Post Office carry ban challenge

[cobb]

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19423472

[Northern Gal]

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

[PHATSPEED7x]

Wouldn't it just be easier to keep it concealed....

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[cobb]

Wouldn't it just be easier to keep it concealed....

So we don't need any carry laws, just carry concealed, legal or not. At least that is what I get from your statement, don't matter was is legal or not, just conceal and ignore the laws.

[DeanC]

Oh Boy. I hope they planned this. It looks like a real good test case - they apparently have to go to the post office to get their mail.

Snarky comment - who wants to bet on how long it takes the NRA to get involved?

(Also - I'm not a big fan of the NAGRs. maybe this can help redeem them.)

[mrp]

"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."

It'll be interesting to see how much they spend on public and employee protection. Armed guards? Weapons screening? Armed escorts to and from the parking area? Yeah, didn't think so.

[farmerj]

"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."

It'll be interesting to see how much they spend on public and employee protection. Armed guards? Weapons screening? Armed escorts to and from the parking area? Yeah, didn't think so.

Shopping malls and grocery stores I am betting have more daily traffic than post offices I am thinking so it's not a valid argument really.

[Jeff Bergquist]

"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."

It'll be interesting to see how much they spend on public and employee protection. Armed guards? Weapons screening? Armed escorts to and from the parking area? Yeah, didn't think so.

And are they then accepting legal liability if something bad does happen? Didn't think so.

[whiteox]

The pleadings on this make for some very good reading. I for one can not understand what makes a Post Office a 'sensitive place'. It isn't a government building in the sense that it does not primarily serve to advance the function of the legislative, judicial, or executive branches of government. It's primary characteristic is commercial. People aren't going there to get a permit, petition their legislator, or have a legal dispute decided, they're sending a package or a letter.

Here's a good link to the pleadings. http://comm2a.org/safe-handgun-rosters/53-bonidy-v-usps

[heavy metal daze]

must be the whole "going postal" bit since the 80's.