Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Exempted Persons under TITLE 18 USC § 930 and TITLE 39 § CFR 232.1

  1. #1
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    A while ago, there was a question about OC or CC in a USPO. I received correspondence back from an email that I sent to the Attorney General, State of Virginia, Bob McDonnell Office of the Attorney General on 15 April 2007. I will first post what I sent (with the help of Lockman, of course), and, the response that was sent back on 16 April 2007 (I don't usually check my home email that often because I am hardly here):

    15 April, 2007

    Attorney General, State of Virginia, Bob McDonnell
    Office of the Attorney General
    900 East Main Street
    Richmond, Virginia 23219

    Subject: Exempted Persons under TITLE 18 USC §930 and TITLE 39 §CFR 232.1

    Dear Attorney General Bob McDonnell,

    I am requesting the Attorney General’s office provide guidance concerning information provided in TITLE 18 USC §930 - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in federal facilities and TITLE 39CFR §232.1 - Conduct on postal property as to persons exempted and possible conflicts within.

    All references to armed persons shall represent persons not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms under federal, state or local laws and who are authorized, licensed or permitted to carry firearms for any lawful purpose in the state of Virginia. The scope of this inquiry is not intended to include areas of federal facilities considered sterile; whereupon, weapon screening and armed security or police are provided, such as airports or court buildings.

    Specifically, I request the following questions to be addressed:

    Is self-defense considered “other lawful purpose” under 18 USC §930(d)(3)?

    Is the public access area of a postal facility considered a federal facility?

    Would a person exempted under 18 USC §930(d)(3) still be subject to prosecution under 39CFR §232.1(l)? If so, is the exemption recognized in 18 USC §930(d)(3) rendered inoperable under any other provisions of federal code?

    Under 39CFR §232.1(l) the only exemption is “except for official purposes”. What constitutes “official purposes”? Is the transaction of normal business in the public area of such facility an “official purpose”? If not, would a person licensed or authorized to carry firearms in the course of their business or duties be subject to prosecution if armed while conducting normal business in the public area of such facility if the transaction is not related to their business or duties?

    39CFR §232.1(l) does not specify buildings but “postal property”. Does this prohibit the possession of firearms within the approach, collection or parking areas accessible to the public located outside of the buildings?

    Forty-eight states allow the carrying of concealed firearms for personal protection, thirty-seven of which are “shall-issue” states. Many states do not require licensure to carry firearms for self-defense as long as the firearms are not concealed. Concealed or open, millions of citizens legally carry firearms for personal defense in the normal course of their daily affairs. Clearly, 18 USC §930(d)(3) does provide exemption for “other lawful purposes”.

    It is my intention to share the opinions of the Attorney General’s office on these matters with other individuals and groups to educate people exercising this right to defend themselves and their families. Putting into practice a natural right protected by our Constitution should not place any person in fear of arrest or prosecution.

    I trust your opinion will help clarify this matter and provide guidance to prevent well- intentioned persons from becoming entangled in a legal situation that they understood to be constitutionally protected and lawful conduct.


    Respectfully submitted,


    Smurfologist





    Here is the response that was received:

    Mr. Smurfologist:

    Thank you for contacting the Office of Attorney General Bob McDonnell.

    Section 2.2-505 of the Code of Virginia is the statutory provision that authorizes the Attorney General to render official advisory opinions. That section provides as follows:

    The Attorney General shall give his advice and render official advisory opinions in writing only when requested in writing so to do by one of the following: the Governor; a member of the General Assembly; a judge of a court of record or a judge of a court not of record; the State Corporation Commission; an attorney for the Commonwealth; a county, city or town attorney in those localities in which such office has been created; a clerk of a court of record; a city or county sheriff; a city or county treasurer or similar officer; a commissioner of the revenue or similar officer; a chairman or secretary of an electoral board; or the head of a state department, division, bureau, institution or board.

    Unfortunately, the Attorney General and his staff are required by Virginia law to provide legal advice only to the Governor and to state agencies and are precluded from giving advice to private citizens. However, if one of the above mentioned individuals were to make the request, we would respond directly to that person. I hope that this information is helpful to you.


    Sincerely,

    Jacqueline A. Kotvas

    Office of the Attorney General

    Special Assistant for Community Relations


    Does anyone know any of the listed that can help us attain the answer that we are seeking? Thanks in advance!

    2nd Amendment..........Use it...........Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    Why were you bothering the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia regarding the interpretation of Federal law/regulation?

    You might have saved yourself time and effort directring your inquiry to either the US Postal Service's Office of the Postal Inspector, or to the US Attorney General's Office.

    You might get a decent assist in receiving an answer if you contact youyr Representative or Senator and ask them to request either/both of the offices above to provide you with information.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    skidmark wrote:
    Why were you bothering the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia regarding the interpretation of Federal law/regulation?

    You might have saved yourself time and effort directring your inquiry to either the US Postal Service's Office of the Postal Inspector, or to the US Attorney General's Office.

    You might get a decent assist in receiving an answer if you contact youyr Representative or Senator and ask them to request either/both of the offices above to provide you with information.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    Skidmark, I can't find the original post pertaining to all of this. But, I believe (Lockman can refresh my memory) I actually sent a letter to the Attorney General of the US (the one that resigned), and, I posted it; I did not receive a response. So, I sent it to the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia since there is a conflict with the laws pertaining to this.

    I will do as you suggest because I really want to get to the bottom of this. Thank you so much!

    2nd Amendment............Use it............Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1

    Post imported post

    Hey - I just read your post and I am new to this, but I would be interested in what you have found out (if anything) regarding your question and what is considered "normal business". I am a Postal Clerk and I believe in the 2nd Ammendment and I also have just received my Concealed Carry Permit. I was reading the 18 U.S.C. Section 930 which prohibits the carrying of a Weapon into a federal facility and so forth except for the subsection c which allows for a Federal Official who is "authorized by law" to carry a weapon. Am I, as a Postal Clerk, considered a Federal Official, and thereby allowed to carry my weapon and would thereby be exempt from prosecution under this section and allowed to defend myself by virtue of the 2nd ammendment? I doubt it. I would be interested on your opinion and what you have discovered. Tim

  5. #5
    Regular Member Smurfologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    TimmyBD wrote:
    Hey - I just read your post and I am new to this, but I would be interested in what you have found out (if anything) regarding your question and what is considered "normal business". I am a Postal Clerk and I believe in the 2nd Ammendment and I also have just received my Concealed Carry Permit. I was reading the 18 U.S.C. Section 930 which prohibits the carrying of a Weapon into a federal facility and so forth except for the subsection c which allows for a Federal Official who is "authorized by law" to carry a weapon. Am I, as a Postal Clerk, considered a Federal Official, and thereby allowed to carry my weapon and would thereby be exempt from prosecution under this section and allowed to defend myself by virtue of the 2nd ammendment? I doubt it. I would be interested on your opinion and what you have discovered. Tim
    I am still waiting for a response........Of course, when I do get one, I will post it. If there is someone out there that want to help push this along, please feel free to help in any way you can.

    2nd Amendment.........Use it...........Or, lose it!!:X
    The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1791!!

  6. #6
    Regular Member ProShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
    Posts
    4,671

    Post imported post

    FWIW, I made 2 phone calls not too long ago regarding this.......

    One was to an ATF agent that I had other business with. I asked her simply if a citizen could lawfully carry in the post office and she said a curt "no". I then read section 930 to her, specifically the "other lawful purpose" section. She stuttered for a moment and said "ohhhh, hhmmm, well I'm going to have to check with the division counsel and get back to you". I imagine that "no" was her quick blanket answer and after hearing that statute, she didnt have a good response in the "no" frame of mind so she passed the buck to the "division counsel". Oddly enough, she never called me back.

    A week later, I called a Postal Inspector that I was acquanted with through my previous life. I left him a brief message and he called me back when I was unavailable and left a return message. My next message to him was a detailed message regarding my question. Oddly enough, he never called me back either. Perhaps he didnt want to be put on the spot of having to provide me with the truth.

    I'm not an attorney but I have read legal opinions on this matter and I know how to read a statute. To that end, I know what I do when I go to mail a letter, buy stamps, or conduct other lawful purposes....
    James Reynolds

    NRA Certified Firearms Instructor - Pistol, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Refuse To Be A Victim
    Concealed Firearms Instructor for Virginia, Florida & Utah permits.
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    Sabre Red Pepper Spray Instructor
    Glock Certified Armorer
    Instructor Bio - http://proactiveshooters.com/about-us/

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas, USA
    Posts
    429

    Post imported post

    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not an attorney but I have read legal opinions on this matter and I know how to read a statute. To that end, I know what I do when I go to mail a letter, buy stamps, or conduct other lawful purposes....
    +1. I read it the same way and act accordingly. IMO lawful carry for personal protection is a lawful purpose. But then I'm in Texas where concealed is concealed, so my theoretical actions do not have the same gravity as they would if I were OC. And as always IANAL. I hope some authority will eventually weigh in on this. Good work and good luck.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •