Category Archives: Gun Rights

More Brady Campaign Score correlations

Posted on by


I updated my Brady Campaign Score for state gun laws correlations. Previously I used FBI UCR data from 2005 with Brady Scores from 2007. My present results use only 2007 data and added correlations for the total violent crime rate, murder, and rape. The spreadsheet is here but the interesting part is as follows:





























FBI Data Type

Correlation Coefficient


Violent crime rate per 100K

0.016


Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter rate per 100K

-0.072


Forcible rape rate per 100K

-0.491


Percent murdered with firearm

0.056


Percent murdered with knife

0.287


Percent murdered with weapon other than firearm

0.028


Percent murdered with hands, fists, feet, etc.

-0.114


Remember:



The correlation coefficient always takes a value between -1 and 1, with 1 or -1 indicating perfect correlation (all points would lie along a straight line in this case). A positive correlation indicates a positive association between the variables (increasing values in one variable correspond to increasing values in the other variable), while a negative correlation indicates a negative association between the variables (increasing values is one variable correspond to decreasing values in the other variable). A correlation value close to 0 indicates no association between the variables.


For the most part there is no correlation between Brady Scores and the crime data. The exceptions are there does appear to be a moderate association between good Brady Scores and a decrease in rape and slight increase in the chances that if someone is murdered they will be murdered with a knife in Brady approved states.


The rape data point is a mystery to me. Most men have enough of a physical advantage on the average woman that having “easy access” to a gun would not seem to be an important part of forcing a female victim to comply. If “easy access” to guns were to enable any crime I would think it would be murder or even violent crime in general. But that does not seem to be the case.


Also of interest is that the FBI has footnotes explaining that Illinois didn’t supply much data and that for some unexplained reason Florida was not included in Table 20.


Any speculation, other than random coincidence, on why there is a negative correlation between good Brady Scores and rape rates?

More data points on gun sales

Posted on by

Yesterday Barb and I went on drive. This Thursday Barb has a class in Bellingham so we drove up there ahead of time to make sure she can find it without difficulty during morning traffic. It was a nice day and it was a pleasant drive and we got a chance to talk about a bunch of stuff rather than sitting at our respective desks with our hobbies.


Just prior to leaving we stopped at Joe’s Sports, Outdoor, and More (no relation). I was looking for some .45 ACP brass so I can reload for my Gun Blog 45. Midway is out of stock. The shelf with the brass was nearly empty with only a couple bags with some 7mm brass hanging from a hook. The powder and primer shelves were nearly empty as well. Hmmm…


On the way back from Bellingham we stopped at Kesselring Gun Shop in Burlington. The parking lot was FULL. And this is on the same weekend that WAC had their big show in Puyallup! I found a narrow spot to park between a building and a pickup that was parked such that it was blocking a private road. We went inside to find the store was packed. Every aisle was crowded. There was just barely enough room to move between all the people. I found the brass I was looking for at a reasonable price (considering), paid for it and we left.


One has to wonder if we had put that much money and effort into defeating Obama in November would we have succeeded? Being reactive seldom is better than proactive but that just isn’t the way human nature works. And the money gun owners are spending on firearms, ammo, and accessories could have gone into the election process and ended up in the hands of mainstream media who are one of our worst enemies and instead of into tools of freedom in our own hands.

Quote of the day–Sarah Brady

Posted on by

The Brady Law is still working to block handgun sales to convicted felons, domestic abusers, the mentally ill and other prohibited purchasers, according to a report released today by the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics. In 1997 alone, 69,000 people who were prohibited by law from buying handguns were denied access to these lethal weapons due to background checks. In the four years since the Brady Law was implemented, an estimated 242,000 ineligible purchasers have been stopped from buying handguns.

 

Sarah Brady
June 21, 1998
Sarah Brady Statement on Justice Dept. Report on Brady Law Success
[I find it exceedingly telling that the Brady’s measure their success in terms of the number of people denied the purchase of a firearm. I contend the only valid measurement of the success of a restriction on firearms is whether the average person is made safer by that restriction. In other words the Brady measure ignores safety and celebrates the blocking of people from exercising a specific enumerated civil right.–Joe]

Quote of the day–2009 Montana Legislature

Posted on by

A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.


2009 Montana Legislature
HOUSE BILL NO. 246
[I also like the part where it directs the Montana attorney general to “defend in full” any “Montana citizen whom the government of the United States attempts to prosecute” for violation of federal law concerning a firearm manufactured and retained within Montana. It also provides this protection for firearms with bores up to 1.5 inches (38.1mm) in diameter.–Joe]

Brady Score versus murders committed with a firearm

Posted on by

Recently there has been some crowing about North Dakota having only two murders in 2008 (and neither were committed with a gun):



And of course North Dakota has a very poor score as far as the Brady Campaign is concerned.


While the claims made above are true this isn’t the whole story. It’s an example of cherry picking the data and is very risky if you are a scientist.


Using the FBI Uniform Crime Report (2005) and the Brady Campaign Scores on the states (2007) I came up with some interesting information. Starting with the FBI data I added the Brady Scores and added some additional rows and columns. The result is here*.


The bottom line is that the assuming someone is murdered then correlation between the Brady Score and a particular method of murder are as follows:



  • Weapon:Correlation
  • Firearm:0.009
  • Knife:0.215
  • Weapon other than firearm (including knives):-0.014
  • Hands, fists, feet, etc. (including being pushed):-0.180 0.007

Correlation is a number between -1.0 and 1.0, inclusive. What the above numbers mean is that a good Brady score does not mean there is a reduction in the the percentage of murders committed with firearms. It may mean there is a slight increase in the percentage of murders committed with knives and a decrease in the percentage of unarmed murders in Brady favored states. Another interesting set of data would be to compare the total violent crime rate to Brady Scores. I have done that in the past with the result of discovering there was essentially no correlation. Perhaps I’ll have time to look at that this weekend sometime.


Update: As noted in the comments I made a mistake on one of the formulas in the spreadsheet. This only affected the correlation of the “Hands, fists, feet, etc.” murders with the Brady Score. Instead of there being a slight negative correlation there is instead essentially zero correlation with Brady Scores. I have updated the spreadsheet accordingly.




* Please check my numbers and formulas. The Brady Scores were hand entered and hence are error prone. Also note that the original FBI table does not list Florida. I did not remove it intentionally.

Quote of the day–Sarah Brady

Posted on by

This dramatic decrease in gun violence debunks the gun lobby’s myth that gun control doesn’t work.  Common sense laws can and have worked. The gun lobby claims that ‘an armed society is a polite society’, when, in fact, the opposite is true. These reports show that fewer guns on our streets means less crime and less violence.


While we are grateful for this news, we know that more can and must be done. We have eliminated a number of sources for crime guns but loopholes still exist which allow criminals to ‘lie and buy.’ We need to institute a national one-gun-a-month law to reduce gun trafficking to criminals even further. We need to close the gun show loophole which allows so-called ‘private collectors’ at gun shows to sell their wares to anyone without doing a criminal background check.


Sarah Brady
Chair of Handgun Control, Inc
January 4, 1999
YEAR-END CRIME STATISTICS SHOW GUN LAWS WORK, SAYS SARAH BRADY
[Note the year–1999. Also my next post will be of interest to supporters of this claim of hers.–Joe]

Quote of the day–William H. Neukom

Posted on by

Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 37.3, the American Bar Association (“ABA”), as amicus curiae, respectfully submits that the decision of the divided panel of the D.C. Circuit should be reversed, because the decision improperly rejected the long and consistent line of precedent on which this Nation has built its entire matrix of gun regulation.


William H. Neukom
January 11, 2008
President American Bar Association
Brief of the American Bar Association as amicus curiae supporting petitioners.
[Similar things could have been said about passage of the 13th Amendment or any number of things such as allowing women to vote and laws against using birth control. Hence his justification for rejecting the individual rights viewpoint of the D.C. Circuit carries no weight.


But, assuming his characterization of the nations gun laws is true, then one should reasonable expect the “entire matrix of gun regulation” to collapse under the Heller decision. I wish that were true. I think it’s possible but unlikely. We will have to play our game very, very, well in order to even approximate this.


Based on these two items which Neukum apparently got wrong I must conclude that Neukom doesn’t know what he is talking about and his opinion, in general, should be severely discounted.–Joe]

Quote of the day–M. Carol Bambery

Posted on by

[T]he NCVS [National Crime Victimization Survey] and researchers have concluded that women who offer no resistance are 2.5 times more likely to be seriously injured than women who resist their attackers with a gun. While the overall injury rate for both men and women was 30.2%, only 12.8% of those using a firearm for self-protection were injured. Subjective data from the 1994 NCVS reveals that 65 percent of victims felt that self-defense improved their situation, while only 9 percent thought that fighting back caused them greater harm.

M. Carol Bambery
Brief of amicae curiae 126 women state legislators and academics in support of respondent.
[John Fogh said it a little more succinctly with, ‘Nothing says, “Please don’t rape me.” like multiple jacketed hollowpoints.’ But some people prefer to see the details.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Henry David Thoreau

Posted on by

We cannot but pity the boy who has never fired a gun; he is no more humane, while his education has been sadly neglected.


Henry David Thoreau
Walden Chapter 11. Higher Laws
[Thanks to Shyam who suggested I read The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan who used this quote in his book. I just finished the book about 90 minutes ago. It’s a good book. Perhaps a bit slow and wordy but opinion that might be because I grew up on a farm and have hunted and gathered food as well. A lot of the material covered was already fairly well known to me.


If we could but get the teaching of gun safety and shooting in our schools for all children to learn as they learn to drive automobiles we would be able to win the battle for gun rights. But then if it were taught in the schools that would mean we had already won. So we much teach the children ourselves outside the schools. Still it’s not an impossible task. The improved communication channel of the Internet favor the educated rather than the ignorant and no matter how repressive the anti-gun bigots it’s hard for them to repress our speech, or accomplishments, or recreation, and our way of life without revealing themselves for who they are. They are timid creatures afraid of confronting reality and willing to use the iron hand of government to crush the imaginary demons they manufacture in their narrow little minds from ordinary people who happen to own a gun.–Joe]

Arrested for legally owning guns so guns must be confiscated

Posted on by

This is bizarre, but it’s New Jersey so what do you expect? The guns were legally owned but in a plea bargain the owner paid a small fine and the guns were confiscated:



Goldstein was arrested in March after Northfield police searched his Mount Vernon Avenue home after receiving a report of suspicious objects in his basement. The objects turned out to be old hand grenades and some fuses, but the discovery of a 9mm Uzi submachine gun and what police believed to be the sawed-off shotgun led to Goldstein’s arrest and extradition from Pennsylvania.

Possession of an assault weapon is a third-degree crime in New Jersey, carrying a sentence of as much as five years in prison.

Attorney Amy Weintrob said Goldstein’s Uzi was purchased and registered with the state in 1989 – one year before state law changed to criminalize Uzis as assault weapons.


“The registration was on file with the state of New Jersey,” Weintrob said, “and the Prosecutor’s Office verified the information, and therefore possession of the Uzi was not illegal.”


Housel said Goldstein did voluntarily register the Uzi under its old classification as a rifle in 1989, but after the law changed in 1990 there was a “grace period for (some) individuals who met certain criteria” to register their Uzis under the new classification as an assault weapon. Goldstein’s Uzi was never registered as an assault weapon, Housel said.

“Relying on less-than-complete information from the NRA,” Housel said, “(Goldstein) thought the prior registration was legitimate. Looking at whether there was criminal intent, it’s reasonable that he could have believed the Uzi was registered. The decision by (Assistant Prosecutor David) Ruffenach to do the plea agreement the way he did was a reasonable one.”

Regarding the shotgun, Weintrob said that she and an investigator went to the Northfield Police Department to measure the gun in front of officers. The result, she said, was that the gun was measured at 26.5 inches long, while to be legally considered “sawed-off” it had to be less than 26 inches long overall and less than 18 inches from breech to muzzle.

“That’s when they realized it was legal,” Weintrob said of the Northfield police, who she said were the lead investigators on the case. “The prosecutors realized they couldn’t proceed on that charge.”


…


Goldstein ended up pleading guilty to two amended charges of disorderly conduct resulting in a combined fine of $127. The weapons are in the custody of the Northfield police and could be either destroyed or sold, James said.

“It’s a good resolution for everybody,” Weintrob said. “Mr. Goldstein will never have those weapons again.”


Emphasis on that last line is mine. It’s good for everybody that Goldstein will never have those (legal) weapons again? Goldstein’s attorney, Amy Weintrob, as well as all the people representing the government in this case are bigots.

Herding cats?

Posted on by

I would like to think Howard Nemerov will have better luck with this than the NRA, GOA, and others do:



I am building a national network to ensure the survival of our civil right of self-defense. Our mission is to contact our congressional representatives at least once a month with a short fact-bite explaining why this civil right is so vital to the preservation of all other rights, as well as the survival of our nation as the international torch-bearer of Liberty.


Initially, we will create and support a minimum of 20,000 activists in each state. One million people contacting their representatives each month will make even the most rabid anti-rights advocate hesitate, because they know that each of you represents an even larger number of votes, and getting re-elected is the goal of most representatives: of the 435 seats in Congress in 2008, 400 incumbents were running for re-election (92% of all available seats).


You will receive a sample talking point each month, or you can say whatever you think will make the best point with your representative.


I tried doing something on a much, much smaller scale and was very disappointed. I had about 15 people on an email list that were “very committed” to the gun rights issue and agreed to help influence the Washington State legislature on the gun issue. I sent out about a half dozen different requests for them to contact their representatives over the course of about a year. I later asked them in person if they had responded as I had requested. There were only about 10 TOTAL contacts that resulted from my requests.


My conclusion was liberty minded people are not easily herded like sheep. That they value their liberty may also mean they will not be easily persuaded to do as someone else asks.


As others have said, it’s like herding cats.


Hence, my conclusion is that Mr. Nemerov had better have some trick up his sleeve that many others have failed to figure out and/or execute successfully on.

Burning the midnight oil

Posted on by

An ATF agent gets arrested for murder and apparently the DOJ starts burning the midnight oil over it. Local time for this Google search by them was nearly 12:30 AM:




























































































Domain Name   usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address   149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
ISP   US Dept of Justice
Location  

























Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
Language   English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System   Microsoft WinXP
Browser   Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; DOJ3jx7bf; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  









Resolution  :  1024 x 768
Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit   Jan 8 2009 9:27:55 pm
Last Page View   Jan 8 2009 9:29:10 pm
Visit Length   1 minute 15 seconds
Page Views   2
Referring URL http://www.google.co…rk january 7%2C 2008
Search Engine google.com
Search Words atf agent arrested william clark january 7, 2008
Visit Entry Page   http://blog.joehuffm…astItIsAnArrest.aspx
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/
Out Click    
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Jan 9 2009 12:27:55 am
Visit Number   416,532


I also received a similar search hit this morning.


It’s nice to know they care about what I think. But what I really wish is they would just go get legimate jobs instead of spending taxpayer money to infringe our rights.

At least it is an arrest

Posted on by

To my way of thinking nearly all ATF agents should be arrested for violation of 18 USC 242. But I don’t expect that to happen for at least another, like, million years or so. But there is one less ATF agent in the field today which has to be a good thing:



A U.S. federal agent has been charged with second-degree murder in the alleged 2008 shooting of his neighbor in the U.S. Virgin Islands.


Justice officials say they arrested Agent William Clark with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. He also was charged with involuntary manslaughter and using a dangerous weapon during a violent crime.

Quote of the day–William P. Hoar

Posted on by

While Barack Obama has been urging citizens not to stock up on weapons because they mistrust him, other anti-gunners are a tad more candid, seeing in the new administration an opportunity to disarm Americans. The Brady Campaign, the day after the election, was demanding the adoption of what it duplicitously calls “common sense gun laws.” Similarly, John Rosenthal, co-founder of Stop Handgun Violence, gleefully wrote in the Boston Globe: “With the historic election of Barack Obama, the nation finally has an opportunity to enact sensible national gun control policy.”

Not so. We already have such a “policy.” It is called the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


William P. Hoar
January 7, 2008
Skepticism About Second Amendment Support
[There have been lots of people that have used various versions of that last paragraph but that doesn’t diminish the correctness or the effectiveness of it.–Joe]

War plans

Posted on by

If there is a coming offensive against gun owners Alan Korwin has some of the likely details of their war plans. There is some scary stuff in there:



Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.” Note that Obama’s pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.


In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”


In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.


..


If these near-total bans aren’t enough, the most dangerous part may be the phrase “pistol grip” because: “The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” In other words, any semi-auto long gun with a grip (that’s ALL semi-auto long guns) would be banned under the existing proposal. It’s not clear what they hope to achieve by deceptively banning guns with grips instead of just calling to ban the guns — even an idjit can tell it’s the same thing.


I didn’t cover here all the magazine bans, transfer bans, dealer record-keeping and centralized reporting, and a host of nuisance details — there will be time enough for that when the new lists are released soon: “As soon as President-elect Obama is inaugurated and the 111th Congress is sworn in,” according to Ms. Brady. Congress is set to be sworn in on Jan. 6, Inauguration Day is Jan. 20.


If they really are making war plans to engage us then we need to make our plans and prepare as well. I’m still debating what to work on first.

Gathering the troops?

Posted on by

I could just be parnoid but this search for Mothers Against Violence In America founder Pam Eakes (I last met and did battle with her nine years ago) by someone in the U.S. House of Representatives could be someone looking for support in a coming offensive:




























































































Domain Name   house.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address   143.231.249.# (Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives)
ISP   Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives
Location  

























Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
Language   English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System   Microsoft WinXP
Browser   Internet Explorer 7.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  









Resolution  :  1280 x 1024
Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit   Jan 6 2009 5:49:37 am
Last Page View   Jan 6 2009 5:49:37 am
Visit Length   0 seconds
Page Views   1
Referring URL http://www.google.co…ence pam eakes email
Search Engine google.com
Search Words mavia mothers against violence pam eakes email
Visit Entry Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/06/
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/06/
Out Click    
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Jan 6 2009 8:49:37 am
Visit Number   414,892

Quote of the day–Michael Gaddy

Posted on by

Americans are purchasing firearms and ammunition in record numbers, not because they believe 2009 will offer unusually good duck hunting, but because they fear the fallout from the coming economic storm and the state’s reaction to that fallout.


Michael Gaddy
Buy, Buy, Buy
January 5, 2008
[H/T to Say Uncle for the pointer. There will be more QOTDs from this piece over the next few weeks and months.–Joe]

Carry in Post Offices

Posted on by

Robb posted about being irked that he can’t legally carry his firearm into a Post Office. He can carry at the hospital, shopping malls, his kids soccer games and virtually all public places. What is so special about a Post Office that he is disallowed from carrying their? Of course the answer is there is nothing special about the Post Office that should be grounds for disallowing the carrying defensive tools while picking up your mail. Just as prohibiting blacks from public swimming pools and using the same water fountains as others had no basis other than the bigotry of those making the rules. Still, spending time in a Federal prison isn’t my favorite way of standing by my principles.


That said I had looked into the guns in Post Offices before and had heard others talk of the law being somewhat ambigous. With that background I was going to point out to Robb that according to 18 USC 930, which I’m fairly certain is what I have seen posted on Post Office doors, there are exemptions to the part about fines and imprisonment for “whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility”. These exemptions are never posted on the wall of the post office:



(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—



(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;


(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or


(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.


Notice the last three words of (d)(3), “other lawful purpose”. Self defense–isn’t that a lawful purpose?


But as I was doing my research on the topic, just to make sure, I ran across this post from a lawyer which says that 18 USC 930 isn’t the controlling law. 39 USC 410 says (emphasis added):



(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, and except as otherwise provided in this title or insofar as such laws remain in force as rules or regulations of the Postal Service, no Federal law dealing with public or Federal contracts, property, works, officers, employees, budgets, or funds, including the provisions of chapters 5 and 7 of title 5, shall apply to the exercise of the powers of the Postal Service.


(b) The following provisions shall apply to the Postal Service:



(1) section 552 (public information), section 552a (records about individuals), section 552b (open meetings), section 3102 (employment of personal assistants for blind, deaf, or otherwise handicapped employees), section 3110 (restrictions on employment of relatives), section 3333 and chapters 72 (antidiscrimination; right to petition Congress) and 73 (suitability, security, and conduct of employees), section 5520 (withholding city income or employment taxes), and section 5532 (!1) (dual pay) of title 5, except that no regulation issued under such chapters or section shall apply to the Postal Service unless expressly made applicable;


In the Postal rules I found that bringing a firearm onto the property is a rule violation but apparently it is not a felony:



  (l) Weapons and explosives. No person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.


…


  (p) Penalties and other law. (1) Alleged violations of these rules and regulations are heard, and the penalties prescribed herein are imposed, either in a Federal district court or by a Federal magistrate in accordance with applicable court rules. Questions regarding such rules should be directed to the regional counsel for the region involved.
(2) Whoever shall be found guilty of violating the rules and regulations in this section while on property under the charge and control of the Postal Service is subject to fine of not more than $50 or imprisonment of not more than 30 days, or both.


Further reading of the rules revealed you give up your Fourth Amendment rights once you set foot on U.S. Postal Property (232.1 (b)):



  (b) Inspection, recording presence. (1) Purses, briefcases, and other containers brought into, while on, or being removed from the property are subject to inspection. However, items brought directly to a postal facility’s customer mailing acceptance area and deposited in the mail are not subject to inspection, except as provided by section 274 of the Administrative Support Manual. A person arrested for violation of this section may be searched incident to that arrest.


I am not a lawyer. You are receiving this legal review for free and my own personal entertainment. It’s probably worth every penny you paid for it.

Quote of the day–Lazarus Long

Posted on by

What are the facts? Again and again and again what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the “unguessable verdict of history” — what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future, facts are your single clue. Get the facts!

 

Lazarus Long
The Notebooks of Lazarus Long by Robert A. Heinlein pages 16 and 17.
[According to some the Brady Campaign may have a reality awareness moment when pursuing their lawsuit against the changed rule on carry of firearms in National Parks. I would like to think so but I have enough experience in court to know that facts and the truth only play a minor role in the proceedings. Still, the facts are what drive things like my Just One Question and I think it is the proper philosophical principle to demand our opposition adhere to. It is our ace in the hole. Even if they don’t play by the rules and cheat at every opportunity it is still our one of our greatest weapons against the forces of darkness and evil.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Tom Palmer

Posted on by

I know people who don’t understand why anyone would have a gun. They don’t have guns, they didn’t grow up with them, and they assume people who did must be some sort of primitive barbarians.


Tom Palmer
Page 30, Gun Control On Trial by Brian Doherty
[Just like gays in the 80’s Silence = Death. We need to come out of the closet if we want to survive as a free people.–Joe]