Search found 5 matches

by KBCraig
Wed May 31, 2006 10:24 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Federal property, again
Replies: 9
Views: 1127

longtooth wrote:Yes & one more of the same question! Who is going to volunteer to be the 1st test case.
Aye, that's always the sticking point, isn't it?

The only thing I have ever heard on this is that if there is an excape they don't want arms on the grounds to be stolen. :roll: :roll: How many escapees are going to take the time in the prison parking lot to pry open trunks, break windows, go through consoles, or glove box... "Excuse me guards, I will run after a while but I am busy for just a minute or two." :banghead:
Like we tell area residents, this is the last place an escapee wants to hang around. If he gets over the fence, he's not slowing down for at least five miles.
If they are going to have a plan to arm themselves the will do it from the prison armory where they know they are.
Just about impossible. If they want arms, they'll have an armed accomplice waiting outside. They really don't want to try to shoot it out, though. The actual weapons and amount of ammo we carry is sensitive information, but let's just say our firepower is... "adequate". :grin:

Kevin
by KBCraig
Wed May 31, 2006 10:20 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Federal property, again
Replies: 9
Views: 1127

txinvestigator wrote: I was curious as to what status you had, as that affects you under state law.

I don't think I am going to be of much help on the federal laws, as I wouldn't know where or how to search the fed laws. However, reading what you put here, I see it like you do.

State law allows carry exemptions for certain federal LEO's;
Ah, I didn't realize that's what you were asking, when you wanted to know about LEO status.

No, we're not peace officers by Texas law, nor any of the recognized "special agents". We're exempt from state or local laws regarding carry, except for any state (not local) laws banning carry on government property. We're also not exempt from any state laws allowing private property owners to ban carry on their property.

The government property thing is not a problem in Texas, but Arkansas is a minefield of places that are off limits.

Kevin
by KBCraig
Wed May 31, 2006 2:58 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Federal property, again
Replies: 9
Views: 1127

txinvestigator wrote:I am sorry, I don't know what LEOSA is.
Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 (.pdf format) Often referred to as "HR 218", but that's not accurate.

It's really not all that relevant to the discussion about parking lots. I only mentioned it by way of pointing out that my coworkers and I can carry almost anywhere in the U.S., but have always been told that to have a gun in the car at work would be illegal. Now I'm not sure that it is illegal.

Kevin
by KBCraig
Wed May 31, 2006 1:43 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Federal property, again
Replies: 9
Views: 1127

txinvestigator wrote:First, that made my head spin.... :willynilly: lol
Yeah, it's a bit long. Sorry! But, I wanted to get the relevant laws cited for everyone to see.

Refresh my memory about your LEO qualification again.
Arrest authority is 18 USC 3050. Annual firearms qualification is mandatory.

With few exceptions (doctors and chaplains aren't allowed to qualify with firearms), BOP personnel meet the definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" under LEOSA. The central office in DC, and the regional offices, whose personnel don't traditionally qualify on the range, have arranged range qualification so that their people will qualify under LEOSA as well.

Kevin
by KBCraig
Wed May 31, 2006 12:44 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Federal property, again
Replies: 9
Views: 1127

Federal property, again

I work at a federal prison. I'm covered under LEOSA, so I can carry almost everywhere except to work.

Or, so I've always been told, and believed until I started reading the law.

Background: all entrances to buildings, as well as the driveways, are posted with signs warning that "It is a crime (felony) to bring any firearms, weapons, blah-blah-blah onto the grounds without the approval of the warden." The signs cite 18 USC 1791.

Sec. 1791. Providing or possessing contraband in prison
(a) Offense. - Whoever -
(1) in violation of a statute or a rule or order issued under a
statute, provides to an inmate of a prison a prohibited object,
or attempts to do so; or
(2) being an inmate of a prison, makes, possesses, or obtains,
or attempts to make or obtain, a prohibited object;

shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section.

( . . . )


Note that the law only prohibits providing contraband to inmates, or possession of contraband by inmates. Nothing at all about possession by non-inmates.

I wondered about 1791(a)(1), and any rules or orders issued under the statute, and I found 28 CFR 6.1:

TITLE 28--JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 6--TRAFFIC IN CONTRABAND ARTICLES IN FEDERAL PENAL AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS--Table of Contents

Sec. 6.1 Consent of warden or superintendent required.

The introduction or attempt to introduce into or upon the grounds of
any Federal penal or correctional institution or the taking or attempt
to take or send therefrom anything whatsoever without the knowledge and
consent of the warden or superintendent of such Federal penal or
correctional institution is prohibited.


That's the entire rule. A bit broad and vague, wot? The warden certainly doesn't know or give consent to the contents of my wallet or briefcase. (Should I turn myself in? :roll: )

Since CFRs can only explain and enable implementation of the USC, not add to the law something it doesn't authorize, then any CFR based on 18 USC 1791 is restricted to providing contraband to inmates, or possession by inmates.

It's interesting that the BOP doesn't cite 18 USC 930, which most people are familiar with when it comes to the Post Office debate. Section 930 specifically defines "federal facilities" as "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".

Section 930 also requires that "Notice ... shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility ... and no person shall be convicted of an offense ... if such notice is not so posted ..."

So even under 18 USC 930, parking lots are not restricted.

I'm leaving out any discussion of workplace policies here, because that is a separate matter. But to the best of my ability to determine, the Bureau of Prisons position (that it is a felony to have a firearm anywhere on the grounds except with the warden's knowledge and consent), is not supported by the law.

I look forward to hearing thoughts from Charles, txinvestigator, and others.

Kevin

Return to “Federal property, again”