help!!!

[kelley350x]

I am a project manager for a construction company in Beaumont. We were awarded a contract to rebuilt a roadway at the Port Of Orange. At the entrance to this project there is a sign that says what is NOT allowed on the premises. Weapons is one of the items the sign says is not allowed.

To me it is not a big enough issue to worry about, When I visit the jobsite i leave my gun at my buddies house right up the street. Although I have a contractor that would like to work on this jobsite but he and all of his dump truck operators have their CHL and do not want to have to leave their weapons at home. I told him to call the Port to get more information. He chose to email. The email is below. Does Texas CHl laws apply here?

From: XXXXXXX
To: Joe XXXXXXX <joeXXXXXX@ymail.com>
Sent: Mon, June 28, 2010 11:06:50 AM
Subject: RE: Question about Alabama Street site

Good Morning Mr. XXXXXX,

The Port of Orange is a U. S. Coast Guard (U.S.C.G.) regulated facility and the Port’s Facility Security Plan (FSP) states in part “Dangerous weapons, devices and substances authorized by the owner will be kept in secure areas of the facility.” The port does not consider a vehicle to be a “secure area” for weapon storage. All weapons must be declared and properly secured in lock boxes within our Command/Control Center.

Our FSP is labeled as “Sensitive Security Information” and further states that the written plan is OUOTE: “Sensitive Security Information that is controlled under 49 CFR parts 15 and 1520. No part of this record may be disclosed to persons without a “need to know”, as defined in 49 CFR parts 15 and 1520, except with the written permission of the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration or Secretary of Transportation. Unauthorized release may result in civil penalty or other action. For U.S. Government agencies, public disclosure is governed by 5 U.S.C. 55.2 and 49 CFR parts 15 and 1520.




From: Joe XXXXXX [mailto:joeXXXXXX@ymail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2010 11:10 PM
To: XXXXXXXXX
Subject: Question about Alabama Street site

Mr. XXXXX,

I operate a dirt hauling company and myself and all of my dump truck operators have the Texas concealed handgun license and I wanted to get clarification on the the "no weapons" sign you have posted at your Alabama Street Terminal. Under Texas law I can not find and literature that addresses Coat Guard regulated facilities.

Can a valid license holder carry a concealed firearm on these premises? If not please respond with more information on this subject.

Thanks
Joe XXXXXXX
XXXXXX Service's

[Beiruty]

Off limits my friend, it is Federal premises. DO as in the email, surrender and secure your firearms where noted.

[kelley350x]

We are the general contractor and i have to work with these people on a daily basis, mine has never been through the gate but i have been tempted because the sign is pretty crappy and if you did not know the coast guard had any involvement you would think this site is ran by the county.

I will relay the message to my subcontractor and let him make his own decision on if he wants to lose his license. His thoughts are the same as mine but i just cant afford to take a chance with mine. I like my Job and my CHL...

[Teamless]

make his own decision on if he wants to lose his license.

its not losing your license that the is the problem.
It would be a violation of Federal Law, therefore you could be arrested and jailed, and sentenced to prison.
And you would lose your CHL, but the CHL loss is the smaller of the 2 problems.

Just think of this facility the same as a Post Office - off limits as it is Federal Property, period.

[Purplehood]

I agree. I would not carry.

[kelley350x]

Everyday we walk right past the "no guns" sign and dont think twice because it is not the 30.06, a Post Office, a church, a dr's office, or the other few places we can not carry that are not required to have the 30.06 sign.

They should have to have a signup that says it is federal property, I know ignorance is no excuse but there is not indication that this is a federal site.

[LarryH]

Skip down to the bolded text and you'll see that posted notice is required at the entrance to such a federal facility. I don't know how the authorities would get around that in the case you've stated, but I'm sure they'd find a way if they wanted to hang you out to dry.

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 44--FIREARMS


Sec. 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.
(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(c) A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.
(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(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; or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm in a Federal court facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (d).
(f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.
(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.
(2) The term ``dangerous weapon'' means a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket knife with a blade of less than 2\1/2\ inches in length.
(3) The term ``Federal court facility'' means the courtroom, judges' chambers, witness rooms, jury deliberation rooms, attorney conference rooms, prisoner holding cells, offices of the court clerks, the United States attorney, and the United States marshal, probation and parole offices, and adjoining corridors of any court of the United States.

(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be.

(Added Pub. L. 100-690, title VI, Sec. 6215(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4361; amended Pub. L. 101-647, title XXII, Sec. 2205(a), Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4857; Pub. L. 103-322, title VI, Sec. 60014, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1973; Pub. L. 104-294, title VI, Sec. 603(t), (u), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3506; Pub. L. 107-56, title VIII, Sec. 811(b), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 381.)

[trig]

Everyday we walk right past the "no guns" sign and dont think twice because it is not the 30.06, a Post Office, a church, a dr's office, or the other few places we can not carry that are not required to have the 30.06 sign.

They should have to have a signup that says it is federal property, I know ignorance is no excuse but there is not indication that this is a federal site.

I believe this is no longer the case, no?

[Teamless]

I believe this is no longer the case

Correct Trig, if it is not posted with the proper 30.06, you can carry at Church or Dr. Office

[dicion]

I don't like it.

Especially since they say "It says in our FSP that they're not allowed... oh, but you're not allowed to see the FSP."
So there's some law or some rules, somewhere... but you can't see it or see what authority it has, or any punnishment.
That doesn't fly with me bub.
This stinks to me, and If It involved me on a daily basis, I'd get a lawyer involved.

However, he DID give you an alternative.

All weapons must be declared and properly secured in lock boxes within our Command/Control Center.

Get the procedure to declare and check weapons, and then have every driver do so every time they go to the facility. Make it an annoyance to them.

But, like I said, if it were me, I'd get a lawyer involved to figure out what's horse-hockey, and what's not.

[sjfcontrol]

Everyday we walk right past the "no guns" sign and dont think twice because it is not the 30.06, a Post Office, a church, a dr's office, or the other few places we can not carry that are not required to have the 30.06 sign.

They should have to have a signup that says it is federal property, I know ignorance is no excuse but there is not indication that this is a federal site.

I believe this is no longer the case, no?

Churches must (now) post 30.06 if they want to prohibit CHLs. Doctor's offices were never prohibited by statute -- perhaps you're thinking of Hospitals? Those too must now post 30.06 to prohibit.

[trig]

Everyday we walk right past the "no guns" sign and dont think twice because it is not the 30.06, a Post Office, a church, a dr's office, or the other few places we can not carry that are not required to have the 30.06 sign.

They should have to have a signup that says it is federal property, I know ignorance is no excuse but there is not indication that this is a federal site.

I believe this is no longer the case, no?

Churches must (now) post 30.06 if they want to prohibit CHLs. Doctor's offices were never prohibited by statute -- perhaps you're thinking of Hospitals? Those too must now post 30.06 to prohibit.

That's what I was thinking he was thinking of, but like you said, no longer the case either way.

[kelley350x]

Get the procedure to declare and check weapons, and then have every driver do so every time they go to the facility. Make it an annoyance to them.

these dump truck drivers are paid with my money by he hour, if you annoy the guard shack attendant they tend to spend a little longer searching you vehicle.

[kelley350x]

am i reading this correct? Does the law quote above mean that no matter what a sign must be posted? Does it have to be the 30.06 sign or is there other signs that can be used in a federal facility?

[dicion]

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(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; or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

Ya know.. I wonder if the recent supreme court ruling has any bearing on that last statement, as they defined Self Defense as a lawful purpose to own a handgun...

Just a thought.