Page 1 of 1
Federal Property
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:31 pm
by tboesche
I work for a defense Contractor in the DFW area. I have searched all of our HR documents to find anything relating to guns on the premises. Can't find any. My boss knows that I am getting my CHL and we have even discussed what gun I will use as a carry gun. He has never mentioned to me that I can not carry at work. SO, I will be carrying once my plastic arrives. Now here is the real question, Our building, is owned by a holding company that is owned by a very wealthy, one time presidential candidate from Texas. However, one of my coworkers, not an ANTI, mentioned to me that since we deal with Government contracts, and have an office for a government auditing agency that our building mey be classified as a federal installation. I can not find anything to support this.
Does any of our more enlightened have any ideas on this situation.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:44 pm
by Kalrog
I think that "advice" is worth about what you paid for it... maybe less.
Re: Federal Property
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:48 pm
by Keith B
tboesche wrote:I work for a defense Contractor in the DFW area. I have searched all of our HR documents to find anything relating to guns on the premises. Can't find any. My boss knows that I am getting my CHL and we have even discussed what gun I will use as a carry gun. He has never mentioned to me that I can not carry at work. SO, I will be carrying once my plastic arrives. Now here is the real question, Our building, is owned by a holding company that is owned by a very wealthy, one time presidential candidate from Texas. However, one of my coworkers, not an ANTI, mentioned to me that since we deal with Government contracts, and have an office for a government auditing agency that our building mey be classified as a federal installation. I can not find anything to support this.
Does any of our more enlightened have any ideas on this situation.
If you work where I think you do on Plano Parkway, the county tax records show all of that property as owned by the corporation. I don't think it becomes federal property just because you have a contract. proeprty!!
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:50 pm
by tboesche
Actaully, I am in North Fort Worth. In the Alliance area. Personally, I do not think it is considered Federal Property.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 5:55 pm
by KBCraig
You're clearly not in a federal facility. The prohibition on weapons in federal facilities is 18 USC 930, which includes this definition:
18 USC 930(g)(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.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 5:58 pm
by tboesche
Yeah! see thats the rub. The Gov'ment doesn't lease or own any part of the building. However, We have maybe 10 Govt employees working out of the audit office. This is tha part that has me worried....Just a little
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 6:06 pm
by Xander
tboesche wrote:Yeah! see thats the rub. The Gov'ment doesn't lease or own any part of the building. However, We have maybe 10 Govt employees working out of the audit office. This is tha part that has me worried....Just a little
If they don't own or lease it, then it doesn't qualify. It isn't an "or" situation, it's an "and". They have to *both* own or lease the building, *and* have Federal employees regular present for official duties. Your place of work isn't a federal facility under that regulation.
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:46 am
by KBCraig
Packing plants are a good example: every packing plant or chicken plant has a USDA inspector on duty at all times when animals are being slaughtered or butchered, or meat is being processed.
Those are not federal facilities, and anyone who wonders about "deadly weapons" has never seen a captive bolt gun in action.
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:35 am
by frankie_the_yankee
Xander wrote:tboesche wrote:Yeah! see thats the rub. The Gov'ment doesn't lease or own any part of the building. However, We have maybe 10 Govt employees working out of the audit office. This is tha part that has me worried....Just a little
If they don't own or lease it, then it doesn't qualify. It isn't an "or" situation, it's an "and". They have to *both* own or lease the building, *and* have Federal employees regular present for official duties. Your place of work isn't a federal facility under that regulation.
I agree.
If the employer has no published or stated weapons policy I think that it's OK to carry there, as far as the law is concerned anyway.
But note that there is nothing that stops the employer from making up a "policy" on the spot and firing you if they find out you are carrying. So as always, you are doing it at your own risk (to the job).
But I see no jeopardy with the law.
IANAL.
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 12:15 pm
by RetiredE9
KBCraig wrote:Packing plants are a good example: every packing plant or chicken plant has a USDA inspector on duty at all times when animals are being slaughtered or butchered, or meat is being processed.
Those are not federal facilities, and anyone who wonders about "deadly weapons" has never seen a captive bolt gun in action.
And those chickens are vicious if they get loose, plan on taking a shotgun!
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:07 am
by DoubleJ
KBCraig wrote:You're clearly not in a federal facility. The prohibition on weapons in federal facilities is 18 USC 930, which includes this definition:
18 USC 930(g)(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.
CROSS THREAD POLLENATION!!!
frankie_the_yankee wrote:Penn wrote:This is off a quick google I did (Answers.com)
Type: Private - Partnership
On the web:
http://www.americanairlinescenter.com
Employees: 1,625
Dallas does everything big, and the Center Operating Company is no exception. The company owns and operates the American Airlines Center, the $420 million sports and entertainment arena that opened in 2001. The venue is the home of the Dallas Mavericks pro basketball team and pro hockey's Dallas Stars. The American Airlines Center, built partially with public funds, also hosts concerts and other touring entertainment shows such as Cold Play, Disney on Ice, and Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. Center Operating Company is a partnership owned by Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, Stars and Texas Rangers owner Tom Hicks, and businessman Ross Perot, Jr.
Key numbers for fiscal year ending 2007:
Sale: $156.0M
Officers:
President and CEO: Brad Mayne
EVP and CFO: Craig Courson
VP Corporate Sales: Curtis Partain
Mark Cuban and Ross Perot? Might want to take this with a grain of salt because the blurb states that the company OWNS and operates the AAC.
Seems like they regard the 30 year lease as equivalent to ownership.
this thread
that code copied above gives me pause to that whole argument about "They're only leasing the building, since it's city owned, they can't post a 30.06."
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, discuss.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:42 am
by KBCraig
DoubleJ wrote:this thread
that code copied above gives me pause to that whole argument about "They're only leasing the building, since it's city owned, they can't post a 30.06."
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, discuss.
Sorry, not much to discuss. 30.06 is only restricted to government entities of the state of Texas, and political subdivisions thereof. Doesn't apply to federal facilities.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 9:12 am
by Kalrog
DoubleJ wrote:this thread
that code copied above gives me pause to that whole argument about "They're only leasing the building, since it's city owned, they can't post a 30.06."
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, discuss.
Pretty much everyone but Frankie disagrees with the AAC thing - just not enough to want to be the test case.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 9:42 am
by frankie_the_yankee
Kalrog wrote: Pretty much everyone but Frankie disagrees with the AAC thing......
Except the ACC people, who just happen to have the keys to the building, who set the policy that the security people follow, and who are enforcing that policy every day without challenge. Then there's various cops, deputies, corrections officers (at the county jail), and DA's that have voiced no objections that I am aware of.
And Lord knows who else.
Not meaning to hijack this thread. This issue has been fully aired and then some. Opinions vary. I just wanted to point out that Kalrog may have
more accurately stated, "Pretty much everyone
on this forum but Frankie disagrees with........."
And the poster who pointed out that the feds can implement any regulations they want on property they own, lease, occupy, or stole from the natives, is correct of course. They are not bound by TX law.
That being said, the federal statute cited does not appear to apply to some place where a federal employee simply shows up or some place where federal employees hang around. That alone doesn't make it a federal facility.
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:36 pm
by DoubleJ
KBCraig wrote:DoubleJ wrote:this thread
that code copied above gives me pause to that whole argument about "They're only leasing the building, since it's city owned, they can't post a 30.06."
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, discuss.
Sorry, not much to discuss. 30.06 is only restricted to government entities of the state of Texas, and political subdivisions thereof. Doesn't apply to federal facilities.
yeah, but!
it could be used as a "guideline" if a case is presented to a court.
"Well, Joe CHLer went into a facility that is leased, and they posted a 30.06. This code over here says owned or leased, and it's Federal, so if it's good for the Feds, it's good for us."
then the defendant gets UCW or criminal trespass, or whatever.
just saying. it could happen.
to me, it gives more creedence to the whoever (or whomever) leases the property can do whatever they want.