USPS Story

[aeriedad]

Just sharing an experience I had Saturday involving the US Post Office in my town.

While waking though town just before lunch, about to cross a side street near the Post Office, I almost tripped over one of their handheld scanners (slightly smaller than a brick, similar to attached image). It was clearly marked as USPS property and had a belt clip on it, so it must have fallen off a driver's belt and out of the vehicle. At that point I had just passed the Post Office walking along the sidewalk between the highway and the Post Office parking lot. Since I'm almost always carrying my 1911 (IWB, 4 o'clock), I could not simply walk across the parking lot and return the scanner without seriously jeopardizing my SC Concealed Weapons Permit. I walked up to the edge of the parking lot and stood the scanner up against the curb so it might be seen from almost anywhere in the parking lot, figuring I might give them a call when I got home to let them know what I had done.

As I approached a Wendy's restaurant, I noticed a USPS truck in the parking lot and the driver going inside the store to deliver mail. I was at the entrance when he came out, told him what I had found in front of the Post Office, where I had placed it and why. He was friendly and appeared to take in my words without alarm, almost. When I said, "I didn't want to walk across the parking lot and return the scanner at the Post Office because I usually carry concealed," he was nodding and answering his thanks, and that he would call someone at the PO right away to go get the scanner. His eyes, however, went right to my waistline, almost shouting the silent question, "Where is it?!?!?" I told him, "You're welcome," and he got in his truck as I continued my walk.

While the prohibition of firearms on USPS property doesn't exactly fill me with irrational emotion, it does strike me as unnecessary, even silly. Would the security of a vital national interest such as the postal service be threatened if I returned a USPS handheld scanner while exercising my 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms? I can certainly see the rationale behind prohibiting firearms in Federal courthouses, etc., but the restriction on USPS property doesn't seem quite so reasonable to me. Now that I've thought enough about it to post this mini-novel here, might as well ask the question: Does anyone know the (so-called) purpose for Federal prohibition of firearms on USPS property?

 

[CoRoMo]

Would the security of a vital national interest such as the postal service be threatened if I returned a USPS handheld scanner while exercising my 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms?

Of course not.

I can certainly see the rationale behind prohibiting firearms in Federal courthouses, etc.,

Please elaborate.

Does anyone know the (so-called) purpose for Federal prohibition of firearms on USPS property?

To prevent crime, although it has zero affect in that regard.

Finally, what exactly was the point of telling him that you carry?

 

[aeriedad]

Please elaborate.

When folks or their relatives are about to be sentenced to long prison terms, it's probably a good idea to keep firearms out of the discussion.

Finally, what exactly was the point of telling him that you carry?

Technically, I only implied that I was carrying. The point was to explain why I didn't just return the scanner myself, since it would have been easy to do so but for Title 18, United States Code, Section 930. It's not as if I were brandishing or in any other way threatening anyone. In hindsight, perhaps I could have left my action unexplained and let the postman figure it out on his own. In any case, I was just being polite and it didn't seem to be a problem.

 

[brickeyee]

I would have picked it up and then handed it to the next USPS employee I came across, or dropped it into a mail box.

 

[tightgroup tiger]

I also would not have told anyone that I was carrying. A friend of mine walked into his post office to get his mail and was open carrying. Some old woman in their went running outside to a police man that was standing near by.

He went in to see what was going on and say my friend standing their going through his mail with his 9 mm on his side.

All the policeman said was "Why don't you get a ccw for that thing, that old woman is having a fit. My friend said he forgot about wearing it.

Other than that the policeman and my friend laughed about it and went their own ways. If this police man would have been a rookie, things would probably have been different but What they don't know won't hurt them.

People don't want to know that we carry guns, they are just happier that way. Don't tell anyone next time. They won't even notice.

 

[aeriedad]

I would have picked it up and then handed it to the next USPS employee I came across, or dropped it into a mail box.

I considered that, but decided on the actions I took instead. At the time, I was on foot, with no guarantee I would see a postal employee soon. My plans were to get a haircut, then lunch, then pick up my car from the repair shop. At each of these places, having a clearly marked USPS scanner in hand would invite questions I would rather not answer. If asked what I had and why, I could be rude (e.g., "None of your business"); lie (e.g. "Just found it outside the store, returning it to PO when I leave"); or tell the truth ("Found it by the PO, but couldn't return it because my 1911 is holstered under my shirt where you can't see it"). I really don't care if the postman knows I may be carrying (off USPS property, of course), but I prefer to keep that detail to myself when it comes to the businesses I frequent.

 

[mljdeckard]

The prohibition of carry on federal property like post offices is a stark reminder of how life, society, and the law have moved on without them. They haven't considered changing their position because it isn't their problem. They have more important things to worry about.....like their survival against private competition.

 

[brickeyee]

"with no guarantee I would see a postal employee soon."

So what?

There are no mailboxes anywhere on your daily trip?

 

[dogtown tom]

brickeyee "with no guarantee I would see a postal employee soon."

So what?

There are no mailboxes anywhere on your daily trip?

+1

I don't think I've ever seen a US Post Office without a mailbox out front.

 

[aeriedad]

+1

I don't think I've ever seen a US Post Office without a mailbox out front.

You mean the mailbox on USPS property? I might as well have walked inside and handed it to an employee.

 

[aeriedad]

"with no guarantee I would see a postal employee soon."

So what?

There are no mailboxes anywhere on your daily trip?

No, not between me and the barber shop. There's one near the bank a couple blocks past where I had to pick up my car later, but by then I would have been carrying the thing awhile. Seemed a lot easier just to leave it in the parking lot and give them a call later. Wasn't really my problem to begin with, just trying to be a good citizen...without breaking a kinda dumb Federal regulation.

Why does everybody want to talk about how foolish and irresponsible I was instead of answer my question about why that particular regulation is in place?

 

[Bobson]

Wow, no kidding. Its like trying to have a meaningful conversation with a 6 year old. Who really cares what he did with the dumb scanner? If you're just going to ignore the point of the thread, go type irrelevant garbage in a word document.

To answer your question, OP: I don't know. Just another illogical law, if you ask me.

 

[bikemutt]

I don't know what happened over the years around here but the only USPS mailboxes around are on postal property. Ever since I started carrying I park next door at the Jiffy Lube, disarm and walk through the bush to the post office. I won't even drive through for a drop off armed, I'd be the one guy they'd catch and lock up

 

[dogtown tom]

aeriedad Quote:

Originally Posted by dogtown tom
+1

I don't think I've ever seen a US Post Office without a mailbox out front.

You mean the mailbox on USPS property? I might as well have walked inside and handed it to an employee.

Nope.
Not all mailboxes are on USPS property, but a sidewalk in FRONT of the post office.

 

[medalguy]

Why, it's pretty obvious to me why they prohibit the carrying of a firearm on USPS property. It's so no one will commit a crime involving a firearm, like sticking up a PO for the little bit of money they have on hand. (Ever try to cash a $500 money order at a PO?)

After all, if you were planning on robbing a Post Office and you saw the sign prohibiting the possession of a firearm on postal property, wouldn't you obey the law and leave with your firearm? Oh wait...........

 

[bikemutt]

Was the ban a result of the whole "going postal" thing?

 

[Devonai]

(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.
(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon
be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes
to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal
facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(c) A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of
subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal
facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon,
or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as
provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.
(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.
(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly
possesses or causes to be present a firearm in a Federal court
facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title,
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described
in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (d).
(f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the
United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or
orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of
weapons within any building housing such court or any of its
proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.
(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.
(2) The term "dangerous weapon" means a weapon, device,
instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is
used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious
bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket
knife with a blade of less than 2 1/2 inches in length.
(3) The term "Federal court facility" means the courtroom,
judges' chambers, witness rooms, jury deliberation rooms,
attorney conference rooms, prisoner holding cells, offices of the
court clerks, the United States attorney, and the United States
marshal, probation and parole offices, and adjoining corridors of
any court of the United States.
(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 am not a lawyer, but my plain English interpretation of 18 USC 930 has, and always will be (unless it's amended) that if one is legal to carry anywhere else then one can carry into the post office. Please present your argument if you disagree.

 

[rondog]

Was the ban a result of the whole "going postal" thing?

Ding ding ding! Winner! Been more than a few PO's shot up by disgruntled employee's, and a lot of people killed and wounded.

I also would not have told anyone that I was carrying. A friend of mine walked into his post office to get his mail and was open carrying. Some old woman in their went running outside to a police man that was standing near by.

He went in to see what was going on and say my friend standing their going through his mail with his 9 mm on his side.

All the policeman said was "Why don't you get a ccw for that thing, that old woman is having a fit. My friend said he forgot about wearing it.

Other than that the policeman and my friend laughed about it and went their own ways. If this police man would have been a rookie, things would probably have been different but What they don't know won't hurt them.

People don't want to know that we carry guns, they are just happier that way. Don't tell anyone next time. They won't even notice.

Your friend was one lucky stiff. That's a Federal crime, and he'd probably still be doing time.

 

[bearcreek]

Ding ding ding! Winner! Been more than a few PO's shot up by disgruntled employee's, and a lot of people killed and wounded.

And of course it makes perfect sense that a person who is planning to shoot up a post office will be deterred by the fact that their gun is against the rules.

 

[archigos]

The USPS doesn't want to service us. Quite frankly, I would have felt no obligation to service them.

 

[lemaymiami]

If I learned anything in a 22 year career in law enforcement... it's that the words "reasonable" and "regulation" probably don't belong in the same sentence. Aerie did the right thing here, following the laws - no matter how ridiculous. It's been my experience that only honest folks go that route. All too many of the other kind.

 

[jsimmons]

All the policeman said was "Why don't you get a ccw for that thing, that old woman is having a fit. My friend said he forgot about wearing it.

My response would have been something like, "Someone else's discomfort with me exercising my Constitutional rights while not also infringing their own causes me no concern at all."

Besides, how can you "forget" you're armed and be completely aware of where you are or what you're doing? If these kinds of lapses are commonplace for someone, they probably shouldn't be carrying in the first place.

Just sayin...

 

[jsimmons]

(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;

But technicaly, haven't we all be deputized by DHS (a government agency) as a result of the "see something, say something" campaign? Aren't we as law-abiding citizens, responsible for the prevention of crime? Are we not pressed into service in an effort to assist the police in investigations? Are we not ALWAYS executing those duties?

 

[brickeyee]

Who really cares what he did with the dumb scanner?

yeah, who would care about trying to return property to the actual owner.

After all, it is just the USPS.

They have all the money in the world.

I'll remember your sentiments if I ever find your wallet.

I am not a lawyer, but my plain English interpretation of 18 USC 930 has, and always will be (unless it's amended) that if one is legal to carry anywhere else then one can carry into the post office.

The plain text of the law says you cannot carry on USPS property unless you are performing 'official business.'

If you had an FFL and are mailing a handgun, that would be official business, but you better have it all packaged for shipment.

The same would apply to any of us peons using USPS for a long gun.

Carrying your gun for SD on USPS property is NOT (by any stretch) 'official business.'

 

[Jim K]

Maybe the ban on carrying guns in a Post Office is directed at their employees, who seem to routinely shoot other employees.

Jim