• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Open carry in a federal facility - exceptions

Obi Wan

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2013
Messages
35
Location
Washington, Spokane
This site has been a big help to me as I figure out how to handle open carry situations.

Another question popped up while going hiking in a nearby National Forest.
My wife and I were both OC'ing while traveling.
Both firearms were loaded.

But RCW 9.41.050 says this is not legal.
Quoted in relevant part:

RCW 9.41.050
Carrying firearms.

(2)(a) A person shall not carry or place a loaded pistol in any vehicle unless the person has a license to carry a concealed pistol:


However, we are also aware of RCW 9.41.060, which states in pertinent part:

RCW 9.41.060
Exceptions to restrictions on carrying firearms.
The provisions of RCW 9.41.050 shall not apply to:

(8) Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding, only if, considering all of the attendant circumstances, including but not limited to whether the person has a valid hunting or fishing license, it is reasonable to conclude that the person is participating in lawful outdoor activities or is traveling to or from a legitimate outdoor recreation area
;

Considering the fact that we were on our way to go hiking,
RCW 9.41.060 (8) provides an exception to RCW 9.41.050,
so open carrying our loaded weapons in a vehicle while traveling to the hiking area is legal.

Right?

On the way, we stopped by the ranger station to pick up a map or two.
A ranger station is a Federal Facility, so possession is banned by 18 USC 930,
which states in relevant part:

TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
§ 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.


But there appears to be an exception to this rule, which is codified in subsection d:

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes
.

Hiking in the national forest is certainly within the domain of a 'lawful purpose'.
But there was a 'No weapons' sign on the door.

Ok, moment of indecision.
Am I legal to go on in? (option 1)
Or do I leave the loaded gun in the car in the manner described in RCW 9.41.050 (2)(iii)?
(locked vehicle and out of sight)
(option 2)

I chose option 2, because I was not sure of my self...

What is the wisdom of the forum...
should I have been ok to carry inside the ranger station, past the gun buster sign?

Obi Wan
 

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
9.41.050,so open carrying our loaded weapons in a vehicle while traveling to the hiking area is legal.

yes, this is correct, as long as firearms are pistols.

as I understand it, any federal facilities still have to be clearly posted as no firearms areas, so, no I dont think that would be permitted if u walked by the signs and could face charges... smart move leaving it behind...

State law cannot usually preempt federal laws
I am not a lawyer tho... ;)
 
Last edited:

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
18 USC 930(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term “Federal facility” means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.
 
Last edited:

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
18 USC 930(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term “Federal facility” means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

EG post office....
 

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

EG post office....
Incorrect.
39 USC 410
(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, and except as otherwise provided in this title or insofar as such laws remain in force as rules or regulations of the Postal Service, no Federal law dealing with public or Federal contracts, property, works, officers, employees, budgets, or funds, including the provisions of chapters 5 and 7 of title 5, shall apply to the exercise of the powers of the Postal Service.

(b) The following provisions shall apply to the Postal Service:

(1) section 552 (public information), section 552a (records about individuals), section 552b (open meetings), section 3102 (employment of personal assistants for blind, deaf, or otherwise handicapped employees), section 3110 (restrictions on employment of relatives), section 3333 and chapters 72 (antidiscrimination; right to petition Congress) and 73 (suitability, security, and conduct of employees), section 5520 (withholding city income or employment taxes), and section 5532 (dual pay) of title 5, except that no regulation issued under such chapters or section shall apply to the Postal Service unless expressly made applicable;

(2) all provisions of title 18 dealing with the Postal Service, the mails, and officers or employees of the Government of the United States;

Which means that 18 USC 930 does not apply to Post Office Property.

Here is that applicble Post Office regulation:
39 CFR 232.1
(l) Weapons and explosives. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
Incorrect.
39 USC 410


Which means that 18 USC 930 does not apply to Post Office Property.

Here is that applicble Post Office regulation:
39 CFR 232.1

US constitution Article 1 section 8
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This trumps 'your' law
 

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
It's cute to see people who still believe that the federal gov or it's agencies follow any kind of written law
 
Last edited:

MattinWA

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
278
Location
Spokane Washington
I know that this state doesn't either.

But at the least on a state level, we have some power to inflict change. How do we recall tsa and nsa officials and shut down covert domestic spying. Rep or dem gets elected, these programs will continue to operate unhindered.
They all blindly support isreal, whom I believe and history has shown, is our enemy, or at least far from friendly.
Does anyone agree? Or am I crazy
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
But at the least on a state level, we have some power to inflict change. How do we recall tsa and nsa officials and shut down covert domestic spying. Rep or dem gets elected, these programs will continue to operate unhindered.
They all blindly support isreal, whom I believe and history has shown, is our enemy, or at least far from friendly.
Does anyone agree? Or am I crazy

Fairly hard to do that too.

Statist judges just ruled against the peoples right to know about their governments actions. http://www.komonews.com/news/local/...cy-calls-it-critical-privilege-228201191.html

What a bunch of hoey, invented terms like "executive privelege" no such thing in a constitutionally restricted government.
 

Difdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
987
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
State law cannot usually preempt federal laws

Depends on the law. For example, Washington's legalization of cannabis partially overturns the Controlled Substances Act within the borders of the state, at least as it pertains to cannabis. The 9th, 10th, 18th (repealed) and 21st amendments make it pretty clear where the authority to prohibit a substance lies. The feds had the same amount of federal supremacy before they passed and ratified the 18th amendment as they do now...and they had to amend the US constitution to prohibit alcohol. And then the enabling amendment for that got repealed.

Federal statutes almost always trump state statutes, but federal statutes get annihilated where they disagree with the US constitution.
 

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
US constitution Article 1 section 8
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This trumps 'your' law

:banghead:

I was simply pointing out that 18 USC 930 does not apply to post office property, 39 CFR 232.1 does.

I made no statement as to the constitutionality of either. :confused:
 

Obi Wan

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2013
Messages
35
Location
Washington, Spokane
While the above has been mildly entertaining,
should I have been ok to carry inside the ranger station, past the gun buster sign?

Obi Wan
 

Bill Starks

State Researcher
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
4,304
Location
Nortonville, KY, USA
While the above has been mildly entertaining,
should I have been ok to carry inside the ranger station, past the gun buster sign?

Obi Wan

The simple answer is NO....
As to the exception in 930(d)(3) for "the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes," please be aware that there is no federal case discussing the meaning of this specific exception to the law. While some claim it means that a person lawfully carrying a holstered handgun for self defense in a National Park should be able to carry it into the visitor's center, since self defense is "a lawful purpose," the people making such claims are not federal judges. The plain truth is that this provision has never been tested in federal court. The downside of being the first test case is that failure carries the potential penalty of federal prison. Remember that the federal judges who will determine such cases work in federal buildings, and their viewpoint may be colored by their particular circumstance.


 
Last edited:
Top