Connect with us

Laws & Rights

Why Are Guns Banned in Post Offices, Anyway?

Published

on

If the answer to that question is, “Well, that’s just how it is,” then we should ask again, more loudly.

For decades, we gun owners have simply accepted that if we’re going to carry concealed, we can’t go to the post office. It’s been illegal to bring a firearm into a post office since 1972, but, like all “gun free zones,” criminals feel completely free to ignore it. There was a highly publicized post-office mass shooting in 1986, 14 years after the ban, and carried out by a disgruntled employee, not a citizen customer. (For you whippersnappers, the Edmond, Oklahoma massacre is where we got the phrase “going postal.”)

So here’s the real question: If the Second Amendment specifically says that the government cannot infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms, then why are government-owned facilities allowed to ban guns? That’s the question the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is asking right now, and they’re doing it in a Texas federal court. Here’s what SAF has to say about it:

“The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuitย in Texas challenging theย ban on firearms carry in U.S. Post Offices and on postal property as violations of the Second Amendment, andย is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.

Joining SAF is the Firearms Policy Coalition and two private citizens, Gavin Pate and George Mandry, bothย Texas residents. Named as the sole defendant is Attorney General Merrick Garland, in his official capacity. Theย complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division.

Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys R. Brent Cooper and S. Hunter Walton at Cooper & Scully, P.C. inย Dallas, and David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C.

โ€œUnder the Bruen ruling of June 2022,โ€ noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, โ€œifย the government seeks to restrict firearms in a particular location as a โ€˜sensitive place,โ€™ it must prove that itsย current restriction is sufficiently analogous to a well-established and representative historical analogue.โ€

โ€œCurrent federal law bars the โ€˜knowing possessionโ€™ of firearms in federal facilities, which includes postย offices,โ€ said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. โ€œMillions of legally armed private citizens, whose dailyย routines may include visits to post offices to pick up or drop off mail, are directly impacted by thisย infringement. There is no well-established, representative historical analogue to justify this regulation, whichย violates the Second Amendment.โ€

 

Trending

Copyright ยฉ 2021 Brand Avalanche Media, LLC. Guns & Gadgets Daily is a wholly owned subsidiary of Brand Avalanche Media, LLC. This copyrighted material may not be republished without express permission. The information presented here is for general educational purposes only. MATERIAL CONNECTION DISCLOSURE: You should assume that this website has an affiliate relationship and/or another material connection to the persons or businesses mentioned in or linked to from this page and may receive commissions from purchases you make on subsequent web sites. You should not rely solely on information contained in this email to evaluate the product or service being endorsed. Always exercise due diligence before purchasing any product or service. This website contains advertisements.