Legal to have a concealed weapon in Post Office parking lot?

[lockman]

+1

[Indigo]

The heart of Bonidy v USPS is the total prohibition on guns in USPS parking lots. The Bonidys won their case which allowed them to leave their firearms in their car in the Post Office parking lot. This decision applies only in the Federal Court District of Colorado, although there are proposals to change this nationwide. Until that happens you cannot legally possess a firearm on USPS controlled property. Period. Unless you are in Colorado. It has nothing to do with whether it is a restricted area or not, and it doesn't have to be posted.

[xd9subcompact]

I guess you didn't read the regulation where it says it must be posted.

[Tjdavis1111]

Read page 3 of the Federal regulations very closely.

 

http://handgunlaw.us/states/usa.pdf

 

Post Office property is NO GUN, in any condition, unless you are covered by the Bonidy case.

 

 

Also, pay attention to the condition for the parking lot of a federal facility that is annotated with the red asterisk.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeavyDuty]

See post 60 in this thread: http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=44303

 

I haven't heard anything else about it, though.

[quackersmacker]

We all probably have a better chance of winning the PowerBall three times in a row, than our chances of actually getting arrested for having a concealed firearm in our car in a Post Office parking lot while we bop inside to mail a letter, unless we somehow incredibly manage to do something unbelievably stupid to call attention to it, and be seen doing same, and having LEO bust us for it.

 

So much agonizing and ado about nothing. Ok, maybe not nothing. Maybe its 0.000000000001% of almost something. Or less.

[bobapunk]

If the lot is not posted then you are fine. I have seen a few post offices where the entry to the lobby is not posted but the doors going into the area that is open during regular hours is posted. So you can get your PO Box or use the automated postage machine during off hours without violating the sign.

 

The carrying in a vehicle in public lots that are posted by USPS is evolving in case law but is still unlawful except for the federal district in Colorado.

 

Umm, no. Next time you are at the PO, take a second and read their sign...

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

 

[mata777]

I just park on the street and place my gun in the glove box and lock it (I don't want it getting stolen too easily). Better safe than sorry.

[Buckfarrack]

I'm your test case six days every week.

[xd9subcompact]

The Dorosan case, much touted as the definitive proof that you can be convicted for having a gun in your car in the parking area of the post office, involved Mr. Dorosan (an employee) parking in the area where the postal service staged and loaded their trucks. Anyone who knows anything about the postal service facilities knows they don't load the trucks in any public parking lots, they do that in the fenced in area. That is not the public parking area. The postal service does not conduct it's business of loading mail in the public parking areas. I stand by my position that if it's not posted in accordance with the federal law and the postal CFRs, it is not prohibited.

[Dr. Rat]

We all probably have a better chance of winning the PowerBall three times in a row, than our chances of actually getting arrested for having a concealed firearm in our car in a Post Office parking lot while we bop inside to mail a letter, unless we somehow incredibly manage to do something unbelievably stupid to call attention to it, and be seen doing same, and having LEO bust us for it.

 

So much agonizing and ado about nothing. Ok, maybe not nothing. Maybe its 0.000000000001% of almost something. Or less.

 

So it's not a crime if you don't get caught? So much for being "law-abiding", eh?

[Indigo]

I guess you didn't read the regulation where it says it must be posted.

 

The regulation refers to the display of Poster #158, the one with the revolver and the prohibited symbol. That has nothing to do with posting the parking lot. The law, as quoted on the poster,

No person on U.S. Postal Service property may carry or store firearms,

explosives, or other dangerous or deadly weapons, either openly or

concealed, except for official purposes.

Title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 232.1

It doesn't get much clearer than that. The feds (and the USPS) don't have to post in the same manner as required by the FCCA. Once again, the heart of Bonidy v USPS is possession of a firearm in the public parking lot of a postal facility.

[xd9subcompact]

Here's the problem with that logic.

There are areas that have signs posted. There are areas that are not posted.

According to that logic, none of it needs a sign on display because the regulation says it is prohibited everywhere, thus no signs are required.

According to that logic, the signs are just a courtesy to the customers, and that is why they only post the signs in certain locations and not others.

According to that logic, the signs Dorosan ignored when he parked his car inside the fenced area weren't really needed, he would have been convicted regardless.

[spec5]

 

I guess you didn't read the regulation where it says it must be posted.

 

The regulation refers to the display of Poster #158, the one with the revolver and the prohibited symbol. That has nothing to do with posting the parking lot. The law, as quoted on the poster,

No person on U.S. Postal Service property may carry or store firearms, [/size]

explosives, or other dangerous or deadly weapons, either openly or [/size]concealed, except for official purposes.[/size]

Title 39, [/size]Code of Federal Regulations, Section 232.1[/size]

It doesn't get much clearer than that. The feds (and the USPS) don't have to post in the same manner as required by the FCCA. Once again, the heart of Bonidy v USPS is possession of a firearm in the public parking lot of a postal facility.

I go with this. This ^^^^^

[SleepingBirdDog]

What about a post office in a strip mall? Would the parking lot provision still apply?

[xd9subcompact]

So we think a Post office is a federal facility. OK. So we think that the feds don't have to post.. OK.

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930

 

I would read this law, and I would read the very last paragraph first, then back up to the first paragraph to get the proper understanding of the requirements to post.

[quackersmacker]

 

We all probably have a better chance of winning the PowerBall three times in a row, than our chances of actually getting arrested for having a concealed firearm in our car in a Post Office parking lot while we bop inside to mail a letter, unless we somehow incredibly manage to do something unbelievably stupid to call attention to it, and be seen doing same, and having LEO bust us for it.

 

So much agonizing and ado about nothing. Ok, maybe not nothing. Maybe its 0.000000000001% of almost something. Or less.

 

So it's not a crime if you don't get caught? So much for being "law-abiding", eh?

 

It is believed that the average American commits three felonies per day. see http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx

 

So, Rat, since you've been posting on this forum .....(yikes, 14 times a day........that oughta be a crime!) ......for three months --- if you're average ---- you may have committed 270 felonies since you joined. Let's say you're 90% better than average. So you've committed 27 felonies just in the last 90 days. Quick, Mr. Law Abiding, get on down to the station and turn yourself in!

[lockman]

 

If the lot is not posted then you are fine. I have seen a few post offices where the entry to the lobby is not posted but the doors going into the area that is open during regular hours is posted. So you can get your PO Box or use the automated postage machine during off hours without violating the sign.

 

The carrying in a vehicle in public lots that are posted by USPS is evolving in case law but is still unlawful except for the federal district in Colorado.

Umm, no. Next time you are at the PO, take a second and read their sign...

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

 

If taken literally, like warning you afteryou enter that it is a prohibited location. Almost as bad as putting it on the exit door facing people exiting. (since I refered to locations that do not post the main entry just additional doors leading to locations within the lobby.) If posted on a fenced area I do not equate that to the whole facility, other parking areas or other curtiliage.

[Indigo]

Here's the problem with that logic.

There are areas that have signs posted. There are areas that are not posted.

According to that logic, none of it needs a sign on display because the regulation says it is prohibited everywhere, thus no signs are required.

According to that logic, the signs are just a courtesy to the customers, and that is why they only post the signs in certain locations and not others.

According to that logic, the signs Dorosan ignored when he parked his car inside the fenced area weren't really needed, he would have been convicted regardless.

Exactly. He was an employee, and had undoubtedly signed an employee handbook type document acknowledging the regulations (actual notice). Regardless of regulations on posting, the underlying regulation says:

No person on U.S. Postal Service property may carry or store firearms,

explosives, or other dangerous or deadly weapons, either openly or concealed, except for official purposes.

Title 39, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 232.1

 

I never said that Feds didn't have to post, I said that they did not have to post in the manner required by the FCCA. Since the USPS, like Amtrak, is a Federal public-private partnership, it has Federal status in these matters.

 

What about a post office in a strip mall? Would the parking lot provision still apply?

Leased property, not the property of the USPS, hence not under the control of the USPS and not prohibited. Similar to a strip mall where a >50% bar or restaurant is located.

[Dr. Rat]

 

 

We all probably have a better chance of winning the PowerBall three times in a row, than our chances of actually getting arrested for having a concealed firearm in our car in a Post Office parking lot while we bop inside to mail a letter, unless we somehow incredibly manage to do something unbelievably stupid to call attention to it, and be seen doing same, and having LEO bust us for it.

 

So much agonizing and ado about nothing. Ok, maybe not nothing. Maybe its 0.000000000001% of almost something. Or less.

 

So it's not a crime if you don't get caught? So much for being "law-abiding", eh?

 

It is believed that the average American commits three felonies per day. see http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx

 

So, Rat, since you've been posting on this forum .....(yikes, 14 times a day........that oughta be a crime!) ......for three months --- if you're average ---- you may have committed 270 felonies since you joined. Let's say you're 90% better than average. So you've committed 27 felonies just in the last 90 days. Quick, Mr. Law Abiding, get on down to the station and turn yourself in!

 

 

"It is believed" by whom - besides yourself? Do you believe everything that's put on the web?

 

I can honestly say I don't believe I've ever committed a felony in my life. You believe the average person commits almost 1100 felonies a year - and without ever being caught.

 

I think we're done here.

[Tjdavis1111]

Okay, momma always said that I was a little slow but I don't understand the "dispute" over whether or not a Post Office and its lot must be posted.

 

As Indigo pointed out, the Code of Federal Regulations states no guns any way, any how.

 

Here is the link to the CFR. The referenced section is on p.50, paragraph "l".

 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title39-vol1/pdf/CFR-2011-title39-vol1-sec232-1.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xd9subcompact]

I never said that Feds didn't have to post, I said that they did not have to post in the manner required by the FCCA. Since the USPS, like Amtrak, is a Federal public-private partnership, it has Federal status in these matters.

Thanks for clearing up any ambiguity as to the fact that they do have to post, they just don't have to post per the FCCA.

So we agree that they do have to post., it just needs to be posted in accordance with the US Code and the CFR's.

Nuke facilities don't have to post per the FCCA either, but they do have to post. Most of us don't have ESP. It's all about notice, and the word "knowingly", isn't it?

[Indigo]

 

I never said that Feds didn't have to post, I said that they did not have to post in the manner required by the FCCA. Since the USPS, like Amtrak, is a Federal public-private partnership, it has Federal status in these matters.

Thanks for clearing up any ambiguity as to the fact that they do have to post, they just don't have to post per the FCCA.

So we agree that they do have to post., it just needs to be posted in accordance with the US Code and the CFR's.

Nuke facilities don't have to post per the FCCA either, but they do have to post. Most of us don't have ESP. It's all about notice, and the word "knowingly", isn't it?

 

If you have an FCCL, the prosecutor can prove that you knowingly violated the USPS GFZ. It's part of the FCCA, and part of your required training. Doesn't matter if the Post Office parking lot is posted or not - it's part of what you had to know as an FCCL holder, kind of like what Dorosan had to know as an employee. Trying the "the instructor didn't cover it" excuse would probably be almost as effective the "I forgot" defense.

[pjh]

From an instructor's viewpoint I will teach as best I can determine according to FCCL teaching instructions as to the written intent of the FCCL law. Until these instructions are formally changed or clarified and in writing I'm not changing my message. Not going to instantly react to some court decision or take it upon myself to delve deeper into federal regulations to ascertain what I "think" they mean. This is the job of legal teams. If students choose do so they do so at their own risk. Certainly err on the side of extreme caution. Violating firearm laws has serious consequences at all levels.

[AJR]

Wow this is still going on.

Really?

How often does anyone really go to the USPS anymore anyway?

[AJR]

From an instructor's viewpoint I will teach as best I can determine according to FCCL teaching instructions as to the written intent of the FCCL law. Until these instructions are formally changed or clarified and in writing I'm not changing my message. Not going to instantly react to some court decision or take it upon myself to delve deeper into federal regulations to ascertain what I "think" they mean. This is the job of legal teams. If students choose do so they do so at their own risk. Certainly err on the side of extreme caution. Violating firearm laws has serious consequences at all levels.

+1

Come on guys, just don't do it or do it. Just know you were told not to.

[bobapunk]

Here's the problem with that logic.

There are areas that have signs posted. There are areas that are not posted.

According to that logic, none of it needs a sign on display because the regulation says it is prohibited everywhere, thus no signs are required.

According to that logic, the signs are just a courtesy to the customers, and that is why they only post the signs in certain locations and not others.

According to that logic, the signs Dorosan ignored when he parked his car inside the fenced area weren't really needed, he would have been convicted regardless.

 

So, what is the problem? If your employer tells you NO GUNS, and they don't post a sign, are you not still subject to disciplinary action is caught with a gun?

 

You said that the signs are there as a courtesy. That is exactly right. Just like the speed limit signs every so often on the open interstate. The speed limit is set by law, the signs are posted as a courtesy reminder.

[xd9subcompact]

Trying to make sure of what you are trying to say. Dorosan was convicted of a federal crime. Getting fired is a little different that going to jail.

Have you read the laws for posting of speed limits? Or is it just your opinion that it is optional? Have you ever heard of the Federal Highway Administration? Do you think they might have regulations that set the signage requirements along the highways? Or do you think they just make it up as they go along?

[bobapunk]

Haven't taken a lot of time studying traffic laws. What is the relationship between state government (which sets the legal speed limit), the State Police (who enforce that speed limit on interstates) and the Federal Highway Administration?

 

And how does that relate the the USPS banning firearms on property under its control?

 

It doesn't matter if you like the sign, or where the sign is posted. The fact is that firearms are not allowed on USPS controlled property unless for "official purposes".

 

 

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/usa.pdf - page 3

10. Post Office Postal regulations prohibit the possession of firearms in their buildings and in their parking

lots or any property they own. Court Case Upholding No Carry on Post Officer Property.

Note: The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado ruled July 10, 2013 that banning firearms in

vehicles on Post Office Property was Unconstitutional. Bonidy vs USPS.

 

If firearms are/were not prohibited in customer vehicles, why did Bonidy vs USPS make it all the way to a U.S. District Court?

[GT1]

The term 'knowingly' doesn't count with this one(The case of a PO being off limits to any kind of firearm, in any way you can conceive of one).