Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Me and Gun_savey were talking about CC'ing in a post office and "other" federal property.

He found this link and info....


http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rtc-usps.html


Some of the post over there

Title 18, United States Code, Sec. 930. - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities


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.

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.

Subsection (a) shall not apply to -


the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.
In order to fall within the exception to the law, two conditions have to be met. First, one has to be engaged in the "lawful carrying of firearms." This means you cannot be a "prohibited person" such as a convicted felon, a fugitive from justice, or fall within any of the other categories that would prohibit one from lawfully purchasing or owning a firearm under federal law.

It also means that it must be legal for you to carry the firearm under any applicable federal, state, and local laws. If, for example, it is illegal under state law to carry a firearm in a post office, the exception in section (d) (3) of 18 U.S.C. § 930 offers you no protection. The same is true about any local regulations or restrictions on the terms of your carry permit. In other words, if state or local law, or the terms of your carry permit, prohibit carry in a post office, then such carry is not "lawful," and the exception to the ban on carrying in federal facilities does not apply to you.

The second condition that has to be met for one to fall within the exception to the ban on carrying a firearm in a federal facility is that one must be carrying in the facility "incident to hunting or other lawful purposes." One cannot be in the facility with intent to commit a crime, or while committing a crime, and fall within the exception.


A simple test of whether one may legally carry in a post office could involve answering four questions:


Is it illegal for me to carry a handgun on the street outside the post office?

Is there a state or local law prohibiting carry in a post office?
Am I violating the terms of my CCW permit by carrying inside a post office?

Am I going to commit a crime or engage in some unlawful activity once inside the facility?

If one answers "no" to all four questions, it seems that one falls within the exception to the federal ban on carrying in a federal facility. The answer to the first three questions seeks to resolve whether one is engaged in the "lawful carrying" of a firearm. The answer to the final question seeks to resolve whether one is carrying "incident to ... lawful purposes."

It is important to note that the term "Federal facility" does not include a federal court facility. Even with a valid concealed weapon or handgun license, it is a federal offense to bring a firearm into a federal court facility. Under this statute, the only persons who may lawfully carry in a federal court facility are federal, state, or local law enforcement officers on official duty, or a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if authorized to possess the firearm.



I know this is NOT CLEAR.. BUT, the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes... OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES is VERY clear to me.

If I go to a federal bank to withdraw money.. that is legal... for example.. I know states laws still need to come in play... but what are your thoughts?

"Incident " will come into play I know..... I am not looking to debate.. I honestly don't think I am well informed enough... but sometimes a good discussion can inform while entertain.

As always level headed comments keep me coming here, and make mods/admin happy. So keep me coming here and keep them happy :hand10:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
24,242 Posts
Bags said:
If I go to a federal bank to withdraw money.. that is legal... for example.. I know states laws still need to come in play... but what are your thoughts?
I'll let someone more qualified than me to answer your direct questions, but I will address the above comment:

There are no banks which are "federal property" other than Federal Reserve Banks. Only banks, thrifts, S&L's, and some other types of institutions "bank" at a Federal Reserve Bank. Federal Reserve Banks are not commercial banks for commercial businesses or individuals.

There are no other banks that are "federal" banks in the sense of the word as you use it. The "federal" banks you see "on the street" that have the word "federal", "national", "N.A.", and the like are not owned by the federal government and hence are not federal property. Likewise "state" banks which use the words "XXX State Bank" or somesuch are not owned by the state. The designation refers only to the regulatory authority under which said bank operates - the federal authorities (the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency), or the state authority, e.g. The Texas Department of Banking. None of those names indicate or infer federal or state ownership - only the banks primary regulator.

There are other quasi-governmental banks such as the "Federal Land Bank" - again - not owned by the feds or the states. Likewise, the Federal National Mortgage Association, etc. is not owned by the feds or the states either.

So, I think I killed your question, but you inferred that there was such an animal as a "federal Bank" which there is not.

Have I confused the matter enough? Sorry! :embarassed:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
let me start out by saying that I am by no means an expert on the subject.

That being said I have done my own research and I have found that the particular law you are referring to dose not qualify you to carry (open or canceled) why? Well the fact is that there is no federal law that says personal protection is a lawful purpose, period. Sure there are state laws, but this is federal. I work on a US Federal facility and asked the question to the department of homeland security, there reply (witch took some time) was no. They even went as far as to invite me over to there building and show me the policy and federal law. It also covered courts, post offices, and federal prisons. Just my .02$ maybe the homeland security director that I met with was wrong, but I would be willing to bet not  Needles to say, I cannot carry at all where I work, not even in my automobile.


the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.
In order to fall within the exception to the law, two conditions have to be met. First, one has to be engaged in the "lawful carrying of firearms." This means you cannot be a "prohibited person" such as a convicted felon, a fugitive from justice, or fall within any of the other categories that would prohibit one from lawfully purchasing or owning a firearm under federal law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Rock and Glock said:
I'll let someone more qualified than me to answer your direct questions, but I will address the above comment:

There are no banks which are "federal property" other than Federal Reserve Banks. Only banks, thrifts, S&L's, and some other types of institutions "bank" at a Federal Reserve Bank. Federal Reserve Banks are not commercial banks for commercial businesses or individuals.

There are no other banks that are "federal" banks in the sense of the word as you use it. The "federal" banks you see "on the street" that have the word "federal", "national", "N.A.", and the like are not owned by the federal government and hence are not federal property. Likewise "state" banks which use the words "XXX State Bank" or somesuch are not owned by the state. The designation refers only to the regulatory authority under which said bank operates - the federal authorities (the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency), or the state authority, e.g. The Texas Department of Banking. None of those names indicate or infer federal or state ownership - only the banks primary regulator.

There are other quasi-governmental banks such as the "Federal Land Bank" - again - not owned by the feds or the states. Likewise, the Federal National Mortgage Association, etc. is not owned by the feds or the states either.

So, I think I killed your question, but you inferred that there was such an animal as a "federal Bank" which there is not.

Have I confused the matter enough? Sorry! :embarassed:
Well that is a GREAT answer.. thank you.... :congrats:

I did not know that about banks..

but the question is "federal property", other than court houses. I used federal bank.. If I went onto a military base to buy food from the commisary is another example. If you work in a federal buliding, but not employed buy the govt. is another.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Bags said:
Well that is a GREAT answer.. thank you.... :congrats:

I did not know that about banks..

but the question is "federal property", other than court houses. I used federal bank.. If I went onto a military base to buy food from the commisary is another example. If you work in a federal buliding, but not employed buy the govt. is another.
I know for a fact that all military instalations STRICTLY prohibit all but LE to cary...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
danedel said:
let me start out by saying that I am by no means an expert on the subject.

That being said I have done my own research and I have found that the particular law you are referring to dose not qualify you to carry (open or canceled) why? Well the fact is that there is no federal law that says personal protection is a lawful purpose, period.
2nd ammendment?

danedel said:
Sure there are state laws, but this is federal. I work on a US Federal facility and asked the question to the department of homeland security, there reply (witch took some time) was no. They even went as far as to invite me over to there building and show me the policy and federal law. It also covered courts, post offices, and federal prisons. Just my .02$ maybe the homeland security director that I met with was wrong, but I would be willing to bet not  Needles to say, I cannot carry at all where I work, not even in my automobile.
Me and gun_savey work on federal property as well... can't even carry a personal cell phone into the bulding.. so I know what you go through.

I have looked and not found a law that says only LEO/military can carry on fed. property. Does not mean it's not there, just mean I have not found it.

I'm trying to be WELL informed :banana:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Believe me I would love to carry at work, but for two reasons I haven’t pushed the issue.

One: I work for the Army, and they have there own internal regulations
Two: Working on a very large federal chunk of land, with a lot of other agencies on board.

The second amendment does not cover CCW...believe me I have tried from all possible angles to make it work, legally for me :icon_neutral:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Bags said:
what law?
Military installations are not governed by federal law....but there own law. Basically whichever the post/fort/base commander chooses, usually the standard "check the block" regulations but there are certin military specific DOD regulations on who can carry on military installations. To tell you the truth I have not pushed this one, as I might loose my job/access to local fort/basses. If you want to carry onto a secure facility, that only screened personnel have access to, go ahead. There are postings at all guard shacks that state the reg. If you are bold enough ask the peon that is usually guarding the gate. I guarantee they will say “no way” especially with the threat level escalated.

I usually feel very safe there :smile:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
Well the fact is that there is no federal law that says personal protection is a lawful purpose, period.
danedel - not nit-picking and thx for your input - it is most helpful.

But that statement - "no federal law that says personal protection is a lawful purpose" - makes me think of the way folks interpret open carry here in PA - it is not listed as illegal, ergo it can be legal. With that Fed statement, (I stress I am being pedantic :smilez: ) - is there any law that says it is actually an UNlawful act to carry concealed, because if there was then a) we'd all be law-breakers, and b) - we'd maybe not be law-breaking if we carried in some locations supposedly off limits.

Hard to make clear what I am thinking but maybe you get my drift! :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
guys I am not trying to shoot down the idea of carrying on federal and military land...I have tried myself, and failed miserably.

In fact the officer that told me no after I didn’t like what the gate guard said, “ the only way I can allow you to take that on here is if you have it registered with the base, and you are a resident” Since I don’t live on this base, I didn’t even ask about registering my firearm and would assume that some unloaded ammunition distance rule would apply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I understand P95, but I tell you what…I don’t want to be the guy that has my carry piece taken and tied up in the federal system for god knows how long. If you want to try it, yeah you will probably get away with it, one, and five maybe forever…

If you do your part none will know you have something on you, until it is necessary anyhow. I seriously don’t feel a need to carry on these types of places. Would I like to have something in the car two and from wile in route, yes…

The gentlemen from the department of homeland security, which governs FPS (federal protective service) which has absolute jurisdiction over all federal facilities and land says “no” that’s good enough for me. Evan going as far as to asking an FPS agent once…you can imagine how that went. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Seems a grey area in federal law has appeared...Maybe I should contact the individuals involved for further investigation. Well at any rate I hope to soon separate from the unit that I am with and get a “real” job on the outside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
Bags said:
what law?
Pasted from my reply on a similar thread:

As a soldier, commander, CCW holder, and hunter, I have been thoroughly educated on pretty much every iteration of getting a weapon on a military installation legally. Definately a PITA, but worth it for me because there is some great hunting available on post.

Several have mentioned the possibility of storing weapons on post. There is a provision for doing so, but only for service members living in the barracks or in post housing. They can store their POWs (Privately Owned Weapons) in their unit armsroom, and just sign them out from the armorer for hunting and target shooting. This requires a memorandum signed by the company-level commander who is the "landlord" for that armsroom, and only for personnel in his command. Bottom line, civilians, contractors, and off-post personnel don't have storage facilities available on post for their weapons.

Another caveat to this whole deal is that you have to register every weapon you bring on post in advance, by S/N, with the provost marshalls office. The form also has to be signed by your unit commander - I used to do this all the time for my soldiers. Not sure how it works for civilians. Once registered, carry the card with you if you have the weapons on board, and again, only for range shooting and hunting - no CCW or just to have it in the truck. You must declare them when you enter the gate, which most times will end up getting your entire vehicle searched, S/Ns verified, and provost marshall's office notified.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
duckhunter said:
You must declare them when you enter the gate, which most times will end up getting your entire vehicle searched, S/Ns verified, and provost marshall's office notified.
Been there.....when I lived in GA on Ft Gordon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
danedel said:
Military installations are not governed by federal law....but there own law. Basically whichever the post/fort/base commander chooses, usually the standard "check the block" regulations but there are certin military specific DOD regulations on who can carry on military installations. To tell you the truth I have not pushed this one, as I might loose my job/access to local fort/basses. If you want to carry onto a secure facility, that only screened personnel have access to, go ahead. There are postings at all guard shacks that state the reg. If you are bold enough ask the peon that is usually guarding the gate. I guarantee they will say “no way” especially with the threat level escalated.

I usually feel very safe there :smile:
There are "standard" rules for every CONUS installation. I know that base commanders can add, but they can't take away from the SOP. I know exactly what sign you are talking about, I see the sign everyday, just as you do. I just have not read it for the refference.. I will be doing that tomorrow.

It's not about getting fired or telling the system to F off. It's about what is LEGAL and what is NOT legal.

I'll look up DOD regs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
duckhunter said:
Pasted from my reply on a similar thread:

As a soldier, commander, CCW holder, and hunter, I have been thoroughly educated on pretty much every iteration of getting a weapon on a military installation legally. Definately a PITA, but worth it for me because there is some great hunting available on post.

Several have mentioned the possibility of storing weapons on post. There is a provision for doing so, but only for service members living in the barracks or in post housing. They can store their POWs (Privately Owned Weapons) in their unit armsroom, and just sign them out from the armorer for hunting and target shooting. This requires a memorandum signed by the company-level commander who is the "landlord" for that armsroom, and only for personnel in his command. Bottom line, civilians, contractors, and off-post personnel don't have storage facilities available on post for their weapons.

Another caveat to this whole deal is that you have to register every weapon you bring on post in advance, by S/N, with the provost marshalls office. The form also has to be signed by your unit commander - I used to do this all the time for my soldiers. Not sure how it works for civilians. Once registered, carry the card with you if you have the weapons on board, and again, only for range shooting and hunting - no CCW or just to have it in the truck. You must declare them when you enter the gate, which most times will end up getting your entire vehicle searched, S/Ns verified, and provost marshall's office notified.
Keeping it in the car on "federal" property will be more than I can do now..lol

And when I lived in the bks, I would not buy a firearm for the armory to store.. thanks but no thanks.

Thanks for the info.

So that covers "military bases". Post office and federal property still open then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
danedel said:
Seems a grey area in federal law has appeared...Maybe I should contact the individuals involved for further investigation. Well at any rate I hope to soon separate from the unit that I am with and get a “real” job on the outside.

Better to ask forgivness than ask permission... as long as loss of job and or freedom is not involved.:yup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
danedel said:
the fact is that there is no federal law that says personal protection is a lawful purpose, period.
Personal protection is not outlawed, therefore it is lawful. In this great land known as America, if an act is not specifically prohibited in statutory, case, or administrative law, it is a legal act. An omission of prohibition is the same as if a law was in place to say that the act was specifically legal. Obviously this would make every legal act a law and to try and transcribe every lawful act on the books is insanity at best. It is easier to just record the unlawful acts and their exceptions than record every legal act. This legal phenomenon is known as the modern 'common law' and originated in England and was carried and is upheld here in the states.

In other words, if it doesn't say it is illegal, it is legal.

For example:

Chewing buble gum is not prohibited by any law on any books. Therefore it is legal and lawful.

Folding a piece of paper into an airplane shape in not prohibited by any law on any books. Therefore it is legal and lawful.

Similarly, personal protection is not outlawed by any law on any books. Therefore it is legal and lawful.

MI does not prohibit carry of a weapon into a post office. Federal law states as long as it is legally possessed by a legally eligible possesor for legal purposes, it is legal.

That being said, since I have legally obtained a concealed weapon permit issued my the state of Michigan, I have been inside the post office at least a dozen times and have carried a concealed firearm on each and every visit to conduct lawful commerce with the United States Government via the United States Postal Service, which is lawful, satisfying every single element of the exception.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top