Hanson views 39 CFR 232.1 as prohibiting firearms at the post office, and, therefore, an Ohio resident carrying a firearm at a post office is not breaking just state law, but committing a felony.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/Concealed-carry-in-a-post-office-may-lead-to-rude-awakening

This being the case, at a minimum, we have a situation where there is a valid RULE prohibiting the carrying of firearms, and properly posted signs evidencing this fact. That being the case, an Ohio CHL is prohibited from carrying at the post office by Ohio's criminal trespass. If an expansive reading is given to 39 CFR 232.1 and it is considered a FEDERAL LAW, and/or there is a federal law that makes it a crime to violate a provision of the CFR, then carrying at a post office would be prohibited by 2923.126(B)(10), meaning that the Ohio CHL would be committing a felony by carrying at the post office.

I do not want to be right about the answer to this question, because I personally see no problem with a CHL carrying in a post office. However, I think some of the information/discussion going on in forums has the potential to expose the Ohio CHL to a rude awakening.

But, hey, you do whatever you feel is right, I wouldn't count on Ken Hanson as much of a defense, though.

 

[SMMAssociates]

NavyLT:

You misunderstand me....

(I may also misunderstand Ken, but that's not unusual .....)

Here in OH, we have a LAW that says carrying in the Post Office is a Felony....

We MAY have a conflict between the RULES and the LAW at the Federal level that, IMHO (and I believe this is what Ken's saying), would OTHERWISE make it acceptable.

If, of course, we could talk the OH Legislature into cutting that out of OH law....

Or at least that's how I see it....

Until this gets cleared up (making honest citizens into criminals is a hell of a lot easier than locking up criminals), I stay out of the Post Office.

I'm not entirely sure about the parking lots - in most cases, IMHO, they can't "lock down" an otherwise public parking area if the Post Office is in a strip plaza anyway, and we just (last February) got a change in the OH law that pretty much says that if you want to post a parking lot, you're going to have to make Civil Suit against the licensee at an individual level (the Legislators didn't have the gonads to just make it impossible to post).

This probably would apply to the Post Office lots....

Not a hell of a lot of hope these days - criminals and terrorists are now a protected minority, and any interference with their ability to earn a living or stay healthy is forbidden.

Very similar logic to that which assumes that me owning a black rifle is somehow going to make it easier for Mexican drug cartels to get 'em from Honduras or wherever they're getting them from.

Regards,

 

[NavyLCDR]

We MAY have a conflict between the RULES and the LAW at the Federal level that, IMHO (and I believe this is what Ken's saying), would OTHERWISE make it acceptable.

If, of course, we could talk the OH Legislature into cutting that out of OH law....

Ohio law has absolutely nothing to do with the legality of carrying a weapon in an actual, real post office or storing the weapon on post office property (an actual, real, post office parking lot). It is against 39 CFR 232.1, NOTWITHSTANDING any other law at the Federal, state or local level. 39 CFR 232.1 has it's own posting requirements, enforcement rules and it has it's own punishments. It stands completely alone and by itself.

Ken Hanson was saying in his article essentially the same thing. If Ohio legislature changed the law, Ohio CHL's would be in for a rude awakening because carrying in a real post office would STILL be illegal. Ohio legislature could pass a law that specifically made it legal to carry in a post office and it wouldn't matter, it would still be against 39 CFR 232.1 to do so.

39 CFR 232.1 only applies at a branch post office to the part of that property that is under the control of the post office, which is the area behind the counter where THEY handle the mail. It does not apply to the area in front of the counter, any other part of the store, or any part of the store's parking lot.

 

[dp509]

Hell, you are in Wymong. A gun friendly state

Be polite but have a plan to kill everyone you meet

That means having a gun