• 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.

Guns On Post Office Property?!?!?!?

Lenny Benedetto

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
470
Location
VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
imported post

I just saw this on another forum...Some food for thought. How many carry daily and just leave your gun in the car when you have to enter the Post Office???

Hell I did it yesterday!!!!



http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gun-R ... rking-lots



On October 14, 2009 the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the conviction of a postal employee for possessing a gun in his vehicle while parked on a non-public United States Postal Service (USPS) parking lot in violation of a federal regulation at 39 CFR 232.1(l). The court’s opinion in United States v. Doroson can be found here.

Mr. Doroson had appealed the conviction on the ground that the USPS gun ban violated the Second Amendment. The Fifth Circuit panel disagreed, writing that

“the Postal Service used the parking lot for loading mail and staging its mail trucks. Given this usage of the parking lot by the Postal Service as a place of regular government business, it falls under the ‘sensitive places’ exception recognized by Heller.”

The Court did not indicate whether the Second Amendment would protect gun owners from prosecution if they possess a gun in the public areas of USPS property. Even though USPS parking lots are often indistinguishable from other public parking lots, and are not posted to warn the public of the gun ban, USPS spokesperson Joanne Vito told the Examiner.com that 39 CFR 232.1(l)

“applies to anyone coming into a Post Office or a Postal facility. The regulation prohibiting the possession of firearms or other weapons applies to all real property under the charge and control of the Postal Service. . . . Both open and concealed possession are prohibited, so storage of a weapon on a car parked in a lot that is under the charge and control of the Postal Service would be prohibited.”
However, adding further complexity to issue, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) explains here that postal customers may legally mail long guns through the USPS:

“(B7) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm through the U.S. Postal Service?
A nonlicensee may not transfer a firearm to a non-licensed resident of another State. A nonlicensee may mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. The Postal Service recommends that long guns be sent by registered mail and that no marking of any kind which would indicate the nature of the contents be placed on the outside of any parcel containing firearms. Handguns are not mailable. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.” (emphasis and color in original).
Philip Van Cleave, President of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Virginia’s largest gun rights group, said that the Postal Service is just “setting a trap” for the many gun owners who now carry their guns on a daily basis and may not even know about this parking lot gun ban. “Even the National Park gun ban allowed folks to store their guns in their cars,” said Van Cleave, “and Congress repealed that milder ban” effective February 2010.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
imported post

Good info, but the question this begs to be asked is "How did anyone know he had the gun in his car, and how would they know about yours?"

And then of course we come to the issue of "Why isn't private property (your car and everything in it) private property any more?"

Good find though, thanks for letting us know.
 

Lenny Benedetto

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
470
Location
VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
imported post

My new concern is that the Stratford post office is in the center of a strip mall. The parking lot is the same one for it and more than 10 other stores a couple of restaurants and a Movie theater. So now am I breaking the law carrying while I am shopping? Eating in a restaurant? Watching a movie? Since the P.O. and the other stores share a common sidewalk also?!?!?!

Its another case of a BS court decision that needs better defining!!!
 

romma

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
333
Location
Southeast, Connecticut, USA
imported post

I think there should be at the very least an exemption for guns onFederal Property if theyare locked in ones vehicle... That vehicle is Private property, and the Post office and all federal buildings and property are at least funded in partby it'scitizens.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
imported post

romma wrote:
I wonder if he will appeal to the Supreme Court?

I hope so. But we really need something based on "Why are our rights invalidated when we enter a federal building?". I guess that is a pretty big leap though when we are still working on people being arrested for lawfully carrying a firearm.
 

gluegun

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
359
Location
Central, Connecticut, USA
imported post

Lenny Benedetto wrote:
My new concern is that the Stratford post office is in the center of a strip mall. The parking lot is the same one for it and more than 10 other stores a couple of restaurants and a Movie theater. So now am I breaking the law carrying while I am shopping? Eating in a restaurant? Watching a movie? Since the P.O. and the other stores share a common sidewalk also?!?!?!
There is a big difference between a Post Office who shares the premesis with other businesses and a stand alone Post Office that is entirely contained on owned by the USPS. In this case the USPS employee was in a non-public parking lot owned entirely by the United States Postal service. From the decision, "the Postal Service owned the parking lot where Dorosan's handgun was found, and its restrictions on guns stemmed from its constitutional authority as the property owner."

Thought I'm not familiar with the area, in the situation you describe in Stratford, the parking lot doesn't sound like it's owned by the USPS. Instead they are leased usaged of the parking lot. Federal Prohibitions to firearm possession at that Post Office stop at the door to the building.
 

gluegun

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
359
Location
Central, Connecticut, USA
imported post

Does anyone have additional information on this? All we have is the decision, none of the facts surrounding the case.

What about the facts of his lower court case?
What briefs were filed?
Why did he rely only on his 2nd amendment rights and not bring up his 4th amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures?
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
imported post

gluegun wrote:
Why did he rely only on his 2nd amendment rights and not bring up his 4th amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures?

Right. And why was he getting his car searched in the first place?

If he was threatening someone in the office or something, he is not going to be a good stand up guy for a supreme court case.
 

Lenny Benedetto

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
470
Location
VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
imported post

I think that they would have had grounds for arrest just for the bag with the loaded mag that he left in work...I could be wrong, but ammo is considered an explosive.

On another note, they probably would have searched his car anyway...by law they did have the right to, even the sign on the parking lot said they could.
 

Lenny Benedetto

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
470
Location
VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
imported post

Douglas in CT wrote:
Lenny Benedetto wrote:
...I could be wrong, but ammo is considered an explosive
Hi Lenny,
Now why would you say that?

The power in the ammo is not classified as an explosive.
- It is a fast burning chemical compound that acts as a propellant.
Call it what you want! You cant mail it. so thay must have some regs about it.
 
Top