Is This Considered Federal Property?

[CT-Mike]

The local Navy base has a convenience store off-base that is part of the NEX (AAFES for you Army/Air Force Types). So would such a building be considered Federal property, thus making it illegal to carry?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[2ndAmend]

It would depend on if it is owned by the Navy or a contractor.

[CT-Mike]

It is run by NEX, the employees are NEX employees.

[LM2024]

The local Navy base has a convenience store off-base that is part of the NEX (AAFES for you Army/Air Force Types). So would such a building be considered Federal property, thus making it illegal to carry?

We have the same exact situation here. The Shopette is located in base housing, which is off base, along with the base hospital and a chapel. The base currently has joint jurisdiction with the local county sheriff and local PD. During high threatconditions like Force Protection Condition Delta, security forces do seal off the area to unauthorized personnel. So yes, it may be federal property, but local LE may also have jurisdiction. CCWers probably would not be able to carry, but I would call your base commander and local LE to clarify.

[archer51]

Since it is part of the NEX system I would guess it is off limits. If you check, the property is probably part of the base, just not part of the main base. Either that or they have leased it and the building which would make it off limits.

[archer51]

We have the same exact situation here. The Shopette is located in base housing, which is off base, along with the base hospital and a chapel. The base currently has joint jurisdiction with the local county sheriff and local PD. During high threatconditions like Force Protection Condition Delta, security forces do seal off the area to unauthorized personnel. So yes, it may be federal property, but local LE may also have jurisdiction. CCWers probably would not be able to carry, but I would call your base commander and local LE to clarify.

While it is off the main base it is still part of the base. At least that is how it was in every stateside base housing has been in my 24 years of service.

[Retiredonce]

The local Navy base has a convenience store off-base that is part of the NEX (AAFES for you Army/Air Force Types). So would such a building be considered Federal property, thus making it illegal to carry?

If in doubt, I'd say consider it off limits. Not worth it, IMHO

[Janq]

While it is off the main base it is still part of the base. At least that is how it was in every stateside base housing has been in my 24 years of service.

If in doubt, I'd say consider it off limits. Not worth it, IMHO

This. ^^

A property does not have to be contiguous to that of an adjacent another as in order to specifically as operated/owned and thus considered of a government.

For example the states of Hawaii and Alaska.
US property non-contiguous to the rest of the United States.

Puerto Rico and Guam, US property non-contiguous.

As to buildings and grounds any US Embassy as overseas, non-contiguous.
As within the US buildings and grounds such as small local museums, historical buildings and even some beach grounds and/or adjacent parking areas are Federal property and thus all fed rules & regs regarding weapons (which does include 'firearms' for the confused) and carry of same do apply.

I ran into this as an issue myself this past summer when visiting with my family to Wellfleet for summer vacation.
We stopped as random at a lighthouse museum in Turo only to drive up and find that the building & grounds receives federal funding as a landmark and thus is fed property. I let my family go on and I stayed back at the car as I was carrying. :(
Same thing happened again at the Marconi beach..Fed grounds that are non-contiguous.

Bottom line as suggested when in doubt default to 'Yes it is Fed' until you can absolutely positively establish otherwise toward a location such as this.
On the other hand default to ehh I didn't know/ignorance and get caught...Guess what, ignorance of the law is not an accepted plea in a court of law. You'll then lose far more than what few dollars you might have saved by buying from a PX.

Think it through.

- Janq

[Saber]

Off base housing and associated services, are considered a government controlled facility. Every one I've seen has been posted as such. The base/post authorities share jurisdiction under a mutual aid agreement. In cases where the facility is in another country, the host nation may have primary authority depending on the violation. When I was stationed in Germany, you better wish the US military would take you in.

Granted, you’re not typically going to be searched for weapons, but if you were to rise to the occasion and save the day; you would most likely ‘win the battle and loose the war’.
Regards,

[OldVet]

I think you answered your own question. It's NEX.

[rolyat63]

Well I just got off of the phone with a Manager at NEX HQ. She found the line of questions interesting can see where it could go both ways. In fact there is the possiblity that two persons going in side-by-side, one an authorized NEX patron and the other not but yet authorized on the property for various reasons and the law would/could be different for both persons.

It also may matter if there is either dual or exclusive jurisdiction as in the case of the OP where it is dual jurisdiction. She stated there are locations where they are colocated with applebees and such as well as theatres that the general public can go.

She also stated that actual ownership of the real estate may matter.

Further, I asked if it is posted (and I stated most aren't) with the 18USC930 posting does the caveat in subsection d.3 cover the legal carry of a concealed weapon.

She asked me to frame my questions and send them and she will inquire with counsel to these questions.

She was very friendly and understanding. We even discussed Ft Hood.

So, I will try to get together my questions ( from this board and my head) and I'll email her on Monday.

[Builder58]

I don't have time to look it up right now, but IIRC, the ownership or lease of the property doesn't matter if the employees are paid by the Federal gov't it is considered off limits.

[asardoc]

Agree with Saber and simliar posts. IAMNAL, but from my understanding, any establishment run/administered/staffed by the DoD is solidly considered government property. I'd talk to your local LEO office and/or Navy JAG if you think you have a solid argument. As Saber said, nearly every gov't facility I've encountered is signed as "no weapon" zones. (ironically) This seems especially prevalent in Shall-Issue states. (and in those states, the signs even specifically mention prohibiting weapons carried by CPL holders)

[rolyat63]

Agree with Saber and simliar posts. IAMNAL, but from my understanding, any establishment run/administered/staffed by the DoD is solidly considered government property. I'd talk to your local LEO office and/or Navy JAG if you think you have a solid argument. As Saber said, nearly every gov't facility I've encountered is signed as "no weapon" zones. (ironically) This seems especially prevalent in Shall-Issue states. (and in those states, the signs even specifically mention prohibiting weapons carried by CPL holders)

Administered may be a close as you get. These are concessionaires contracted by the DOD so they may no more be Federal than is a DOD contractor facilty is; and they are not.

[tiwee]

The property record cards are held at the Engineering Field Division. The local Public Works Department has a map on the wall(in the computer these days) showing all government owned property in the area. It is important for tax, maintenance, utility, and liability reasons.