Posted on 10/29/2009 7:54:00 AM PDT by majstoll
USPS spokesperson Joanne Vito told the Examiner.com that 39 CFR 232.1(l)
“applies to anyone coming into a Post Office or a Postal facility. The regulation prohibiting the possession of firearms or other weapons applies to all real property under the charge and control of the Postal Service. . . . Both open and concealed possession are prohibited, so storage of a weapon on a car parked in a lot that is under the charge and control of the Postal Service would be prohibited.”
. . .
Philip Van Cleave, President of the Virginia Citizens Defense League . . . said that the Postal Service is just “setting a trap” for the many gun owners who now carry their guns on a daily basis and may not even know about this parking lot gun ban. “Even the National Park gun ban allowed folks to store their guns in their cars,” said Van Cleave . .
(Excerpt) Read more at smalllinks.com ...
Please DIGG this article.
Does that include the EMPLOYEES?....................
Inspect all Postal Service employee vehicles.
No kidding. The phrase “going postal” came about from postal employees going postal.
How about in the back office?
Sounds like Thune and the like need to attach another rider amendment on the USPS and gain back our RIGHT of carrying on USPS property.
Need any more proof that government employees, except military, are socialist, communist and not willing to serve the general public?
I must have broken the law dozens of times. But I don’t really use the U.S.P.S. much anymore. Pity. /s
However, the next provision states
(m) Nondiscrimination. There must be no discrimination by segregation or otherwise against any person or persons because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age (persons 40 years of age or older are protected), reprisal (discrimination against a person for having filed or for having participated in the processing of an EEO complaint--29 CFR 1613.26l-262), or physical or mental handicap, in furnishing, or by refusing to furnish to such person or persons the use of any facility of a public nature, including all services, privileges, accommodations, and activities provided on postal property.
Seems discriminatory to me to not allow me to carry a pistol that I carry everywhere else. :)
Smallink not working. This one does: http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d19-US-Postal-Service-enforces-gun-ban-in-public-parking-lots
Article raises two interesting points: (1) There is a court case involved, and the defendant who lost on appeal was a postal employee. (2) You can mail longuns, but according to the USPS, you can’t posses a long gun on USPS property.
Insane.
Very interesting; I wonder how it would interact with NM state-law which considers a vehicle an extension of the owner’s domicile (meaning you can have a gun in your vehicle while you park at campus and take classes).
“Does that include the EMPLOYEES?....................”
Such a law would help ensure employees “going postal” would have a clear killing field.
Hmmmm...wonder if it covers USPS offices in strip centers. Our local USPS office is right in between a Walgreen’s and a frozen yogurt shop. Also, shouldn’t they be required to post signs at the entrances just as they do on the buildings? If they are going to enforce this, that should be the first thing they have to do.
>Article raises two interesting points:
>(1) There is a court case involved, and the defendant who lost on appeal was a postal employee.
>(2) You can mail longuns, but according to the USPS, you can’t posses a long gun on USPS property.
>
>Insane.
Indeed, I noticed that too.
Heller II is already in the courts (types of weapons) Heller 2.1 (incorporation) is @ the SCTOUS level already. You are correct, that Heller 3.0 will be “right to bear” arms.
SCOTUS has already ruled that you (I believe only by dicta though) that you cannot “prohibit” individuals from open carry, because 2A IS your permit to do this, however, you can discriminate for concealed permits, only if you Constitutionally allow open carry.
Haha, this will work. Because we all know that when someone wants to go on a killing spree they ALWAYS follow parking-lot gun bans.
ping
I would never, ever carry my weapon or have it in my vehicle on USPS property. Nor would I ever have a weapon on any property to which the USPS delivers mail. Nope, not me.
Now if you’ll excuse me I need to go douse the flames on my trousers.
If you’re not yet boycotting the USPS, maybe it’s time to consider it.
Postal property, belonging to the government, which is subject to the Constitution, and is "by the people, of the people and for the people", right?
I think each and every restriction on RKBA on government property should be struck down. It should be declared unconstitutional and thrown out of court every single time it comes up.
Disarming the defenders is wrong, it's unconstitutional, and it should be forbidden.
Postal Clerk: “Yes, we’ll send it for you, but your under arrest! And the cops will be waiting for the recipient. That will be $40.00.”
This serves no practical purpose other than to disarm the lawful citizen.
That is its only purpose.
Oklahoma has a similar law plus it has been tested in state and federal courts by Conoco-Phillips Oil Co.
The State of Oklahoma won in federal court when Conoco-Phillips tried to stop employees from having firearms in their personal cars.
I’m not taking my gun out of my car you stupid statist morons. And you’ll never have probable cause to search my vehicle while I’m parked at a post office, so SCREW YOU.
I don’t know if anyone has noticed, but the USPS has removed all of the stamp vending machines from office buildings and even post offices. This makes it necessary to take off from work during business hours, go to a post office and stand in line to buy a (explative deleted) stamp.
So, the day I plan to buy stamps, I must leave my “car gun” at home to avoid the postal Nazis searching my car. (By the way, it is legal in my state to have a concealed/non concealed gun in your car and you don’t even need a CCW permit). I ought to just park in the middle of the street in front of the post office to keep from getting arrested.
And we are a “free people”?
Yeah, you wouldn’t want to let a union thug get hurt...............
I understand that in Alaska you don’t need a permit to carry a weapon, concealed or not. Also, 90% of the adults in Alaska own guns. How will this law play out there?
This serves no practical purpose other than to disarm the lawful citizen.
++++++++++++++++++++++==
I’d argue that it is a first step towards warrant-less searches. Want to mail stuff? Gotta get car searched. By the agent on duty at every post office.
Folks, there is a subtle legal issue here that everyone always misses.
There is a federal LAW (passed by congress) that prohibits guns in postal facilities unless it is for lawful purposes (which undoubtedly includes carrying for personal defense when not prohibited).
This nonsense is about a federal RULE (enacted by postal bureaucrats, not by Congress). RULES do not provide the same penalties. This RULE is one of a long list of rules that included not bringing animals onto postal property (your Glock in the glove box is no worse than Fido waiting in the back seat). Other rules include not exceeding parking lot speed limits. Penalties are something like $50.
As a RULE, RULES are intended to apply only to federal employees. There are lots of rules about how to operate a post office, few of which have anything to do with the public. You can have rules about what employees can wear at work, or how often they must wash their hands.
This story is about bureaucrats gone wild, extending their power over their own agency to the public at large.
They can’t send you to prison because some postal board decided to make an otherwise lawful act unlawful.
It might become an inconvenience if someone breaks into your car while parked at a post office and steals your gun. How do you report the theft then?
About 5 years ago AOL fired 3 employees who had firearms on a leased parking lot in Utah.
AOL won in court, I think that case did wind up in a federal court.
See Reply #27 above where the out come was the opposite
Sounds like they don’t require probable cause:
(2) Vehicles and their contents
brought into, while on, or being re-
moved from restricted nonpublic areas
are subject to inspection. A promi-
nently displayed sign shall advise in
advance that vehicles and their con-
tents are subject to inspection when
entering the restricted nonpublic area,
while in the confines of the area, or
when leaving the area. Persons enter-
ing these areas who object and refuse
to consent to the inspection of the ve-
hicle, its contents, or both, may be de-
nied entry; after entering the area
without objection, consent shall be im-
plied. A full search of a person and any
vehicle driven or occupied by the per-
son may accompany an arrest.
Dear USPS; 2nd ammendment.
I order stamps online, there is a wide selection of nice stamps and instant service. I do my best to avoid visiting USPS offices, they are usually located in poorly maintained buildings (a.k.a. dumps) and all their workers are brought in direct from Soviet Union, judging by their work ethic.
FMCDH
I violate their law nearly every day!
...About TWENTY YEARS late, ehhh post office???
Some would go so far as to say the whole facility would be considered under the ban.
My take is that they have no say on the parking lot in that case, but would have say once you enter through the doors of the post office itself, not any outer, or neighboring store.
This one does:
§ 232.1 Conduct on postal property.
(a) Applicability. This section applies to all real property under the charge and control of the Postal Service, to all tenant agencies, and to all persons entering in or on such property. This section shall be posted and kept posted at a conspicuous place on all such property.
Mike, ask her: “What’s the penalty for violation? How often has this occurred in the last 20 years? It the same as for having a pet in your car in the parking lot?”
>> I’d argue that it is a first step towards warrant-less searches.
I can see that happening in 10 years unless the tide changes back in favor of the Constitution.
>> I order stamps online <<
I usually buy mine at Sam’s Club. And at least some of the grocery stores carry them.
(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
Considering the erosion of the Constitution, I’d give it a lot less. Unless, like you say, we vote the bums out.
Of course.
But my point is that the vast majority of rules have no applicability to the public. Like the rules that control how patent examiners examiner patent applications, for instance.
So, how does one go about mailing a long gun at a Federal Post Office, something that is otherwise lawful, if you can’t posses the gun on Post Office property? I mean, when you think about it, a gun in a box is about as concealed as it can get. The problem is that you can transport the gun up to the boundary of the parking lot, and it’s apparently OK once the long gun is in possession of the mail clerk. So, the prohibition is in that magic little zone between those two lines. So, what’s the solution? I know! Have the postal clerk walk out to the boundary of the property and meet you there. You pay your money there and the postal clerk reaches over the parking lot boundary and takes the gun from you so that you never possess it on Post Office property. Problem solved! Yet another practical solution to one of life’s little aggravations brought to you by the Federal Government!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.