TexasCHLforum.com

Is it legal to carry at a contract post office? It is a contract office in a little strip center. Property is owned by an individual and there are a few business in the building including the contract US Post office.

I thought I've read somewhere that if it is not Gov't property, then carry is ok. Did a search but could not find it.

The key is premises owned or leased by the federal government where federal employees work regularly.

In the gray areas, it all comes down to how lucky you feel. Is the Postal Police or FBI going to pounce on you with a warrant when you're mailing a letter?

- Jim

I don't understand the issue. If there is any question, why not just put the gun under the seat and go in do your business and then go on your way. Why invite a a big legal fee to either:

* Defend your CHL; and/or,
* Prove that you're right?

What's wrong with me?

Oldgringo wrote: I don't understand the issue. If there is any question, why not just put the gun under the seat and go in do your business and then go on your way. Why invite a a big legal fee to either:

* Defend your CHL; and/or,
* Prove that you're right?

What's wrong with me?

What about someone working in the building? Not for mailing a letter or package. I would think the law is the same for either one.

Oldgringo wrote: I don't understand the issue. If there is any question, why not just put the gun under the seat and go in do your business and then go on your way.

These unattended post office satellites are a likely location for robbery or more nefarious forms of assault, especially for women.

What people seem to forget is that the federal offense of carrying on post office property is a minor misdemeanor. And, for all that is discussed, no one can point to a case of it being prosecuted.

- Jim

Oldgringo wrote: I don't understand the issue. If there is any question, why not just put the gun under the seat and go in do your business and then go on your way.

Same reason I didn't just skip the CHL and save a couple hundred bucks on class and licensing fees; violent confrontations happen, and they happen where you're not expecting them.

I apparently didn't understand the issue. It was my understanding that the OP was going to mail a letter or whatever one does at a PO. I missed the part about him/her hanging out for an extended period at the satellite PO.

What a CH licensed dolt I am !

seamusTX wrote:The key is premises owned or leased by the federal government where federal employees work regularly.

That's the 18 USC 930 definition, which does not apply to post offices.

KD5NRH wrote:

Oldgringo wrote: I don't understand the issue. If there is any question, why not just put the gun under the seat and go in do your business and then go on your way.

Same reason I didn't just skip the CHL and save a couple hundred bucks on class and licensing fees; violent confrontations happen, and they happen where you're not expecting them.

Spot on. If criminals told us when and where they would attack, we would go somewhere else.

http://www.rmgo.org/images/gun-free-zone-cLR.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We could discuss this issue forever.

No one really knows the meaning of a law until it is prosecuted and appealed. I doubt anyone is ever going to be prosecuted under this law or regulation, because no one who has the authority to prosecute violations of post-office regulations is going to be looking for licensed concealed-carry holders in post offices.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:We could discuss this issue forever.

No one really knows the meaning of a law until it is prosecuted and appealed. I doubt anyone is ever going to be prosecuted under this law or regulation, because no one who has the authority to prosecute violations of post-office regulations is going to be looking for licensed concealed-carry holders in post offices.

- Jim

Well, at least until the day a CHL holder has to defend him/herself in a post office. That particular person will have to deal with a legal can of worms afterwards, I'm sure.

More specifically, until a CHL holder has to shoot in self-defense.

Part of the reason why I say this law is unlikely to be tested is that CHL holders tend to avoid being the target of crimes in the first place, through situational awareness and conducting themselves in ways that make criminals look for softer targets.

In the case of a self-defense shooting, I would expect the feds to let local authorities sort out the issue. Then the defender will either be found justified or charged with a state crime.

It would be rather picayune of the feds to then charge the defender with the moral equivalent of a speeding ticket.

Prosecuting someone under an untested law opens the possibility of the law being declared invalid or unconstitutional. That is what happened to the earlier federal "gun-free school zone" law.

- Jim

NcongruNt wrote:Well, at least until the day a CHL holder has to defend him/herself in a post office. That particular person will have to deal with a legal can of worms afterwards, I'm sure.

If they only find out because you need it, then it truly has become a situation of "tried by twelve or carried by six." I know which I'd prefer, regardless of the ultimate outcome.

Oldgringo wrote:I apparently didn't understand the issue. It was my understanding that the OP was going to mail a letter or whatever one does at a PO. I missed the part about him/her hanging out for an extended period at the satellite PO.

What a CH licensed dolt I am !

I never knew that only people who hung out at places for extended periods of time would become victims of attack.

Guess I'll have to shorten my visits.

The risk is proportional to the amount of time that you spend in a place.

What I understood the OP to be talking about was a retail establishment that also had post office boxes and maybe sold stamps and some similar functions. These places are private businesses.

Retail establishments are the most likely places to be robbed, especially those that are open early and late, have little traffic, and are quick-in-quick-out.

If you go in for one minute, you have much less risk than someone who works there all day.

- Jim