TexasCHLforum.com

A federal judge in Denver has allowed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Postal Service's ban on guns in post offices to go forward.

Hope they win.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19423472" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also hope the case is resolved in favor of the BofR: Amendment 2.
Needing to regularly pick up mail, it is a pain to first stop at the office, lock up CCW and then proceed to local PO.
BTW - 5th Circuit Court ruling IS binding for 5th district.
If this goes to USSC, then a uniform, national standard would be set.

Given recent decisions (Heller and McDonald) by a similarly-made-up SCOTUS, seems there's a chance to have the PO ban rescinded.

Fingers crossed.

USPS legal reponse wrote:Large numbers of people from all walks of life gather on postal property every day," the motion stated. ". . . The Postal Service is thus responsible for the protection of its employees and all the members of the public who enter postal property.

So does this mean if I'm ever mugged, robbed, raped, or murdered on USPS property it is THEIR responsibility and thus their LIABILITY for failing to protect me or allow me to protect myself?

Maybe if any statement made by a winning side in a lawsuit ALSO became precedence, attorneys wouldn't spout off at the mouth so much

A-R wrote:

USPS legal reponse wrote:Large numbers of people from all walks of life gather on postal property every day," the motion stated. ". . . The Postal Service is thus responsible for the protection of its employees and all the members of the public who enter postal property.

So does this mean if I'm ever mugged, robbed, raped, or murdered on USPS property it is THEIR responsibility and thus their LIABILITY for failing to protect me or allow me to protect myself?

Maybe if any statement made by a winning side in a lawsuit ALSO became precedence, attorneys wouldn't spout off at the mouth so much

I wrote a post that the living victims or families of the deceased victims of a college campus shooting should sue the state because they effectivily tied the students' hands behind their backs. Mr. Cotton replied saying something about a law preventing such lawsuits. I didn't ask further of it. I remember watching some TV lawyer show though ( ) where even though there was such a law, the judge allowed the lawsuit anyway. Can judges do that?

Thomas wrote:

A-R wrote:

USPS legal reponse wrote:Large numbers of people from all walks of life gather on postal property every day," the motion stated. ". . . The Postal Service is thus responsible for the protection of its employees and all the members of the public who enter postal property.

So does this mean if I'm ever mugged, robbed, raped, or murdered on USPS property it is THEIR responsibility and thus their LIABILITY for failing to protect me or allow me to protect myself?

Maybe if any statement made by a winning side in a lawsuit ALSO became precedence, attorneys wouldn't spout off at the mouth so much

I wrote a post that the living victims or families of the deceased victims of a college campus shooting should sue the state because they effectivily tied the students' hands behind their backs. Mr. Cotton replied saying something about a law preventing such lawsuits. I didn't ask further of it. I remember watching some TV lawyer show though ( ) where even though there was such a law, the judge allowed the lawsuit anyway. Can judges do that?

Yes.

A judge here in DFW recently allowed a civil suit to proceed where a family was suing a city's animal control for euthanizing their dog by accident. The law only allows someone to recover the market value of the dog, but they argued that this dog was a valued family member and the judge said they could sue for emotional loss and punitive damages.

LSL wrote:Also hope the case is resolved in favor of the BofR: Amendment 2.
Needing to regularly pick up mail, it is a pain to first stop at the office, lock up CCW and then proceed to local PO.
BTW - 5th Circuit Court ruling IS binding for 5th district.
If this goes to USSC, then a uniform, national standard would be set.

This. The PO I unfortunately have closest to me is always full of people that are likely non-CHLers packing anyway. I'd like to even my chances a bit if a native gets upset with the Chinese lady at the front of the line paying for everything in pennies and not understanding that you can't just mail something to "Phoenix, Arizona" (that you need a zip code!!!).