Post Office Law Suit to Repeal Carry Rule

[C-dub]

Sorry, but I'm still confused. There is a much higher probability of me having to defend myself in a post office than spotting an eight point buck. So, switching "incident to" to "necessary for" still doesn't work for me.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Well, I'm not sure of my inference in a legal sense,
or just a comedic sense, but it seems from the descriptive
legal text above:

We could all go into a Post Office with a Remington 700 in a
deer-endangering caliber,

BUT

we can't go in there with our sidearms and CHL's.

Are we all clear now? :-)

SIA

If there was legal hunting in the Post Office, but since there isn't, you can't bring your Remington either.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Sorry, but I'm still confused. There is a much higher probability of me having to defend myself in a post office than spotting an eight point buck. So, switching "incident to" to "necessary for" still doesn't work for me.

The only things you are going to legally do in a Post Office is 1) buy postage; 2) ship something; or 3) check your post office box. (Yeah, I'm leaving out other postal activities like certified mail, etc.) Carrying a handgun is not "incident to" or "necessary for" any activity you are going to do in the Post Office.

Does this help?

Chas.

[C-dub]

Yes, but I thought you meant that this exception made a weapon normally used for hunting okay. Excluding other statutes that make carrying any gun in a PO illegal, of course.

[Jasonw560]

39 CFR 232.1(p), states "Nothing contained in these rules and regulations shall be construed to abrogate any other Federal laws or regulations of any State and local laws and regulations applicable to any area in which the property is situated." So would 39 CFR 232.1 be in conflict if it is read to prohibit a CHL from carrying at the post office, since a statute can't contradict a regulation?

[Shorts]

I ship USPS. I find it irritating I cannot stop by there to drop packages if I'm out and about running other errands. I'd sure like to see this change.

[wheelgun1958]

Sorry, but I'm still confused. There is a much higher probability of me having to defend myself in a post office than spotting an eight point buck. So, switching "incident to" to "necessary for" still doesn't work for me.

The only things you are going to legally do in a Post Office is 1) buy postage; 2) ship something; or 3) check your post office box. (Yeah, I'm leaving out other postal activities like certified mail, etc.) Carrying a handgun is not "incident to" or "necessary for" any activity you are going to do in the Post Office.

Does this help?

Chas.

Other that self-defense. It may not be an 'activity' but a weapon is 'incident to' self-defense.

[b322da]

Sorry, but I'm still confused. There is a much higher probability of me having to defend myself in a post office than spotting an eight point buck. So, switching "incident to" to "necessary for" still doesn't work for me.

The only things you are going to legally do in a Post Office is 1) buy postage; 2) ship something; or 3) check your post office box. (Yeah, I'm leaving out other postal activities like certified mail, etc.) Carrying a handgun is not "incident to" or "necessary for" any activity you are going to do in the Post Office.

Does this help?

Chas.

Other that self-defense. It may not be an 'activity' but a weapon is 'incident to' self-defense.

If you carry concealed in the Post Office, be sure you engage in self-defense while there, because you can be assured that "thinking about it" is not incident to self-defense. :-)

Elmo

[KD5NRH]

The only things you are going to legally do in a Post Office is 1) buy postage; 2) ship something; or 3) check your post office box.

I can't do any of the above if I'm dead or robbed, so it's certainly necessary to all of those that I do things like breathe and protect my wallet and keys from BGs.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The only things you are going to legally do in a Post Office is 1) buy postage; 2) ship something; or 3) check your post office box.

I can't do any of the above if I'm dead or robbed, so it's certainly necessary to all of those that I do things like breathe and protect my wallet and keys from BGs.

Being equipped to defend your self is not engaging in lawful self-defense. If an asthmatic carries a bronchodialator in his pocket in case he has an asthma attack, he's not engaging in providing medical treatment to himself until he has to use the bronchodialator.

We can play word games until the end of time. The phrase "incident to" is controlling and carrying a handgun is not "incident to" anything you are going to do in a Post Office. That said, anyone who wants to test this analysis is welcome to do so. I'll send you a Christmas card each year you are in Club Fed.

Chas.

[C-dub]

Charles, I totally believe you and have no doubt that I would end up in Club Fed if I were caught carrying a handgun in a post office. The part I'm confused about is the difference between hunting and self defense. Are you saying that I could carry a rifle into a post office to buy some stamps or pick up a package that required a signature and I would be legal? Would I have to prove that I was going hunting when the police showed up? I'm not going to do this, but I'm trying to understand the logic here.

[ScottDLS]

Charles, I totally believe you and have no doubt that I would end up in Club Fed if I were caught carrying a handgun in a post office. The part I'm confused about is the difference between hunting and self defense. Are you saying that I could carry a rifle into a post office to buy some stamps or pick up a package that required a signature and I would be legal? Would I have to prove that I was going hunting when the police showed up? I'm not going to do this, but I'm trying to understand the logic here.

I'm going to take a shot at this based on my understanding, not Mr. Cotton's...so this is just my opinion...which I understand you didn't ask for but I am nonetheless offering...

- Carrying a rifle in the post office isn't generally legal because it isn't incident to hunting. In what post office are you going to be (engaged in) hunting?
- Carrying a pistol in a post office isn't legal because it isn't incident to defending yourself, unless you are actually engaged in defending yourself at the time (i.e. drawing down on the bad guy, shooting him, etc.).

One LEGAL activity involving carrying a handgun in a post office might be...a FFL shipping the handgun to another FFL via USPS. In this case bringing the gun to the post office is clearly incident to legally shipping it via USPS, and therefore legal under 18 USC 930.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Charles, I totally believe you and have no doubt that I would end up in Club Fed if I were caught carrying a handgun in a post office. The part I'm confused about is the difference between hunting and self defense. Are you saying that I could carry a rifle into a post office to buy some stamps or pick up a package that required a signature and I would be legal? Would I have to prove that I was going hunting when the police showed up? I'm not going to do this, but I'm trying to understand the logic here.

No, I'm saying you cannot carry any firearm or dangerous weapon into a Post Office. You cannot hunt in a Post Office so the "hunting" exception is not applicable to Post Offices.

Likewise, carrying a self-defense handgun is not "incident to" anything you are going to be doing in a Post Office. People who want to rely upon the 18 U.S.C. 930(d)(3) defense or exception argue that 1) engaging in self-defense is a lawful purpose (it is); and 2) that merely carrying a handgun is engaging in self-defense (it isn't). One carries a handgun to be equipped for self-defense, but one is not engaging in self-defense until they are attacked. If merely carrying a handgun constituted self-defense, then so does locking your car door, setting your home's burglar alarm at night, refusing to shop at a stop-and-rob after dark, or any of a number of things we do in the name of safety.

Chas.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Charles, I totally believe you and have no doubt that I would end up in Club Fed if I were caught carrying a handgun in a post office. The part I'm confused about is the difference between hunting and self defense. Are you saying that I could carry a rifle into a post office to buy some stamps or pick up a package that required a signature and I would be legal? Would I have to prove that I was going hunting when the police showed up? I'm not going to do this, but I'm trying to understand the logic here.

One LEGAL activity involving carrying a handgun in a post office might be...a FFL shipping the handgun to another FFL via USPS. In this case bringing the gun to the post office is clearly incident to legally shipping it via USPS, and therefore legal under 18 USC 930.

This is an excellent example.

Chas.

[C-dub]

- Carrying a rifle in the post office isn't generally legal because it isn't incident to hunting. In what post office are you going to be (engaged in) hunting?
- Carrying a pistol in a post office isn't legal because it isn't incident to defending yourself, unless you are actually engaged in defending yourself at the time (i.e. drawing down on the bad guy, shooting him, etc.).

That first one was my question several posts back in this thread. I agree.
The second one I understand, but don't necessarily agree with, but that's okay.

I thought that it was explained that it was okay to carrying a gun for hunting because that was an exception. Did I misunderstand?