Federal judge rules ban on firearms in post offices unconstitutional
Federal judge rules ban on firearms in post offices unconstitutional
A federal judge in Florida ruled a U.S. law that prohibits people from having firearms in post offices to be unconstitutional, the latest court decision declaring gun restrictions violate the Const…
A federal judge in Florida ruled a U.S. law that prohibits people from having firearms in post offices to be unconstitutional, the latest court decision declaring gun restrictions violate the Constitution.
U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, a Trump appointee, cited the 2022 Supreme Court ruling “New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen” that expanded gun rights. The 2022 ruling recognized the individual’s right to bear a handgun in public for self-defense.
The judge shared her decision in the indictment that charged Emmanuel Ayala, U.S. Postal Service truck driver, with illegal possession of a firearm in a federal building.
You're viewing a single thread.
So anyone surprised by this ruling must believe that folks, licensed and legally carrying, are disarming and leaving their shit in the car to go into specific buildings. That's stupid. All that does is leave a gun one broken window away from someone already committing crimes who in the excitement of finding a weapon might suddenly graduate to doing much worse crimes. Keeping your piece on your person, holstered and concealed is the only responsible approach if you are going to carry.
Um, I don't take my gun in. I remove the magazine, empty the chamber, remove the slide and carry the slide in one pocket and the magazine in another. The lower, the part legally defined as a gun, is locked in the car and useless without the other parts. Never had anyone break into my car while at a post office. Gotta imagine that the rate break-ins at post offices is lower than the average for any given area.
Part of being a responsible gun owner is not putting yourself at risk of a felony charge for bringing a gun into a federal building. Once you have a felony you don't get to carry any guns anywhere.
Heads up, watch out for bullet setback. Constantly rechambering the same rounds can push the bullet back into the casing slightly and increase pressures, it is generally advised to avoid doing this, but if you must, unload the entire mag and put that one on the bottom, so you aren't just unchambering/rechambering the same 2rnds over and over, thus decreasing the likelihood one will cause a catastrophic failure.
Also, by leaving the serialized lower in the car, it is still useful, as someone could easily break that window and take the regulated part, then overnight a complete slide to their house for ~$300*, including shipping, slap em together, and now they've bypassed a NICs check and got a pretty fucking good deal on a glock if you ignore that whole "getting caught with a stolen gun sucks" hidden cost. It really is more responsible to keep it holstered, it's just that the law forces irresponsibility.
*$300 is the quote for a complete glock slide. If not glock, still no NICs, just more money, like $500ish.
Good call on rotating ammo. But the law says that the lower is the gun and guns aren't allowed in the post office. So that part stays in the car and the rest goes with me. I'm not going to do anything that's going to jeopardize my ability to carry. Getting caught with a gun in a post office is a felony and a felony means not having any guns at all.
Totally understandable, I was just talking about how stealing the lower isn't "useless" as some have described it, since that's the regulated part and the rest can be ordered to the door by a 12yo with mommy's (or any stolen) credit card. And about how the law itself is irresponsible, as the best place for a gun is always its holster (or safe but ykwim.) Totally understandable to do it though since the law makes you, the law just shouldn't make you and talking about that is the only way it'll ever change.
But why? When have you ever been in a post office and felt like you needed a firearm to defend yourself? Or the grocery store? Or any of the other places people are pushing to be able to intimidate people by wearing a firearm that immediately lets people know, "look out for me". I've never been to a place I felt like I needed to be armed, and if I did I would probably stop going there. Living in fear of everyone around you to the point you can't mail a package without your gun probably means you should be seeking some counseling, not a carry permit.
EDIT - Oops extra period.
A lot of people who wear them on holsters could just forget, and it's unreasonable to punish people for something they have the right to carry on their person anyway.
I'm actually kind of with the right wing on this one. It is a stupid rule.
Having carried for years. You don't forget. But I would still support a misdemeanor or civil fine charge for a gun owner who was immediately repentant about it when the police showed up.
Your comment pretends that concealed carry doesn't exist. I'd rework that section so you don't look like you missed an obvious counterpoint. While you are at it I'd avoid pretending that you know the motivation of someone carrying. If a person carries for a reason other than what you said it makes it very easy to discard your whole position and because of the way you phrased it not one person you are trying to reach will even begin to agree with your description of their motivation even if that is actually the reason they carry.
Must be nice to just decide not to go places. Not everyone has that luxury.
Or the grocery store?
On my feed rn there is an article about a kid who shot up a grocery store possibly getting the death penalty, so this is actually a pretty good example. "Yes."
to be able to intimidate people by wearing a firearm that immediately lets people know, "look out for me".
Concealed carry. Open carry is antiquated, it comes from the idea that since everyone carried back in the day that only a criminal intent on victimizing another would conceal their arms. This is obviously patently stupid to assume, and now proponents of open carry like to tout that it intimidates those that would otherwise wish to victimize them. In reality it just makes them a target. But the way the laws are set up in most states, it is legal to carry concealed with a permit, and legal to carry openly without one, frankly I think that should be reversed, but it is the actual reason most people who open carry choose to do so. Their supposed reasoning that "it intimidates would be attackers" is just a justification because "I don't wanna get a permit" sounds less convincing.
I've never been to a place I felt like I needed to be armed, and if I did I would probably stop going there.
Well, I can tell you live in a good neighborhood. Unfortunately many people in the world are in a less financially stable situation and are forced to be in areas that aren't exactly safe, like their local neighborhood grocery store, gas station, park, street, apartment, etc. I'm sure they'd love to live in a gated community, but $500 for a glock and another $100 for a stack of 9mm is a lot cheaper.
Living in fear of everyone around you to the point you can't mail a package without your gun probably means you should be seeking some counseling, not a carry permit.
I carry a pocket knife to cut open boxes, snip errant strings from shirt's armpits, etc. To do that, I have to have the knife on me when I encounter the box or feel/notice the string. I carry the gun to defend myself from guys with knives or guns who are attempting to use them to kill me or someone near me, to do that, I have to have the gun on me when the guy with a knife decides to victimize me. Can't use what you don't have.
I also have a leatherman in my backpack I use all the time, I never feel like I need pliers in the grocery store either, but I didn't spawn in the grocery store, there's a whole world outside of it, and again grocery stores have been the target of criminals before.
I envy you. I have lived places where being armed was the responsible move. I still didn't carry everywhere or every day though. There are bad places, even in the US.
I just don't see how throwing gas on the fire makes it less out of control. Are you really prepared to shoot someone? Wouldn't a better solution be for sane gun laws that don't put them everywhere, and doesn't make it so you have to feel in danger everywhere you go? I just don't see how our constant bowing to gun lobbing to make sure that the streets are constantly full of guns is helping anyone. And it just can't be a coincidence that the US is the country with the biggest problem, and also the one where we are constantly trying to arm everyone, everywhere.
For me? Yes. But I'm also a combat veteran. I also would love to live in that world where we didn't get fucked over by gun companies. And I'm not saying people should carry everywhere. Some gun owners really are just scared alpha males who want a security blanket. But we live in the world we live in and until it changes we do what we have to if we don't live in a safe area.
Intimidation? Maybe read what you are going to respond to. Who is being intimidated by a fully concealed firearm? And what I would give to be as blissfully unaware of my surroundings as you to believe that I could never be endangered by man or beast. You live in a dream. The world is dangerous.
When is the last time a man or beast attacked you? I mean that in all seriousness, I'm honestly curious with a reaction like that to someone that doesn't feel safe knowing everyone around them is just waiting to be some kind of Jason Bourne.
Last time. Beast: about 4 months ago. I live in a rural area plagued with feral hogs. I have been charged by them on multiple occasions. Shots get fired.
Ok fair enough, that I can agree with. I still don't know why anyone would need to be armed in the Post Office though.
Mostly just to not leave it in the car. Even a locked car really isn't that secure. On your person is the most secure location. I've had a window broken out and the radio stolen when I went to the mall. I've also been harassed at gas stations, and once was threatened with a knife for my keys. I did draw my pistol on him. He ran, it was over. I'm glad I had it on me. I hate that a firearm has just become part of my clothes. It's not fun. I'm not trying to be a hero. I damn sure wouldn't get it out in anger. If I shoot someone I will be going to jail, because that's standard procedure. Even if I'm determined to be in the right, it will probably take months to retrieve my firearm. The whole thing is a huge pain in the ass at best.
You sound like a very reasonable gun owner to me, sorry for the trouble. Just hope you can understand that from my point of view I know nothing about the other person with a gun. It could be the guy that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, but sees himself as Dirty Harry just itching to pull his piece out and end a "lesser life". Who knows when he is firing off rounds like it's a movie who he might actually hit. That type of scenario I think is most people's worst fear when they see rulings like this.
If people had to take some kind of renewing mental health assessment, along with some kind of "I actually know how this thing works" assessment every couple of years I think that would also help ease minds. That being said, I think things like an AR-15 should be something that stays at a range (envision some kind of weapon holding/transfer program for moving them between ranges and/or from the dealer) as it has no practical real world application except death (but I'm sure they are fun to shoot).
You didn't bother me any. Lots of people out there behaving foolish. Georgia, I'm afraid, is an open carry state. Those are the ones I don't trust. Their holsters are always ill fitting, barely attached to thier owners. They never seem to be paying any kind of attention to their surroundings, but they all wear the same oddly forced looking scowl. And it's always some absolute canon of a pistol, too. And this is at, like, Walmart on Sunday. Those guys are trying to live an action movie. ARs get a bad rap, but I'm sure you aren't interested in my defense of the platform. It's just a rifle though. Not a particularly high powered one either.
Bad risk assessment. Most Americans are deeply confused about the things that are likely to kill them vs the things they actively worry about. Maybe that's not you, but statistically it almost certainly is.
Unless you are a young man in a concentrated poverty neighborhood, your chances of encountering deadly interpersonal violence are vanishingly small. You're far more likely to be killed by heart disease due to an unhealthy lifestyle, yet the vast majority (not all) of gun-owners pay little or no attention to that aspect of their personal well-being.
The need some people feel to carry a gun isn't rooted in accurate risk assessment and instead is about a desire to feel empowered or because like my old man --a Vietnam combat vet-- they have a blown-out fight or flight response so that everything looks like a threat even when it's not. (This is why so many Vietnam vets --again, like my old man-- ended up living off in the woods by themselves; that way they could be in control of their environment at all times which is also why they always carried firearms.)
But ultimately the real problem is that many people aren't honest with themselves about why they are so wedded to carrying.
I conceal carry where ever I can. It's not about "intimidating" people. No one around me knows I have a gun on me.
A lot of people carry a firearm for self protection, these are not the people you want to take guns away from. We just want to live our lives and not be the victims of any criminals with bad intentions.
So anyone surprised by this ruling
I am alarmed and concerned by this ruling, but not really surprised.
Take it apart. They can get the bolt slide for breaking the window. Barrel, grip/lower, and spring go in your pockets. I've never had a place turn me away after doing that. Government buildings though should have lockers. That's the most responsible way of handling it.
Barrel, grip/lower, and spring go in your pockets.
Cargo shorts enjoyer?
They're just so useful.
The lower/receiver is the part that is legally a firearm.
I've never had a place turn me away after doing that
You carry a lower into gun-free zones and they're cool with it? That's the same legally as carrying the whole gun.
Technically yes. In reality you just don't bring a gun if you know your going to a gun free zone. This in regards to private businesses.
But then you're back to "It's literally fascism if I'm not allowed to always have the ability to impulsively clear a room for even 5 seconds."
Well, according to the NRA anyway.
What? A reasonable person with a gun?!? That's got to be enough to get you kicked out of the NRA for life.
Most gun owners forget the "well regulated" part of their favorite amendment. Every town in the Old West bigger than a general store had a prohibition on carrying guns in town. Concealed weapon? Straight to jail. It's evidence that you were going to kill or main someone.
Yeah well I started in the Army, without any NRA propaganda as a kid. If anything the opposite since Columbine happened while I was a kid.