Old question revisited: Is it legal to CCW in the Post Office? - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Old question revisited: Is it legal to CCW in the Post Office? (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 11/23/2005 7:47:52 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
from the second link, which includes the full version of the law that is shown in abbreviated form on the wal at the local post office:

TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 44, § 930
§ 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities

Release date: 2004-08-06

(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.

Wouldn't legal CCW be an 'other lawful purpose', just like described in the first link in my original post?

You read it here first! It's OK to hunt inside US Post Offices!

How do you think you get a job there? Make an opening.

Posted: 11/23/2005 7:49:44 PM EDT

[#2]

Sorry, ain't gonna wash. The law is written in plain english and doesn't differentiate between federal lawfull purpose and state lawfull purpose.

Some times a fuckin duck is just a fuckin duck.

Posted: 11/23/2005 7:56:24 PM EDT

[#3]

I have no background in law, (just math and reading) but ..

...I think the "it's lawful" people are correct, but they get their logic wrong when they make their final conclusion.

the exception in question:
the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

The "lawful purpose" would not be "protection" as has been suggested, it would be "buying stamps" or some such

If I am lawfully carrying a firearm , (e.g. on my belt in Arizona or concealed with a concealed carry permit in TX and not brandishing it, assaulting with it or shooting with it, etc)....

.....and my purpose for being in the federal facility is lawful e.g.
-buying stamps,
-memorizing the most wanted list,
-avoiding a rabid dog
-picking up certified mail from ex-wife's lawyer, etc.

......then I am OK

if my purpose for being in the federal facility is unlawful e.g.
- buying heroin
- shooting employees
- bringing my non-seeing eye dog in out of rain
- taping a game without the express written permission of the commissioner
- mailing a pistol to an out-of-state non-FFL person
etc.

....then I am in violation

summary:

LAWFULLY carrying incident to a LAWFUL purpose=GOOD

LAWFULLY carrying incident to UNLAWFUL purpose=BAD

UNLAWFULLY carrying incident to an LAWFUL or UNLAWFUL purpose=BAD

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:02:27 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a well known fact that the keyboard commando lawyers of AR15.com have ZERO reading comprehension abilities.....

see below

18 USC 930 covers all federal property.

39 CFR 232.1 covers the US Postal Service.

Example 1: The federal AWB expired, allowing you to have all those evil things that Clinton didn't want you to have.NY state passed a law mirroring the AWB, which did not expire. End result - you cannot have a post ban weapon in NY State, because it is still not legal.

The federal law does not make possession of the weapon legal, just doesn't make it illegial any longer. State law says that it is illegal. This isn't even close to the discussion and has nothing to do with the law in question, nor portions being discussed. Reading is fundemental

Example 2: You can get a CCW in NY State. The CCW is not valid in NY City (unless you go through the NY City process to get their license).

Again reading is fundimental....... Local Law trumps state law as the state legislators have not seen fit to pass legislation that would neuter the city ordinance. Again this has nothing to do with the Federal law governing possession of weapons upon a federal facility.

Once you have stepped onto federal property, you have left the state in which your CCW was issued, therefore it means nothing anyway. Even HR-218 (Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act), which gives LEO's full carry everywhere, does not supercede the government's right to regulate or prohibit the carrying of firearms on government property.

............. the federal law clearly states 3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

.......Hunting or other lawful purposes............ hmmmmm States issue hunting licenses, same as they issue Concealed weapons permits. When's the last time you seen someone hunting in the Post Office? Possession of a firearm is still by federal law allowable while " incident to hunting". . . Or other lawful purposes.

Again I sumbit that possesion of a firearm with a leagal permit for the purpose of self defense while doing business in the Post Officer is by legal definition "other lawful purposes".

Reading Comprehension obviously is becoming an ancient art.

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:06:04 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Sorry, ain't gonna wash. The law is written in plain english and doesn't differentiate between federal lawfull purpose and state lawfull purpose.

Some times a fuckin duck is just a fuckin duck.

I wasn't going to post this but I will for the benefit of the others who are reading this.

The reason I knew about Poster #158 is that I happen to be a Postal Police Officer. I work for the Postal Inspection Service. I graduated from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC).

When I catch you with a firearm in a Post Office, I have 3 options: I can either take your firearm and lock you up, or I can throw you out, or I can escort you in and out.

You can call me a dick if you want, but it doesn't change the facts - I am authorized to exercise any of those options - whether you are a civilian, you are NYPD, or you belong to any other agency (federal or local). The only people I cannot touch are Postal Inspectors.

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:13:23 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry, ain't gonna wash. The law is written in plain english and doesn't differentiate between federal lawfull purpose and state lawfull purpose.

Some times a fuckin duck is just a fuckin duck.

I wasn't going to post this but I will for the benefit of the others who are reading this.

The reason I knew about Poster #158 is that I happen to be a Postal Police Officer. I work for the Postal Inspection Service. I graduated from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC).

When I catch you with a firearm in a Post Office, I have 3 options: I can either take your firearm and lock you up, or I can throw you out, or I can escort you in and out.

You can call me a dick if you want, but it doesn't change the facts - I am authorized to exercise any of those options - whether you are a civilian, you are NYPD, or you belong to any other agency (federal or local). The only people I cannot touch are Postal Inspectors.

Funny, No one ever arrested me when I came into the post office to pick up the Bank Deposits and I currently work for a private contractor. Try and arrest me and see how long you keep that job. Try and arrest a local Police Officer/ FBI agent/ NCIS/ DEA etc. et all and see how long you keep your job.

Happens that I've got a few years of Law Enforcement behind me as well and I'm about as afraid of the federal Government as I am the Local Law Enforcment.

And I'm less afraid of LEO who don't know thier ass from a hole in the ground and think that they can pull a bullshit bluff like you just tried.

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:23:23 PM EDT

[#7]

Now on the other hand, that 39 CFR 232.1 rule that was mentioned:

l) Weapons and explosives. 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.

..looks pretty damn unambiguous!!

I have no idea what the difference between a CFR and a USC is. If they are both laws, I would say it is illegal based on the CFR (based, of course on my law background delineated in my above post)

>>I just noticed that shocktrp made this same point about CFR earlier<<

So my question now would be "Is mailing a rifle back to Winchester for repair an "official purpose"?" It must be, right?

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:23:52 PM EDT

[#8]

"It wuz like this, occifer, I us jest on mah way goin hun'in an ah stopped in ta git me some stamps"

"other lawful purposes" Sounds like self defense to me. (Where considered lawful)
I guess it would be up to the jury to decide.

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:26:25 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry, ain't gonna wash. The law is written in plain english and doesn't differentiate between federal lawfull purpose and state lawfull purpose.

Some times a fuckin duck is just a fuckin duck.

I wasn't going to post this but I will for the benefit of the others who are reading this.

The reason I knew about Poster #158 is that I happen to be a Postal Police Officer. I work for the Postal Inspection Service. I graduated from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC).

When I catch you with a firearm in a Post Office, I have 3 options: I can either take your firearm and lock you up, or I can throw you out, or I can escort you in and out.

You can call me a dick if you want, but it doesn't change the facts - I am authorized to exercise any of those options - whether you are a civilian, you are NYPD, or you belong to any other agency (federal or local). The only people I cannot touch are Postal Inspectors.

Funny, No one ever arrested me when I came into the post office to pick up the Bank Deposits and I currently work for a private contractor. Try and arrest me and see how long you keep that job. Try and arrest a local Police Officer/ FBI agent/ NCIS/ DES etc. et all and see how long you keep your job.

Happens that I've got a few years of Law Enforcement behind me as well and I'm about as afraid of the federal Government as I am the Local Law Enforcment.

And I'm less afraid of LEO who don't know thier ass from a hole in the ground and think that they pull a bullshit bluff like you just tried.

I'm not bluffing, but whatever. We have a policy for escorting contractors (like the armored car guards) in and out with their weapons.

I have also been around more than a few days. I am smart enough to stay within policy to keep my job (policy is to contact a supervisor immediately in case of arrest or detainment). It is not hard to take responsibility/liability off of myself and put it onto a sergeant, lieutenant, captain, or inspector.

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:29:25 PM EDT

[#10]

I have no idea what the difference between a CFR and a USC is

CFR=Current Federal Regulations aka Regulations

USC=United States Code aka the Law

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:32:34 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Now on the other hand, that 39 CFR 232.1 rule that was mentioned:

l) Weapons and explosives. 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.

..looks pretty damn unambiguous!!

I have no idea what the difference between a CFR and a USC is. If they are both laws, I would say it is illegal based on the CFR (based, of course on my law background delineated in my above post)

>>I just noticed that shocktrp made this same point about CFR earlier<<

So my question now would be "Is mailing a rifle back to Winchester for repair an "official purpose"?" It must be, right?

USC = United States Code

CFR = Code of Federal Regulations

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:39:44 PM EDT

[#12]

(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.

To me, protecting yourself from crazy P.O. employees is a lawful purpose. After all, where do you think the term "going postal" came from??? It wasn't from the customers, I assure you.

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:41:30 PM EDT

[#13]

so is violation of a CFR actually "breaking the law" as in go directly to jail--do not pass go?

or is it a just some kind of "policy" like an OSHA safety rule or when the ticket stub says you can't bring beverage cans into the baseball stadium?

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:47:05 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
"It wuz like this, occifer, I us jest on mah way goin hun'in an ah stopped in ta git me some stamps"

that's hilarious!!

jes don't bring your hound dog in wit ya!! (unless you are blind, of course)

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:50:33 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
(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.

To me, protecting yourself from crazy P.O. employees is a lawful purpose. After all, where do you think the term "going postal" came from??? It wasn't from the customers, I assure you.

The Postal Service's position is that they provide protection for you, which is why they employ police officers and inspectors in the first place, so that there is no need for you to protect yourself.

Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 (This act was passed, giving active and retired LEO's full carry rights everywhere within the US):

http://www.leaa.org/218/218text.html

`(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--

`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or

`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

http://www.grandlodgefop.org/legislation/issues/hr218faq.pdf

Is the exemption provided by the law total can I now carry anywhere at anytime?

The new law exempts all qualified active and retired law enforcement officers from State and local laws with respect to the carrying of concealed firearms. These officers are not exempt fromFederal law or regulation, which governs the carriage of firearms onto aircraft, Federal buildings,Federal property, and national parks.In addition, State (not local) laws which prohibit the carriage of firearms onto State or localgovernment property and State (not local) laws which allow private entities to prohibit firearmson their private property would still apply to qualified active and retired law enforcementofficers.

[bold]If qualified law enforcement officers cannot supercede the law, then why would anyone else be able to?[/bold]

Posted: 11/23/2005 8:53:28 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

I'm not bluffing, but whatever. We have a policy for escorting contractors (like the armored car guards) in and out with their weapons.

I have also been around more than a few days. I am smart enough to stay within policy to keep my job (policy is to contact a supervisor immediately in case of arrest or detainment). It is not hard to take responsibility/liability off of myself and put it onto a sergeant, lieutenant, captain, or inspector.

Never been escorted, never been hassled. Also go the Federal Reserve Bank regularly and never have a problem with the Fed Reserve Police Either.

I call

Reading your above post tells me you don't have a clue about reading the law, let alone enforcing it properly.

Posted: 11/23/2005 9:05:12 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
so is violation of a CFR actually "breaking the law" as in go directly to jail--do not pass go?

or is it a just some kind of "policy" like an OSHA safety rule or when the ticket stub says you can't bring beverage cans into the baseball stadium?

USC and CFR are laws:

Example: The law states that you cannot exceed the posted speed limit, but you are exempt if you are in an official vehicle responding to an emergency and you are not endangering the public.

You can be issued a summons, or arrested, if you violate the law.

Policies are different:

Example: A government agency (police, fire, ambulance, etc) can enact a policy stating that, regardless of the law, you will never exceed the posted speed limit.

In this case, if you did not endanger the public, you could not be issued a summons or arrested.

However, you could be subject to administrative action (up to and including removal from your job), for violating the policy of never exceeding the speed limit.

Posted: 11/23/2005 9:15:48 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:

I'm not bluffing, but whatever. We have a policy for escorting contractors (like the armored car guards) in and out with their weapons.

I have also been around more than a few days. I am smart enough to stay within policy to keep my job (policy is to contact a supervisor immediately in case of arrest or detainment). It is not hard to take responsibility/liability off of myself and put it onto a sergeant, lieutenant, captain, or inspector.

Never been escorted, never been hassled. Also go the Federal Reserve Bank regularly and never have a problem with the Fed Reserve Police Either.

I call

Reading your above post tells me you don't have a clue about reading the law, let alone enforcing it properly.

The Federal Reserve is not a government agency - it is a private bank. I'm not the one who doesn't have a clue.

Unfortunately, what I have already posted here (poster 158) is all I can show you - Inspection Service manuals and handbooks are marked 'restricted information' so I cannot scan and post them here.

Posted: 11/24/2005 7:19:01 AM EDT

[#19]

................... you just ain't gonna get it.

Posted: 11/24/2005 7:57:11 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Illegal:

www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/posters/pos158.pdf

You'll notice the asswipes didn't include section D. "Other lawful purposes". CCW *IS* an "other lawful purpose."

And the other one, seciton P of that says

"(p) Penalties and other law.

(2) Whoever shall be found guilty of violating the rules and regulations in this section while on property under the charge and control of the Postal Service is subject to fine of not more than $50 or imprisonment of not more than 30 days, or both. Nothing contained in these rules and regulations shall be construed to abrogate any other Federal laws or regulations of any State and local laws and regulations applicable to any area in which the property is situated."

USC > CFR. look at the last sentance.
Unless there is STATE law that prevents it, Federal law allows CCW.

Posted: 11/24/2005 8:00:47 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

18 USC 930 covers all federal property.

39 CFR 232.1 covers the US Postal Service.

CFR is lower than the US Code and section P2 of that CFR acknoldges that it CANNOT supercede Federal law. Meaning their regulation is essentially a restatement of the USC.

Posted: 11/24/2005 8:03:47 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

I have no idea what the difference between a CFR and a USC is. If they are both laws, I would say it is illegal based on the CFR (based, of course on my law background delineated in my above post)

CFRs are NOT laws. They are regualtions used to explain how laws are implemented and they MUST comply with laws.

USC>CFR

Posted: 11/24/2005 8:05:28 AM EDT

[#23]

I believe that Mason's can carry at teh post office.

Posted: 11/24/2005 8:28:10 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
I believe that Mason's can carry at teh post office.

I'm sure Chuck Norris does.

Posted: 11/24/2005 9:41:20 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I'm not bluffing, but whatever. We have a policy for escorting contractors (like the armored car guards) in and out with their weapons.

I have also been around more than a few days. I am smart enough to stay within policy to keep my job (policy is to contact a supervisor immediately in case of arrest or detainment). It is not hard to take responsibility/liability off of myself and put it onto a sergeant, lieutenant, captain, or inspector.

Never been escorted, never been hassled. Also go the Federal Reserve Bank regularly and never have a problem with the Fed Reserve Police Either.

I call

Reading your above post tells me you don't have a clue about reading the law, let alone enforcing it properly.

The Federal Reserve is not a government agency - it is a private bank. I'm not the one who doesn't have a clue.

Unfortunately, what I have already posted here (poster 158) is all I can show you - Inspection Service manuals and handbooks are marked 'restricted information' so I cannot scan and post them here.

Sounds remarkably familiar to the 'ol "If I tell you I'll have to kill you" routine - doesn't pass the smell test, IMO...

- georgestrings

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:05:13 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

The Postal Service's position is that they provide protection for you, which is why they employ police officers and inspectors in the first place, so that there is no need for you to protect yourself.

I cannot believe that there are people on this board who still say shit like this.

Is there a Postal Police Officer in every post office to provide protection for me?

Posted: 11/25/2005 7:09:09 AM EDT

[#27]

Sounds remarkably familiar to the 'ol "If I tell you I'll have to kill you" routine - doesn't pass the smell test, IMO...

- georgestrings

Your right - these manuals really don't exist:

http://www.fbody.com/members/shocktrp/IS135.JPG

http://www.fbody.com/members/shocktrp/IS702.JPG

http://www.fbody.com/members/shocktrp/IS701.JPG

Don't hotlink - it won't work - copy and paste link.

Posted: 11/25/2005 7:10:22 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
I ask because have long been under the assumption that CCW qualified as an 'other lawful purpose', as once outlined on the USPS no-guns fliers on their bulletin boards.

Recently, while waiting for the attendant to swipe my credit card, I read what appeared to be a new, updated law that, if read correctly, would have outlawed CCW within the post office.

I did a google search, which turned up this link:
www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rtc-usps.html

Which looked great, except that it is at least 2 years old.

So, I looked further, and found this:

www.packing.org/state/all_united_states/#stateoff_limits

which indicates that yes, post offices are off-limits.

Any thoughts here?

Ever heard the term "going postal"? Could have something to do with it.

Posted: 11/25/2005 7:13:35 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:

The Postal Service's position is that they provide protection for you, which is why they employ police officers and inspectors in the first place, so that there is no need for you to protect yourself.

I cannot believe that there are people on this board who still say shit like this.

Is there a Postal Police Officer in every post office to provide protection for me?

No - sometimes it is a postal police officer, sometimes it is a postal inspector, sometimes it is a private guard, and somethimes it is no one.

I never said that their protection was good, or even adequate, all I said is what their position is.

Posted: 11/25/2005 7:21:31 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

The Postal Service's position is that they provide protection for you, which is why they employ police officers and inspectors in the first place, so that there is no need for you to protect yourself.

I cannot believe that there are people on this board who still say shit like this.

Is there a Postal Police Officer in every post office to provide protection for me?

No - sometimes it is a postal police officer, sometimes it is a postal inspector, sometimes it is a private guard, and somethimes it is no one.

I never said that their protection was good, or even adequate, all I said is what their position is.

The number of Postal Police in the country have been dwindling over the last few years and their response areas are only in bigger cities. Postal Inspectors don't do routine patrol of postal facilities. Private guards are normally deployed at bulk mail centers or distribution centers.

How does any of that equate to the postal service providing protection for me?

Posted: 11/25/2005 8:33:36 AM EDT

[#31]

Hmm...... didn't see any protection in the Post Office this morning.......

glad I was packing.

Posted: 11/25/2005 8:41:33 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
"official purposes"

I don't care, I'm carrying anyway.

+1.

Defending myself is pretty damned offical, IMO.

Posted: 11/25/2005 9:01:32 AM EDT

[#33]

I always leave my gun in the car before I enter a PO. At the very worst, I'm only a few seconds away from my gun if I need it. I'd rather be shot to death by a rampaging postal clerk than go to federal prison.

Posted: 11/25/2005 10:14:26 AM EDT

[#34]

shocktrp
How is "other lawful purposes" interpreted by the Postal Police?
I think I already know the answer, but I would like to hear firsthand.

Posted: 11/25/2005 2:54:34 PM EDT

[#35]

Are the Federal Reserve Banks private companies?

The Federal Reserve Banks, created by an act of Congress in 1913, are operated in the public interest rather than for profit or to benefit any private group.

Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold stock in the Reserve Bank in their region, but they do not exercise control over the Reserve Bank or the Federal Reserve System. Holding stock in a regional Reserve Bank does not carry with it the kind of control and financial interest that holding publicly traded stock affords, and the stock may not be sold or traded. Member banks do, however, receive a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's board of directors.

Although they are set up like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not really "private" companies, but rather are "owned" by the citizens of the United States.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#5
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concealed, out of sight, out of mind.

So for the postal guy, how many postal officers on average are present during normal business hours at the post office?

I have never seen a postal officer touch or even talk to a LEO carrying in a post office ever FWIW. If I am on a call and responding to a post office, no one is gunna be taking my firearm.

Posted: 11/25/2005 2:55:06 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
shocktrp
How is "other lawful purposes" interpreted by the Postal Police?
I think I already know the answer, but I would like to hear firsthand.

The way the Postal Inspection Service interprets it is that you must have a need to bring it onto the property (property includes parking lots, front steps, physical buildings, vehicles, etc):

1. I need a firearm in the performance of my official duties. Therefore, they issue each of us a firearm. We take it out of the safe at the beginning of the shift, and return it at the end of the shift. We cannot take it home, and we cannot bring our personal weapons onto the property. (We even have retired NYPD working for us and they are not allowed to bring their weapons in, even though they have a full-carry privelages as an LEO.)

2. Postal inspectors need a firearm for the performance of their official duties. They are allowed to take their issued weapon home because they are on call 24/7. They cannot bring their personal weapons onto the property.

3. Armored cars come to designated facilities. They have state permits to carry. They get escorted in and out of the building by an armed postal police officer or inspector. (If there is no escort available, they either wait outside for one to become available, or they can leave.)

4. Local police respond to postal facilities for emergency calls. They are escorted by postal police officers or inspectors whenever possible. Postal property is recognized as concurrent jurisdiction by the postal inspection service, so they are given leeway (because the inspection service would rather give them the arrests, overtime costs, liability, etc instead of doing it themselves - unless, of course, it is a big case that can get the postal inspectors into the news or make them big money in forfeiture of assets).

5. Customers patronize the post office. They are not allowed to have a firearm on the property because they postal service does not recognize their need to do so. The options are to arrest, remove, or escort them in and out.

NOTE: These are not my policies. I never said I agreed with these policies. I merely said that this is the way it is, as far as the postal service is concerned.

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:10:28 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
5. Customers patronize the post office. They are not allowed to have a firearm on the property because they postal service does not recognize their need to do so. The options are to arrest, remove, or escort them in and out.

shocktrp, do you have a link to an arrest, prosecution, indictment or conviction for anyone who was arrested while carrying a concealed weapon in complience with all state/local laws and lawfully conducting his/her business in a Post Office?

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:16:34 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:
shocktrp
How is "other lawful purposes" interpreted by the Postal Police?
I think I already know the answer, but I would like to hear firsthand.

The way the Postal Inspection Service interprets it is that you must have a need to bring it onto the property (property includes parking lots, front steps, physical buildings, vehicles, etc):

1. I need a firearm in the performance of my official duties. Therefore, they issue each of us a firearm. We take it out of the safe at the beginning of the shift, and return it at the end of the shift. We cannot take it home, and we cannot bring our personal weapons onto the property. (We even have retired NYPD working for us and they are not allowed to bring their weapons in, even though they have a full-carry privelages as an LEO.)

2. Postal inspectors need a firearm for the performance of their official duties. They are allowed to take their issued weapon home because they are on call 24/7. They cannot bring their personal weapons onto the property.

3. Armored cars come to designated facilities. They have state permits to carry. They get escorted in and out of the building by an armed postal police officer or inspector. (If there is no escort available, they either wait outside for one to become available, or they can leave.)

4. Local police respond to postal facilities for emergency calls. They are escorted by postal police officers or inspectors whenever possible. Postal property is recognized as concurrent jurisdiction by the postal inspection service, so they are given leeway (because the inspection service would rather give them the arrests, overtime costs, liability, etc instead of doing it themselves - unless, of course, it is a big case that can get the postal inspectors into the news or make them big money in forfeiture of assets).

5. Customers patronize the post office. They are not allowed to have a firearm on the property because they postal service does not recognize their need to do so. The options are to arrest, remove, or escort them in and out.

NOTE: These are not my policies. I never said I agreed with these policies. I merely said that this is the way it is, as far as the postal service is concerned.

Thats what I thought.
Thank you.

ETA: I see Miami PD and Dade County PD come in to get or drop off
mail and they indeed have their weapons on them.
Nobody says anything about it. No escorts. No hysteria. No nothing.
They are regarded as patrons as anyone else in the P.O. here in Miami, FL.
Must be different laws in NY.

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:22:01 PM EDT

[#39]

"ETA: I see Miami PD and Dade County PD come in to get or drop off
mail and they indeed have their weapons on them.
Nobody says anything about it. No escorts. No hysteria. No nothing.
They are regarded as patrons as anyone else in the P.O. here in Miami, FL."

Dade county is exempt from US laws

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:27:58 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
"ETA: I see Miami PD and Dade County PD come in to get or drop off
mail and they indeed have their weapons on them.
Nobody says anything about it. No escorts. No hysteria. No nothing.
They are regarded as patrons as anyone else in the P.O. here in Miami, FL."

Dade county is exempt from US laws

Fill me in, matt.
How so?
I don't get it.

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:31:04 PM EDT

[#41]

Have you lived in Miami long? As close to another country as possible. I don't think anyone in Dade county (or Broward now) follows any law.

Im joking around lol

Posted: 11/25/2005 3:52:57 PM EDT

[#42]

Tagged.

Posted: 11/25/2005 4:24:02 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Now on the other hand, that 39 CFR 232.1 rule that was mentioned:

l) Weapons and explosives. 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.

..looks pretty damn unambiguous!!

I have no idea what the difference between a CFR and a USC is. If they are both laws, I would say it is illegal based on the CFR (based, of course on my law background delineated in my above post)

>>I just noticed that shocktrp made this same point about CFR earlier<<

So my question now would be "Is mailing a rifle back to Winchester for repair an "official purpose"?" It must be, right?

Umm, I think the key word is "carry". When you walk into the Post Office to mail that rifle, shitgun, or pistol... I'm assuming it is already packed in a box, sealed and awaiting postage to be handed over to a Postal Worker? So.. you are not "carrying" it (as in a readily available loaded weapon, not physically just holding the package as you walk) a weapon. You are delivering a package to be delivered via USPS... and that would be as "official" of a use at the Post Office as you can get.

No Expert

Posted: 11/25/2005 5:01:47 PM EDT

[#44]

Whether the firearm is loaded/unloaded or packaged/unpackaged it is still a firearm and in your possession and as such a postal customer is prohibited from entering a postal facility with it according to shocktrp. The USC says nothing about loaded/unloaded or packaged/unpackaged firearms. The CFR refers to “Official Purposes”.

Diamonds, negotiable stocks/bonds and U.S. currency are regularly shipped via registered mail and picked up at postal facilities by armed diamond dealers and other plain clothes couriers every day.

Posted: 11/25/2005 5:08:02 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
I was told postal inspectors are the only ones allowed to carry in a post office. Regular cops cannot?

Any peace officer can carry, local police, Federal and Postal Police, I have even seen military with sidearms picking up registered mail at the Post Office

Posted: 11/26/2005 10:22:31 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Dade county is exempt from US laws

Fill me in, matt.
How so?
I don't get it.

Foreign soil. No US (read: English speaking) residents. Blue state within a Red state. etc...

Posted: 11/27/2005 5:00:52 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Dade county is exempt from US laws

Fill me in, matt.
How so?
I don't get it.

Foreign soil. No US (read: English speaking) residents. Blue state within a Red state. etc...

Banana Republic

Posted: 11/28/2005 6:43:33 AM EDT

[#48]

I mailed a long gun once. I declared what it was to the clerk. She told me it was against the law. I called a postal inspector on the spot. She was informed it was ok.

When My gun arrived it was bashed to bits. The scope was even ruined. It was wrapped like it was a baby too. She had a real attitude and told me it should be against the law. I told her "well that's not your decision, now is it".

She showed me in the end or did I. I insured it for more than it was worth. It took 6-7 months to get my money. Liberal bitch.

As a side note it is not off limits with my Indiana CCW.

Bob

Posted: 11/28/2005 6:48:40 AM EDT

[#49]

That would be a NO, NO ( off limits)

Posted: 11/28/2005 6:56:22 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
5. Customers patronize the post office. They are not allowed to have a firearm on the property because they postal service does not recognize their need to do so. The options are to arrest, remove, or escort them in and out.

shocktrp, do you have a link to an arrest, prosecution, indictment or conviction for anyone who was arrested while carrying a concealed weapon in complience with all state/local laws and lawfully conducting his/her business in a Post Office?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Old question revisited: Is it legal to CCW in the Post Office? (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us