Denver Post gets it right, editorial FOR Post Office carry!

[gunsmith]

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_19427751

 Basically agreeing that the Post Office is not a "sensitive area" WRT Heller.

[gunsmith]

Wow!
http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20111130/NEWS/111139986/1078&ParentProfile=1062

Like most of us, the Bonidys don't have the option of home mail delivery, so they get their mail at the post office, and the U.S. Postal Service prohibits firearms on their property, including parking lots. That means those who carry firearms — or stop by the post office on their way to or from the shooting range — are breaking the law even by leaving their guns in their cars when they get their mail.

That's my problem too, I always have to park away from P.O & leave my gun in the truck.
On my motorcycle I'm supposed to leave it unsecured in plain view to get my mail.
( no saddle bags for my CBR )

I don't get home delivery due to rural isolation. I don't leave my gun at home ever due to rural isolation, 3 cops for 5000 square miles!

[Monkeyleg]

I have to go to the post office every day. I hate leaving my gun in the car far away from the office, and I know it's safer with me.

Years back the anti's argued that carry in post offices needed to be prohibited because of the number of workers "going postal". It always seemed to me to be a better argument for carrying to defend the public from whacked-out postal workers.

[Gowen]

I was going to ask a question about this very subject.  What about getting your mail after hours, late at night.  Do you really feel safe going into the PO, late at night?  It is not always practical to go during the day. 

[wmenorr67]

So the other day when I was carrying on my waist and had another in a locked case sitting in the car while my wife went in to mail my package to me, I was breaking the law.?

Oh well, concealed is concealed.

[Gowen]

....and someone with a knife can do a lot of damage before they are stopped.

[Hawkmoon]

The editorial got the theory right, but they missed on the facts. The Federal law they cited (the one with the "lawful purposes" exception) is NOT the operative Federal law governing carry in postal facilities.

[Fly320s]

The editorial got the theory right, but they missed on the facts. The Federal law they cited (the one with the "lawful purposes" exception) is NOT the operative Federal law governing carry in postal facilities.

Which law is the proper one?

[gunsmith]

So the other day when I was carrying on my waist and had another in a locked case sitting in the car while my wife went in to mail my package to me, I was breaking the law.?

Oh well, concealed is concealed.

yup & yup.

Concealed/open carry - whether or not you have some kind of license to carry, is currently illegal.

For awhile there was indecision due to the way the law is written, it could be interpreted to allow people with a carry license iirc some fed case said "no".

[Hawkmoon]

Which law is the proper one?

39 CFR 232.1

http://buckeyefirearms.com/Concealed-carry-in-a-post-office-may-lead-to-rude-awakening

[gunsmith]

So the other day when I was carrying on my waist and had another in a locked case sitting in the car while my wife went in to mail my package to me, I was breaking the law.?

Oh well, concealed is concealed.

Also it depends on the State and whether you were in a post office parking lot.

For instance You can have a gun in your car in NV ( in general ) open carry is legal here too, but you can not have a gun on you or in your car in a post office parking lot.

[Monkeyleg]

The post office I go to is part of a five-store older building. It's run as a franchise of the post office but isn't owned by the post office.

I wonder if the same postal service laws apply to the parking lot, since that lot is shared with other businesses?

[Hawkmoon]

The post office I go to is part of a five-store older building. It's run as a franchise of the post office but isn't owned by the post office.

I wonder if the same postal service laws apply to the parking lot, since that lot is shared with other businesses?

No, the law does not apply. The USPS has been moving in recent years to locating retail postal "stores" in strip malls and shopping centers. The only area that's under USPS control is the actual tenant space they occupy and the law applies only inside that store space.

[Tallpine]

The parking lot law is no doubt broken thousands of times every day in Montana, as most vehicles have some sort of firearm in ithem. 

[gunsmith]

The parking lot law is no doubt broken thousands of times every day in Montana, as most vehicles have some sort of firearm in ithem. 

yup,same with NV. I have yet to see postal police anywhere in NV.

I'm sure local LE don't know or care about postal rules and lack jurisdiction.

[Tallpine]

yup,same with NV. I have yet to see postal police anywhere in NV.

I'm sure local LE don't know or care about postal rules and lack jurisdiction.

Heck, I've seen pickups with rifles in window racks in the PO parking lot 

[AJ Dual]

Things keep going the way they are, we won't have a Post Office soon. Online banking/marketing/billing, Internet, and common carriers will pick up the slack just as they are killing the USPS now. 

There'd be a luddite fringe that's problematic, but you could probably do it already if you really wanted to push for it. Just like the digital TV transition.

Might actually be the first "Ron Paul" example the sheeple get that some fed.gov functions actually can just go away, and life goes on. Although isn't there a constitutional mandate of some sort for the USPS?

[Monkeyleg]

Although isn't there a constitutional mandate of some sort for the USPS?

I can't think of any. There's a Democrat Party mandate for union employees, but that's about it.

[Hawkmoon]

I can't think of any. There's a Democrat Party mandate for union employees, but that's about it.

Constitution of the United States:

Article 1

Section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

...

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

...

Of course, having the power to establish post offices is not a mandate to do so. And I suppose it follows that if the Congress has the power to create post offices, it also has the power to uncreate them.

[AJ Dual]

Constitution of the United States:

Of course, having the power to establish post offices is not a mandate to do so. And I suppose it follows that if the Congress has the power to create post offices, it also has the power to uncreate them.

Good to know. I knew the Post Office was in there, but couldn't remember if it was a mandated service or not.

It can go away with PBS then. 

[vaskidmark]

Constitution of the United States:

Of course, having the power to establish post offices is not a mandate to do so. And I suppose it follows that if the Congress has the power to create post offices, it also has the power to uncreate them.

The power of the Post Office is two-fold: it assures that the mail goes through and it ensures that the poorest of the poor are able to communicate with the government.  By being a public, tax-supported activity the PO cannot (in theory) be shut down by strike, or priced out of the reach of some.  The PO has been closed by strike once - in 1970 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._postal_strike_of_1970 .  The NG was called out to deliver the mail.  By being supported by taxpayer monies the cost of communicating with the government is kept within the reach of even the poorest citizen - well, in theory at least.  Both First and Second Class mail is still subsidized at well below actual cost, although the fees for other services have not supported the total expenditures for many years now.

When the PO was restructured into the USPS, the quasi-, semi-governmental entity, it was supposed to become much closer to self-supporting.  That has never happened, even with the continuation of their monopoly on delivery to those cute little boxes on the front of houses or at the side of the road, which is why they hand all that crap on your doorknob or stuff it between your screen and front door.  And which is why UPS/FedEx can never deliver First Class mail, even if they really could do it faster and cheaper and better.  Or why Alaskans can mail enough bricks to build a mansion for less than the cost of trucking them there from the lower 48.

Speaking of the power of the PO - a quiz:

At the intersection of Mass Ave, NH Ave, Conn Ave, 19th St, P St, and Riggs Ct in NW Washington DC you have the following vehicles approaching: on Mass Ave moving SE to NW the President of the USA and the Dutch Ambassador in a motorcade, on NH Ave moving N to S you have a fire truck with lights & sirens, on Conn Ave moving NW to SE you have an ambulance with lights & sirens, on 19th St you have the FBI and Secret Service in a running gunfight chasing robbers from the US Treasury, on P St moving from W to E you have the Pope and Mother Teresa (pretend she's still alive) on their way to Children's Hospital to save the life of little Susy via a miracle, and coming out of Riggs Ct is a mail truck.  Which vehicle has the right of way?

Say it with me, class: the mail truck!

stay safe.

[Fly320s]

Nope, says Snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/fourway.asp

[zahc]

It strikes me that the situation is exactly reversed. The USPS should be one place with national, universal preemption against local gun control laws.

I mean the question for decades/centuries has been, is the 2nd incorporated or not? But if you can't even carry at the Post Office, because it's associated with the Federal government, then what does incorporation even mean? How can Heller say the 2nd asserts a personal right to arms but USPS still ban carry?

[gunsmith]

my guess would be bureaucrats heads would explode if all of a sudden mere prols were able to open carry on postal property.

Yet your reasoning is somehow compelling & who knows? Maybe some Circuit Judge will agree.

[Perd Hapley]

Nope, says Snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/fourway.asp

Toward the end, they ask, if the mail truck does not have the right of way, which emergency vehicle comes first? I was torn between fire truck (because it's bigger and heavier and will plow through anything that crosses in front of it) and police (because they have guns).

I'm gonna go with fire truck.