Posted on 07/11/2013 7:57:26 AM PDT by marktwain
DENVER, CO. A Colorado federal district court ruled today in favor of a Colorado man and a national gun rights group holding that a U.S. Postal Service regulation barring firearms in its parking lots violates their right to keep and bear arms under the Constitution. The district court ruled, “openly carrying a firearm outside the home is a liberty protected by the Second Amendment [and the] parking lot adjacent to [Avon’s Post Office Building] is not a sensitive place [such that] an absolute ban on firearms is substantially related to [Defendants’] important public safety objective.” Tab Bonidy, who is licensed to carry a handgun and regularly carries a handgun for self-defense, drives several miles from his home, where mail delivery is not available, to Avon to collect his mail. On arrival in Avon, however, he is barred by federal regulation from carrying a firearm, or parking his vehicle if it contains a firearm, on Postal Service land. In July 2010, Mr. Bonidy asked that the regulation be withdrawn; the Postal Service refused. Mr. Bonidy and the National Association for Gun Rights filed their lawsuit in October 2010.
“We are pleased the court struck down the Postal Service’s regulation as it applies to the Avon parking lot,” said William Perry Pendley of Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF); MSLF represents Mr. Bonidy and the group.
In 2007, the Postal Service renewed its total ban on firearms on Postal Service property, first promulgated in 1972:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on Postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on Postal property, except for official purposes."
39 C.F.R. § 232.1(l). This regulatory prohibition, which carries a fine, 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.” 18 U.S.C. § 930(d)(3). This statutory exception does not apply in federal court facilities, where a total ban is enforced. 18 U.S.C. § 930(e)(1).
The Postal Service’s total ban on firearms possession impairs the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment even when individuals are traveling to, from, or through Postal property because the Postal Service does not allow people to store a firearm safely in their vehicles. Anyone with a hunting rifle or shotgun in his car, or a handgun in his glove compartment for self-defense, violates the Postal Service ban by driving onto Postal Service property. Thus, the ban also denies the right to keep and bear arms everywhere a law-abiding gun owner travels before and after visiting Postal Service property.
Mountain States Legal Foundation, founded in 1977, is a nonprofit, public-interest legal foundation dedicated to individual liberty, the right to own and use property, limited and ethical government, and the free enterprise system. Its offices are in suburban Denver, Colorado. More about this case: Bonidy v. USPS
Read the Court's Order: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This does raise important notes to gun carriers.
1) The decision was by the US District Court of Colorado. This means it currently just applies in Colorado. When appealed, it will go to the US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. If upheld by the 10th, it will apply in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Kansas and Oklahoma (only). Only then might it go to the SCOTUS. But if the USPS does not appeal, it will only apply in Colorado.
2) Even at such time as the decision exists in your area, typically the only way Post Offices will know will be if their bureaucratic system tells them. Since many gun owners know that even police are often not up to date on gun laws, this means that the Post Offices will not have a clue.
So if this Post Office regulation is overturned in your area, do not assume they know. So do them a favor and *tell* them of the change. Even if they don’t believe you, they will check up on it.
Think of it as saving some other gun owner(s) hassle from being arrested for having a gun in a Post Office parking area.
What's more lawful than the second amendment, or at the very minimum, self defense?
To read this means that you can carry lawfully in federal facilities for purposes of self-defense.
REINSTATE THE BAN!!!!11!!!!!1111leventy!!!1111
We can’t have armed maniacs stealing all the Sharper Image catalogs at gunpoint!!!!!
I never use the post office.
Never. They send me junk mail. My gifts go via UPS. My rent is paid in person. My family gets email the same day I send it, and some pictures are sent by phone.
Rather than privatize, they should disestablish it.
Be sure when you tell them that you don’t have a gun in your car, or they could test your assertion by having you arrested.
If the law is illegal, or is no law at all, they use the process to punish.
Colorado Ping ( Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
Is the parking lot ban because the USPS doesn’t want competition for its wackos who carry, brandish and fire theirs inside the buildings?
A bit of good news!
“Do the people who openly carry, like in Arizona, openly carry the holstered guns into the Post Office? You see people everywhere openly carrying holstered guns.”
They do not open carry in the post office. It is one of the “unarmed victim zones”.
“parking his vehicle if it contains a firearm”
Hypothetically, a twin of mine may have violated that one
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.