Jump to content

High Court Rejects Appeal Over Ban on Guns at Post Offices( link)


Sweeper13

Recommended Posts

I find it ironic how the USPS is a private company, yet it isn't, couldn't survive without government subsudization. Just like if Delta (or American, United) stopped receiving subsidies, they wouldn't be able to survive. Same with Amtrak.

 

And the whole "this is federal property" implies no rights exist when on federal property, other than the ones that they allow one to exercise.

 

Sent from my VK700 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, we need to stop subsidizing failing companies. They are failing for a reason and they should be allowed to be put out of their misery.

 

+1

 

The USPS has no one to blame but themselves. Instead of whining about emails being free to send they should have kept up with changing times. Their tracking service still sucks, their prices are outrageous - more expensive than UPS/FedEx on all but the really small stuff and they constantly "lose" you're stuff. When internet shopping took off, UPS and FedEx stepped up their game big time and left the USPS in the dust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go again. The USPS is not subsidized by the government and receives no tax dollars.

 

"

The Postal Service receives NO tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations."

 

It does however receive Tax breaks and can borrow from the treasury, but then this doesn't relate to the OP.

 

Relating to the OP however it is a sad end to the Bonidy Case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go again. The USPS is not subsidized by the government and receives no tax dollars.

 

"

The Postal Service receives NO tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations."

 

It does however receive Tax breaks and can borrow from the treasury, but then this doesn't relate to the OP.

 

Relating to the OP however it is a sad end to the Bonidy Case.

How is it then a federal government facility?

 

Why can't we get a pro-gun federal rep to introduce a bill that simply designates legal concealed carry as a lawful purpose under the federal statute?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Here we go again. The USPS is not subsidized by the government and receives no tax dollars.

"

The Postal Service receives NO tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations."

It does however receive Tax breaks and can borrow from the treasury, but then this doesn't relate to the OP.

Relating to the OP however it is a sad end to the Bonidy Case.

 

How is it then a federal government facility?

 

Why can't we get a pro-gun federal rep to introduce a bill that simply designates legal concealed carry as a lawful purpose under the federal statute?

http://postalnews.com/blog/2015/05/09/postal-myths-2-the-usps-is-not-a-government-agency/

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

 

By the way it is not a Federal Statute that authorizes the USPS it is the Constitution in Article 1 Section 8, Clause 7.

 

"The United States Postal Service, also known as the Post Office, U.S. Mail, or Postal Service, often abbreviated as USPS, is an independent agency of the United States federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Here we go again. The USPS is not subsidized by the government and receives no tax dollars.

"

The Postal Service receives NO tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations."

It does however receive Tax breaks and can borrow from the treasury, but then this doesn't relate to the OP.

Relating to the OP however it is a sad end to the Bonidy Case.

How is it then a federal government facility?

 

Why can't we get a pro-gun federal rep to introduce a bill that simply designates legal concealed carry as a lawful purpose under the federal statute?

http://postalnews.com/blog/2015/05/09/postal-myths-2-the-usps-is-not-a-government-agency/

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service

 

By the way it is not a Federal Statute that authorizes the USPS it is the Constitution in Article 1 Section 8, Clause 7.

 

"The United States Postal Service, also known as the Post Office, U.S. Mail, or Postal Service, often abbreviated as USPS, is an independent agency of the United States federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution."

Could Trump or Cruz issue an executive order declaring the law carry whether open or concealed as a lawful purpose in accordance with federal law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...