Although this is touched on in some of the links in 2aHawaii's thread at:
http://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=561.msg2567#msg2567it is of critical importance to those of us with concealed carry permits and use the post office. (I myself have all my mail sent to my POB.)
The plaintiffs, Debbie and Tab Bonidy, are suing the U.S. Postmaster General and the local Postmaster for implementing the ban on firearms in or on Post Office property. They live in a Avon, Colorado, a very rural area.
The post office does not deliver mail in their area. They have to travel ten miles round trip to collect their mail at the Avon Post Office, which provides free post office boxes to all the folks in that area.
They are both licensed concealed carry permittees according to Colorado State law (C.R.S. § 18-12-206).
Because of the ban on firearms in Post Offices, the Bonidys allege that
25. By prohibiting Plaintiffs from possessing a functional firearm on real property under the charge and control of the USPS, Defendants currently maintain and actively enforce a set of laws, customs, practices, and policies that deprive Plaintiffs of the right to keep and bear arms, in violation of the Second Amendment.
(Note that this is the same language that is used in the Hawaiian Chris Baker suit.)
I used to rely on subsection D of the original law on Post Office carry, which allowed bringing a gun in for lawful purposes, that "lawful purpose" being self-defense.
Then about three years ago I heard that some rules were changed to no longer allow this, but I did not have the opportunity to research it further. So I just said the heck with it, parked on the street, disarmed and secured my weapon pursuant to local law, and went in to do my business. Hell's bells, I don't bring a set of law books along with me just to stop at the post office while running errands.
And if I just wanted to drop urgent mail off in their drop box and not even go into the building, I would have been a criminal for the ten seconds it took to drive into the lot and drop my mail in the outside boxes and take off again.
A federal judge in Denver has recently allowed the Bonidys' lawsuit to go forward.
The original complaint can be found here:
http://ia600500.us.archive.org/13/items/gov.uscourts.cod.122068/gov.uscourts.cod.122068.1.0.pdfToo bad we have to go to court to challenge every little infringement "they've" dreamed up over the past decades. But I am heartened by the fact that the Postmaster is being sued both
personally and in his official capacity.
And note this:
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
They're also suing the local Postmaster in Avon in the same suit, so I guess that buys them the "two or more" part.
I'm glad to see that we're setting some
personal tails on fire, as well as the well-protected "official capacity" tails.
I think it was Judge Learned Hand who said, "The trouble with corporations is they have neither a soul to damn nor an ass to kick."
Sub the word "administrators" for "corporations" and you'll see where I'm coming from. Maybe suing individually will afford us the aforementioned asses and souls to kick and damn.
Terry, 230RN