New Sign at the Post Office
| Author |
Message |
|
Srigs
|
Post subject:  Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:30 pm |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:40 am
Posts: 3752
Location: East Suburbs
|
My head hurts! 
We just want an official answer. 
_________________
Srigs
Side Guard Holsters
"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking" - George S. Patton
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Timothy Nelson
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:03 pm |
|
| Senior Member |
 |
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 2:40 pm
Posts: 379
Location: Hopkins
|
Never seen a posting at Hopkins Post Office, but I'm sure there is one. The guys there know me well, always there... no idea... what is the official word? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
halvey
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:54 am |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 5:56 am
Posts: 112
|
Quote: (3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes. I guess we have to ask:
Is it lawful to carry with a permit?
Is it for a lawful purpose?
And the fact that Utah specifically put in there statue you cannot carry in a Post office, says it is not a federal crime to do so.
Seems pretty clear we can carry in a PO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
squib_joe
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:12 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:37 am
Posts: 606
|
|
I need to send a package by airmail to my sister Isn't that a lawful purpose?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dick Unger
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:03 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
|
|
In Minnesota with your permit, personal protection is a lawful purpose for carrying your gun. In theory you could open carry your long gun. But then Phorvik would need more than $50,000 maybe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
grayskys
|
Post subject: Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:07 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:53 pm
Posts: 1725
|
Dick Unger wrote: But then Phorvik would need more than $50,000 maybe? Huh???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
plblark
|
Post subject: Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:57 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:41 am
Posts: 4468
|
grayskys wrote: Dick Unger wrote: But then Phorvik would need more than $50,000 maybe? Huh??? Given that Phorvick is a lawyer I thik he was saying you'd probably have to pay him more that $50K to defend you if you decided to be the test case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DeanC
|
Post subject: Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:53 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
|
Not to mention you'd be in Federal court, not lil' ole Hennepin County district court.
Of course, now that I think about it, Rybak & Coleman have pledged not to enforce Federal immigration laws, maybe they won't let the police respond to a man with a gun at the post office call?
_________________
I am defending myself... in favor of that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
grayskys
|
Post subject: Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 12:57 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:53 pm
Posts: 1725
|
DeanC wrote: Not to mention you'd be in Federal court, not lil' ole Hennepin County district court. Of course, now that I think about it, Rybak & Coleman have pledged not to enforce Federal immigration laws, maybe they won't let the police respond to a man with a gun at the post office call? Only if you are an illegal alien 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dancar
|
Post subject: Don't ASK - Do TELL Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:40 am |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:48 am
Posts: 121
Location: St. Louis Park, MN
|
Quote: I guess we have to ask:
Is it lawful to carry with a permit?
Is it for a lawful purpose?
Don't EVER ask!!! Why give them the power to simply say no and put the burden of proof (ie test case) back on you? You need to have an attorney send a letter to the postmaster of that branch quoting the full text of the law, demonstrating that the sign is not in compliance with current carry law in Minnesota, and demanding that the sign either be taken down or made to be in compliance with Title 18 USC 930, since it obviously contradicts that law and implies lawful carry is illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kimberman
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:03 pm |
|
| Wise Elder |
 |
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:48 pm
Posts: 2782
Location: St. Paul
|
DeanC wrote: Has anybody written to the Minneapolis Postmaster and asked him if carrying a pistol under a Minnesota Permit to Carry a Pistol is considered both "lawful purposes" and "official purposes"? Waste of time. He's going to parrot the company line. The uncertainty works to their benefit.
When I was a government lawyer, I often witnessed agency personnel take positions that weren't supportable because "no one will ever go to the expense of challenging us" and "most people will obey anything we say." The bureaucrats who made these decisions were correct in this opinion, of course, and very accustomed to "lawmaking" by directive. As one said: It's cheap, it's quick, and it'll last until I retire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.
All times are UTC - 6 hours
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
