Help me interpret this gun law, WA St

deanf, I was getting ready to comment on that.

I have walked into our local post office, both open and concealed carry. This was after I notified both our local PD and the Postmaster that regardless of looks, I would be armed (I was willing to be a test case). I did this every day for 3 years... I ran a grocery store right across the street from the P.O. I would go in once a day to pick-up, deposit mail, and/or purchase stamps for the store.

No one bothers with me.

Title 18, Chapter 44, § 930(d)(3) is an affirmative defense. They know it. They knew I knew it. They weren't willing to open themselves up to a Blivens action.

Of course, in other jurisdictions, you may not get the same mileage I got. Most likely you would go to jail. Pay thousands for your defense. Then pay thousands more if you decided to file the Blivens action.

Or...

Maybe it was my B.O?
 
Grande Cajones

Senior, you have some cajones gigantes. My has is off to you. Affirmative defenses are a nice backup but they have to be pled and proved at trial. This following arrest and booking. Also, attitudes vary from place to place. If I may generalize, cities tend to be more uptight about guns whereas most rural folks are quite comfortable with them-even if the folks are federales.

I believe that the city/country distinction may have something to do with self-reliance.
 
I have walked into our local post office, both open and concealed carry. This was after I notified both our local PD and the Postmaster that regardless of looks, I would be armed
Click to expand...

So was this a freestanding USPS facility, or was it a little post office in a store?

Also, I think if you had called the FBI or the Postal Inspector, we might have gotten a more accurate measurement of your cajones.

You see the local constabulary have no jurisdiction in the P.O., and the local postmaster might chair the Friends of the NRA dinners in your area, for all we know.
 
Constitutional Obsessive-compulsive

You may well be right about the private post office. I read nothing in the CFR about the local post master being authorized to waive the prohibition. As for our Constitutional afflictions, I am a constitutional obsessive compulsive. I obsess about a strict construnction of the Constitution and I am compeled to tell everyone who will listen that the Bill of Rights is non-negotiable.:cool:
 
deanf said:
So was this a freestanding USPS facility, or was it a little post office in a store?
Click to expand...
Rupert is a rural town of almost 4K population. It is a freestanding facility.
Also, I think if you had called the FBI or the Postal Inspector, we might have gotten a more accurate measurement of your cajones.
Click to expand...
A few details that I left out are in order.

I first talked to the Postmaster of Heyburn. This guy is a shooting buddy and also shares an interest in computers. I have known him for several years. He was hesitant about the whole thing and referred me to the Idaho Postmaster in Boise.

While an email conversation was going between him and myself, I also talked with the Rupert Postmaster. The Rupert Postmaster didn't have a problem with my carrying concealed. If no one saw my gun, no one could complain. The Idaho Postmaster finally replied that according to his legal types, I was within the law.

At that point, my cajones were not the issue.
You see the local constabulary have no jurisdiction in the P.O., and the local postmaster might chair the Friends of the NRA dinners in your area, for all we know.
Click to expand...
So wrong it's not even funny. If something occurs within the postoffice, do you think they will call and then politely wait for the FBI to show up? No. They will call the local gendarmes and they will handle it, until such a time as the Feds arrive and take over jurisdiction.

And finally, our local Postmaster does not chair the Friends of the NRA dinners, but he is a participant.

What you fail to see is that I did my homework before testing the waters. I look before I leap, don't you?

Regardless of all that. It was you who brought up the document over at The Gun Zone. Judging from your reaction to my little story, you don't agree with the attorneys opinion. Judging from your location in Washington State, I suppose I can see why.
 
Judging from your reaction to my little story, you don't agree with the attorneys opinion.
Click to expand...

No actually I do.

I just know that theory and practice are two different things. A lot of attorneys can have opinions about things. That doesn't mean that's the way it will be seen by the U.S. Attorney or the Federal Court.

If something occurs within the postoffice, do you think they will call and then politely wait for the FBI to show up? No. They will call the local gendarmes and they will handle it, until such a time as the Feds arrive and take over jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

Again, theory and practice. Local law enforcement generally do not have jurisdiction on federal property, absent local agreements to the contrary. But of course local law enforcement will do whatever it takes to keep the peace, regardless of jurisdiction.

Also, what would be the basis for your Blivens (sic) action?
 
Last edited:
Also, what would be the basis for your Blivens (sic) action?
Click to expand...
Bivens.. Don't know why I keep mispelling that! Violations of my civil rights under color of Law: False Arrest and/or imprisonment.

As for the theory and action... That's why I said that in the big cities, things probably won't work the same as here, in rural Idaho.
 
That's why I said that in the big cities, things probably won't work the same as here, in rural Idaho.
Click to expand...

But your potential Bivens action would be heard in a big city. By the 9th Circuit. The 9th Circuit is historically hostile to the 2nd Amendment (if that would be the basis of your Bivens action) especially at the appellate level.

Also, the Bivens theory of remedy applies only to federal officers, and the Supreme Court has consistently refused to extend Bivens liability to any new category of defendants. Your story does not mention the potential involvement of any federal officers.

Also, which "civil" rights are you talking about?

Also, I am with you in spirit here, man. I am only trying to get you ready for your day in court in front of the 9th Circuit by challenging some of your legal theories. The U.S. Attorney is not going to give you a free pass.
 
Not so much as theory but observation

I have sat in Federal court and watched people being arraigned for this very practice. Moreover, I have had two years experience as the prosecutor assigned to a federally-funded drug taskforce. I'm here to tell you that state and local officials cooperate with the Federal Authorities on a daily basis and vice versa. Also, any Federal Parks Officer of Federal Protective Officer or Postal Police Officer may well tap a law-abiding gun toter on the shoulder in a post office and put into practice my theory.

The penalty may only be a year in jail and a $5,000 fine but permission of the Post Master is not a defense. It is far more important that we lean on Congress to over-ride the stupid CFR. The Federal authorities are out gunned in the parks as it is. They need all of the help they can get. The historical background of this CFR has a lot to do with poaching in National Parks. There aren't many protected species that can surripticiously be killed with a 9mm.
 
OK, this is getting way far away from the original topic. Let's let this thread veer drop here.

I'll collect my thoughts and open a new thread on this... Unless one of you guys do it first.
 
Antipitas, thanks for saying it before I got back to the internet. That is an intresting topic, but more than a little off target.
Anybody else have input on the original question?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top