Question about Post Office.

[TTravis]

I know we cannot carry in a Post Office at all. I don't think it is legal to leave a firearm in my vehicle while parked in their lot. What I am wondering is if it is legal to simply drop a letter off in the drive up mailbox? Sometimes these are in separate lanes keeping traffic out of the parking lot. Someone please clarify this for me. I have not seen the law on this.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

How would they know you have a gun in your vehicle if you don't tell them? I don't know about your post office, but the at the one in Beech Grove the box is along side a public street.

 

[Jack Burton]

It is illegal to carry onto federal property. If you want to make a claim that the lane with the boxes is not actually federal property I don't think it will fly. But as noted, unless you hang a sign out the back of your car who is even going to know you have a "gun on board."

 

[jetmechG550]

Plainfield's drive up box is next to the office in the lot.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What I am wondering is if it is legal to simply drop a letter off in the drive up mailbox?

Where is the mailbox?

Here is Star City I can just drive up to a downtown box. If you have to drive upon their property, no.

There was a lawsuit in Colorado over this. Don't know what happened other than it survived summary judgment last year. I'll look it up.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

It is illegal to carry onto federal property.

Oops. Maybe they'll be nice to me at club fed.

 

[MrsGungho]

Oops. Maybe they'll be nice to me at club fed.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Oops. Maybe they'll be nice to me at club fed.

Joe Hogsett is not going to put you in the BoP for a federal misdemeanor.

Still, don't do it if the box is on Post Office property. Neigh, neigh from federales stay away.

 

[downzero]

It is illegal to carry onto federal property.

That's not quite true.

It is illegal to carry in a federal BUILDING, but whether it's legal to carry on federal PROPERTY depends on the particular property.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I think Jack means in the context of the U.S. Post Office. He was overbroad but we don't run around the conference room table about "Class III guns" or "vendors".

 

[griffin]

There was a lawsuit in Colorado over this.

You're talking about Tab Bonidy. The lawsuit was allowed to go forward, but I don't think anything has happened since late last year.

MSLF -- Legal Cases

 

[TTravis]

Where is the mailbox?

Here is Star City I can just drive up to a downtown box. If you have to drive upon their property, no.

There was a lawsuit in Colorado over this. Don't know what happened other than it survived summary judgment last year. I'll look it up.

Mooresville 46158. They have a lane that parallels the road, but it appears to be on their property.

I would not be advertising that I am carrying and do not expect problems, but with the LTCH showing up on these new fangled license plate scanners in some police cars, I could be visualise getting pulled over as I leave the PO, right or wrong.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

I would not be advertising that I am carrying and do not expect problems, but with the LTCH showing up on these new fangled license plate scanners in some police cars, I could be visualise getting pulled over as I leave the PO, right or wrong.

It doesn't just "show up" if your plate is run by a License Plate Reader (LPR). Theres another thread on that if you care to check it out.

 

[downzero]

I think Jack means in the context of the U.S. Post Office. He was overbroad but we don't run around the conference room table about "Class III guns" or "vendors".

That's also not completely clear. The postal regulation allows carrying firearms for "official purposes," but the operative language of the regulation has to be limited by the statute, which is at least arguably narrower than the regulation.

I don't actually know what the positive law is, having read it. It's not completely clear to me that Congress granted the power to prohibit firearms from their property to the USPS. If nothing else, some firearms are mailable, long guns are mailable by anyone, and a licensed dealer can mail a handgun, so obviously all firearm possession cannot be a crime in USPS property.

I also think that it's time that Congress revisit this idea and revise the statutes to meet the current state of firearm commerce and ownership, but I'm probably just dreaming.

As always, I'm not a lawyer, and this is just the observation I've made as a citizen reading the laws and my response.

 

[eldirector]

I'm also wondering what the "official purpose" part of their rule means?

If I am mailing a letter, I am there for an "official purpose", am I not?

 

[BlueEagle]

It depends; is the letter an official letter? In an official envelope?

 

[eldirector]

It depends; is the letter an official letter? In an official envelope?

It has their over-priced "official" stamp on it, and is going into their official blue box. All names and addresses conform to their standard. I would be at the office ONLY to mail said letter, or conduct other business specific to that office (purchasing the over-priced stamps, or registering to vote, for instance).

So, yeah.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

This is why I stamp "OFFICIAL" all over my pistol and magazines.

 

[Kmann]

I work for the USPS and we have been advised (on numerous occasions) that even though the state law allows for leaving your firearm in your vehicle while at work, this does not apply to federal property. Although our parking lot is fenced off and clearly marked as federal property. Parking in the "public" parking area was never addressed. My opinion is, as long as you are there as a customer in the public parking area, leave it in your vehicle and go about your business. The law is very agrivating to me since I drive over 40 miles to work and have to be without my firearm. I feel this inhibits my abilitt to protect myself to and from work of a situation should arise. But what can I say, can't fight federal government.

 

[cosermann]

Does "federal property" include property that the feds don't own, but are rather renting or leasing from the owner?

BTW, I thought this excerpt from the previously posted link was interesting: " 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(l). This regulatory prohibition, which carries a $50 fine or imprisonment for 30 days, or both, is broader than the federal statute, which prohibits private possession of firearms in federal facilities, except those firearms carried “incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.”

$50 fine and/or 30 days - that's it?

Also seems like carrying for SD under a state license would be a "lawful purpose."

Hmm. I'm curious to see how the case plays out.