Embarq federally controlled?

Embarq federally controlled?

This is a discussion on Embarq federally controlled? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I went to Embarq the other day only to find a new 18 U.S.C. Section 930 sign entering the parking lot and on the door ...

Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Embarq federally controlled?

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array Pro2A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,933

    Embarq federally controlled?

    I went to Embarq the other day only to find a new 18 U.S.C. Section 930 sign entering the parking lot and on the door (basically no guns) I assumed Embarq is not federal property, nor is anything around the building that might share the parking lot federal property.

    Does that sign still hold legal water? Or does it really only apply to federal property and not private business. Either way I made note of the sign to the manager inside. He objected my view in which I closed my account and took my business elsewhere...


  2. #2
    Member Array i12flytoday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Charlotte NC
    Posts
    54
    This is directly from 18 USC 930

    It only applies to:

    (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.

    So, other than any other law prohibiting carry, that facility would only be off limits if it's partially leased by the Fed Gov, or if Fed Employees are regularly there.

    If you are talking about the Embarq communications company, there are probably federal employees there regularly and the sign would be legal. Remember, the feds set up a bunch of equipment inside the communications companies to spy on us!

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array Paco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,507
    When you say you went to Embarq the other day, were you at a CO or some other facility that may house Federal equipment? Or were you at a store front?
    "Don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

    -Paco
    http://www.shieldsd.net

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by i12flytoday View Post
    This is directly from 18 USC 930

    It only applies to:

    (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.

    So, other than any other law prohibiting carry, that facility would only be off limits if it's partially leased by the Fed Gov, or if Fed Employees are regularly there.

    If you are talking about the Embarq communications company, there are probably federal employees there regularly and the sign would be legal. Remember, the feds set up a bunch of equipment inside the communications companies to spy on us!
    Based on your citation, it looks like you are reading it a little differently than I would.

    In particular (emphasis added):

    (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.

    The presence of Federal employees is a condition (where, not or) of the section. In other words, if it is federally owned or leased property, this citation indicates that guns are prohibited if the facility is also where federal employees are regularly present in their official capacity.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  5. #5
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,715
    I think Matiki's reading makes sense, because read the other way, a business (of any sort) where IRS auditors regularly review the books would be considered off limits. Or, better yet, a scientific company that entered into a cooperative development agreement with a Federal Agency, would be off limits because Federal scientists regularly worked there. That reading of the law just doesn't make any sense.

    I have no idea what Embarq does. Heck, maybe they are owned by the CIA so the sign is legal; stranger things have happened. I think I'm just joking on that one, but you never know.

    My guess, someone at Embarq just put up the wrong sign and was too stubborn to take it down.

    I think the first thing I would want to know is more about the nature of the facility; is it some sort of retail store open to the public? If so, it ain't a Federal facility.

    All of that said, I personally never like to take a very stringent legalistic view of anti-gun sign; even dumb ghostbuster ones. IF the owner doesn't want you armed there, don't go there, don't buy there. Don't argue.

    Life's too short for that sort of thing.

  6. #6
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,841
    I also agree with matiki's interpretation. Just because federal employees perform duties at a location shouldn't matter, as long as the facility is not owned or leased by the government.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  7. #7
    Member Array luwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    40
    In Kansas Embarq is the company that was Sprint wired communications. I think Sprint spun that division off and made Embarq. All the Embarq offices and communication facilities are posted with the appropriate Kansas gunbuster.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Discovered in Georgia: Internet Controlled Shotguns! Yes you read that correctly
    By ExSoldier in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 17th, 2011, 07:43 PM
  2. Supreme Court Monday extended the federally protected right to keep and bear arms to
    By runningwater in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 28th, 2010, 10:39 AM
  3. Double Tap .40 S&W 200gr Controlled Exp. JHP
    By johnsonabq in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 12th, 2009, 02:15 AM
  4. remote controlled 1911 and FA shotgun helicopters!
    By Superhouse 15 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 14th, 2008, 05:19 PM

Search tags for this page

what is pure solutisons from embarq

Click on a term to search for related topics.