Return to “Sign on NASA property”
I was recently at NASA Huntsville, AL on business and saw no postings on their buildings, however the buildings are on the property of a US Army base Redstone Arsenal and vehicles are subject to inspection....WTR wrote:In my experience , NASA is one of the most restrictive agencies I have dealt with.
Yes I would, because the one case prosecuted under this Postal reg, against an Employee of the post office, specifically had the 18 USC 930 charges dropped because the gun was not in a facility. And the employee was convicted of the infraction and at the time was a max $50 fine. He also lost his job. Chas. mentioned a case where a NASA employee was charged under their regulations and he was charged with the infraction, but won his case because there was not a sign posted.Keith B wrote:You willing to bet a paycheck on the fact that the courts wouldn't make the same ruling on property that they did for the post office? If it went the same path through the courts you can bet your bottom dollar they would.ScottDLS wrote:
Title 18 is the US Criminal Code. It doesn't just get to be extended to any portion of the CFR that some official wants. There is NO mention of 18 USC 930 in the ruling. 39 CFR 232 regulates conduct on postal property (one of the provisions is you can't post any handbills). Violation is a Federal Infraction (as is a traffic ticket in DC). It is punishable by a fine (theoretically UP TO $5000) and 30 days in jail. 18 USC 930 is a federal misdemeanor and only applies to buildings/facilities that are posted, and in fact specifically excludes parking lots.
Other Federal property like NASA and USACOE property will have a CFR section with their authority to ban firearms. My suspicion is that most violations are infractions also, but I haven't researched it. On down side of 39 CFR 232 and other regulations that invoke a Federal INFRACTION is that if they have any jail time as a penalty, you would lose your LTC as Texas considers it a Class A misdemeanor.
There doesn't need to be a regulation saying you CAN carry a firearm on Federal property, only absence of one (or a law) saying you can't. In the case of NASA, there is likely a reg somewhere saying you can't and now that they put up a sign to notify you, you'd likely get convicted of the infraction. On they other hand for the Post Office I haven't seen too many signs prohibiting the "property" and there is some question about whether having the gun in your vehicle constitutes "carrying" it or "storing" it on postal property as the CFR prohibits. But the lawsuit in Colorado was the typical dumb DON'T ASK IF YOU DON'T WANT THE WRONG ANSWER...that gun rights people seem addicted to. A better strategy is to weigh the benefit of the activity against the worst case outcome IF the law doesn't go your way.
I wonder if people driving through Texas school zones with accessible rifles and off duty cops in Vermont school zones do this as they commit a Federal Felony by violating the Federal GFSZA.
Title 18 is the US Criminal Code. It doesn't just get to be extended to any portion of the CFR that some official wants. There is NO mention of 18 USC 930 in the ruling. 39 CFR 232 regulates conduct on postal property (one of the provisions is you can't post any handbills). Violation is a Federal Infraction (as is a traffic ticket in DC). It is punishable by a fine (theoretically UP TO $5000) and 30 days in jail. 18 USC 930 is a federal misdemeanor and only applies to buildings/facilities that are posted, and in fact specifically excludes parking lots.Keith B wrote:I agree that 18 USC Section 930 states facility and defines it as the building. The rub comes in with the Postal Service rules where the Supreme Court refused to hear the California 10th District Court ruling on 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(l) and let stand that the federal building ruling extended to the parking lot and other property owned by the USPS. https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-1374.pdfjmorris wrote:Ah, not quite. I worked in a federal facility for a while. It was fine leaving the firearm in your vehicle.JustSomeOldGuy wrote:google "18 USC Section 930", read it and weep.....
In summary, firearms are prohibited, not just in the buildings, but also on the property (like the post office parking lot).
(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term “Federal facility” means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.
(2) The term “dangerous weapon” means a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket knife with a blade of less than 2½ inches in length.
(3) The term “Federal court facility” means the courtroom, judges’ chambers, witness rooms, jury deliberation rooms, attorney conference rooms, prisoner holding cells, offices of the court clerks, the United States attorney, and the United States marshal, probation and parole offices, and adjoining corridors of any court of the United States.
(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be.
While two different regulations are in effect, I sure wouldn't want to try and fight 18 USC Section 930 as they would more than likely extend the 10th District Court view to 18 USC.
