Defensive Carry banner

CCW in Military recruiter offices

12K views 21 replies 15 participants last post by  rolyat63 
#1 ·
Hey guy im just trying to figure out the answer to this question as I have been finding some conflicting information. Theres nothing in the Florida statutes about it and other discussions I've seen say that even though the recruiters are federal employees the office is run by the state so it is not defined as a federal building. Other statutes (oregon) I have seen say that a recruiters office IS a federal building and so CC is not allowed.

For what its worth there is no posting at the local recruiter
 
#2 ·
A lot of people will carry everywhere unless the building is posted. (visible signs that say no weapons allowed). Recruiting offices can be found in many areas, from leased commercial buildings to National Guard and Reserve buildings. I believe if it is a military then you cannot carry there either. If it is a state building, you should be good to go unless it is posted (For instance courtrooms may be run by the state but typically firearms are still not allowed). Some states have laws that a lawful CCW permit holder are not responsible for entering a "gun free zone" with a gun if the facility is not posted.

Sorry I can't offer any more help. I know that a lot of these things are very state specific. It may be worth checking out a CCW forum that's just for your state if one is available.

-Clay
 
#3 ·
Be VERY careful of taking the opinions on an internet forum as gospel. Do your own research, make the phone call, if necessary, to the state agency which is over your state CCW regulations, and get the answer from the horses mouth. Many recruiting offices, not located in Federal Buildings, are leased by GSA (General Services Administration) on behalf of the branch of military which occupies the office(s). I am of the opinion, that once the GSA leases the property, it then becomes federal property and falls under the auspices of the laws governing concealed carry in federal offices, buildings, facilities, etc. Therefore, I would assume it would be AGAINST THE LAW to carry in a Recruiting Office. JMO...Beware of the internet lawyers offering their opinions.. :smile:
 
#5 ·
Regardless of whether it is in a federally owned building or not, it is federally leased and federally controlled. Any crime committed is a crime punishable by federal law. I wouldn't risk taking a weapon into the recruiters office. JMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN_Mike
#8 ·
...not to mention there was a jihad-inspired shooting at a recruiting station just about two years ago, IIRC. I doubt a federal prosecutor would miss the chance to send a message about firearms in recruiting stations.

As others have said, never accept legal advice from anonymous bozos on a chat board. Do your own research. Also, don't assume some clerk in the county sheriff's office is up on all the laws, either. Personally, I wouldn't consider taking the chance.
 
#10 ·
Per 18 USC 930, Federal law prohibits carrying a firearm on a "Federal facility" which is defined as a "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."

A US military recruiter office is a Federal facility and is off limits a la a year in the can.
 
#11 ·
Go to the statute. 18 USC 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 be fined under this title or imprisoned
not more than 1 year, or both.

(g) (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.
 
#13 ·
If you are going to quote 18 USC 930 then all of the statute applies. The OP stated is was not posted so then sub section (h) applies which states in plain language "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." But now you know about subsections (a) and (b) if you read this post. However, Subsection (d)(3) states Subsection (a) does not apply when "the lawful carrying of firearms" when it is under "other lawful purposes".

IANAL, just as a I read it it's not posted but now you have constructive knowledge but does the fact you are legally carrrying for "other lawful purposes" (e.g. self defense in FL is a lawful purpose) mean you are exempted? My belief is unless you get arrested and go to court we'll never know because the state AG won't give you a read on federal property and you won't EVER get a federal employee (except the judge in your case) to say it's okay. OMO

Extracts from 18 USC 930:

(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.


(a) Except as provided in subsection (d),...

(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.
 
#15 ·
Late to the game, but most active and reserve offices are posted in some form here. National Guard offices however, are not. The armories are. Really, the best and safest bet is to lock it in the car. It would suck to end your career before it starts. JMHO

Good luck brother.
 
#16 ·
I believe the reason you don't find it posted at National Gaurd offices, is that they are state offices and not federal. Until pulled to active federal service they play under diferent rules.
 
#18 ·
Your recruiter is gonna lie to you and for you. If you aren't on your toes, you may be unexpectedly manipulated and have the path of your life significantly altered for years to come, possibly for the better. It's no reason to shoot him.
 
#20 ·
However, Subsection (d)(3) states Subsection (a) does not apply when "the lawful carrying of firearms" when it is under "other lawful purposes".
That is the same argument I have heard for being able to CCW in post offices. I don't personally care if somebody feels that this gives them license to carry in a post office. I always enjoy reading interesting news stories and arrests in the Metro section of the newspaper.

Admittedly I haven't been near a military recruiters office in almost 40-years so I would not know if they have/don't have bno guns allowed signs on them as do post offices.
 
#22 ·
That is the same argument I have heard for being able to CCW in post offices. I don't personally care if somebody feels that this gives them license to carry in a post office. I always enjoy reading interesting news stories and arrests in the Metro section of the newspaper.

Admittedly I haven't been near a military recruiters office in almost 40-years so I would not know if they have/don't have bno guns allowed signs on them as do post offices.
IIRC the statute posted in the USPS is a different one. A quick search returned just the argument you were referring to and the reason 18 USC 930 doesn not apply to the USPS Concealed-carry in a post office may lead to rude awakening

39 USC 410 exempts Post Offices from 18 USC 930 (being a statute dealing with Federal facilities in general.) 39 USC 410, specifically dealing with post offices, states:
§ 410. Application of other laws

Release date: 2003-06-24

(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, and except as otherwise provided in this title or insofar as such laws remain in force as rules or regulations of the Postal Service, no Federal law dealing with public or Federal contracts, property, works, officers, employees, budgets, or funds, including the provisions of chapters 5 and 7 of title 5, shall apply to the exercise of the powers of the Postal Service.

(b) The following provisions shall apply to the Postal Service:

(1) section 552 (public information), section 552a (records about individuals), section 552b (open meetings), section 3102 (employment of personal assistants for blind, deaf, or otherwise handicapped employees), section 3110 (restrictions on employment of relatives), section 3333 and chapters 72 (antidiscrimination; right to petition Congress) and 73 (suitability, security, and conduct of employees), section 5520 (withholding city income or employment taxes), and section 5532 (dual pay) of title 5, except that no regulation issued under such chapters or section shall apply to the Postal Service unless expressly made applicable;

(2) all provisions of title 18 dealing with the Postal Service, the mails, and officers or employees of the Government of the United States;
 
#21 ·
Funny the way laws read and are interpreted. When I was a young Marine Sgt. fresh from Viet Nam and serving on recruiting duty in Southern California (what a dirty thing to do to a recent combat vet), my partner, a fellow recruiter, died in a flaming pick up truck. I won't go into the details here, but suffice it to say the media had a field day trying to make up all sorts of stories about how he died and why. Typical media trash about those 'out of control recruiters of future baby killers' and other garbage. We wouldn't allow them into our office with their cameras and intrusive questions so they went to court to force us to let them in since a recruiting office was a 'public office' and the 'people' had a right to 'their' office. The judge told the media to pack sand and that it WAS a federal office. The medias response on appeal?? Being a federal office made it a public office and they wanted in. The appeals court verdict?? PACK SAND!

I don't carry on a federal installation (to include recruiteing offices) just on general principle, even though my oath is as valid today as it was when I took it back in 1966. I'm STILL sworn to uphold that oath. Won't ever change.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top