[higabyte]

18 U.S.C. § 930 : US Code - Section 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.

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to -

(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a
Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such
possession is authorized by law;

This is probably reaching out on a limb, but would this authorize military members to carry into a post office or some other federal building?

 

[Adam5]

This part is rather confusing: " if such possession is authorized by law".

 

[higabyte]

I liked your first answer better haha. But yea, that is the part getting me. I'm not sure what "law" it would be referring to.

 

[Adam5]

I'll look at it again tomorrow after some coffee and sleep and see if I need to change it back.

 

[Gunstar1]

You not only have to check the law but the regulations for the law as well.

From just reading the law, I would assume the authorization the law is talking about is one found in the federal law or regulation section for the armed forces or a particular federal official.

If the law/regulation says you can only carry a firearm while on official duty, then no you probably can't carry into a post office.

 

[Going Postal]

A few weeks ago a new sign appeared on the employee entrance door. That sign basically said that carrying a firearm on USPS porperty is a federal offense.

I do believe that if you went into the lobby to conduct some business you might be OK but I sure wouldn't push the issue. If you are a police officer and you wear your sidearm into the PO then you are OK.

 

[gruntpain1775]

"The 2nd Amendment only applies to the Federal Government not the states" Heard that argument many times...yet here we go, the Federal Government ignores it.

 

[GAGunOwner]

YMMV. IANAL.

If you are in uniform and/or on official duty with the military, and in the course of that duty you have to enter the federal facility with your issued duty-weapon, you appear legal.

If you just want to go pick-up your social security card on your day-off, without any type of orders, with a two day scruff, tennis shoes, and your personal handgun, probably not so much.

 

[Gunstar1]

BTW, there is a lawsuit that was recently filed in Colorado that takes on the Post Office firearm regulation.

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... ostal.html

 

[GAGunOwner]

BTW, there is a lawsuit that was recently filed in Colorado that takes on the Post Office firearm regulation.

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/20 ... ostal.html

Thanks for the link! :righton:

 

[rankhornjp]

how bout the next one?

(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons
in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful
purposes.

emphasis mine

 

[phantoms]

how bout the next one?
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons
in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful
purposes.

From TITLE 18 - PART I - CHAPTER 44 - § 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.

So is there that much hunting going on inside a building or part of a building? :shattered:

 

[rankhornjp]

how bout the next one?
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons
in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful
purposes.

From TITLE 18 - PART I - CHAPTER 44 - § 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.

So is there that much hunting going on inside a building or part of a building? :shattered:

One definition of "incident" is "something that occurs casually in connection with something else." But I'm thinking more along the lines of carrying for self defense is a lawful purpose(as long as state law doesn't prohibit it in government building, which GA does, but that's beside the point).

 

[dunkel]

The "lawful purpose" part does seem to make it ok if you're not otherwise in violation of any laws. At least, that interpretation would make sense. So, really, if you think about it like that...it probably means the exact opposite, as we are dealing with federal law.

 

[CountryGun]

My postmaster has said that firearms restrictions only apply to him, and his employees. He tells me that it only applies beyond the secure parking area (loading dock), and of course I can't carry into the building. Our case may be different. Our post office is leased from a private builder. IDK :?

 

[higabyte]

My postmaster has said that firearms restrictions only apply to him, and his employees. He tells me that it only applies beyond the secure parking area (loading dock), and of course I can't carry into the building. Our case may be different. Our post office is leased from a private builder. IDK :?

You use Harlem?

 

[CountryGun]

My postmaster has said that firearms restrictions only apply to him, and his employees. He tells me that it only applies beyond the secure parking area (loading dock), and of course I can't carry into the building. Our case may be different. Our post office is leased from a private builder. IDK :?

You use Harlem?

Yes, sir!

 

[Spc Satt]

These are the same questions I have been asking for years. Work at the CDC in Chamblee. I'm not wanting to carry into the building but just driving onto campass leaving it in the car would be nice. Some how there needs to be clairification of ( Other lawful pupose in subsection D )

 

[CoffeeMate]

"The 2nd Amendment only applies to the Federal Government not the states" Heard that argument many times...yet here we go, the Federal Government ignores it.

Funny how no one seems to notice that, huh?

Maybe it applies to the "other" Federal Government.

 

[Montieth]

I've carried into a bunch of federal facilities, pretty much all military. Rifles, pistols, seen other folks carrying machine guns, cannons. Of course this was part of WWII events and the Post commander had authorized it.

The best was when a 4 friends arrived at Fort McPherson (US Army ForceCom HQ) for an Army Birthday event. They were the lucky car, pulled to the side for inspection, the gate guards got a look in the back of the SUV, stacked floor to ceiling with WWII kit, gear and weapons, and asked the question, "Are you carrying any firearms?"
All four responded "YES! Quite a few!"
"Very good, have a nice day."

Course this isn't as funny as a bus load of War of 1812 re-enactors going to Canada with several score muskets, cases of black powder, bayonets, swords, pikes, flintlock pistols and the like, all declared at the border on paperwork for the Canadian customs folks. At the very end he asks..."purpose of your visit?"
said the whole busload..."INVADE CANADA!"
"Very good, have a nice trip!"