Page 1 of 2
Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:02 pm
by Grundy1133
Where I live our post office is a suite attached to other suites. Like there's the post office at suite 1 and then there's a furniture store a dentist an optometrist and other various shoppes. My question is would the entire building be considered off limits since the post office is a "government building" or just the suite that the post office is in..? None of the enterances are connected to each other. There's not like a lobby with suites inside but each entrance leads to the outside sidewalk. I frequent a few of these places and it just now occurred to me that technically the post office is part of the strip of suites that make up this single building.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:18 pm
by rotor
Also, what about the parking lot in the situation above?
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:24 pm
by Mike S
Only the property under the control of the USPS would be prohibited. The public parking lot & the remaining stores in this example, unless otherwise posted/ prohibited places, are good to go.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:25 pm
by Tex1961
I couldn't see how it would be.. Only the premise space that they lease. Also its a shared parking lot... I'm not an attorney but I'd bet your fine.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:29 pm
by Grundy1133
The post office is on the corner suite and has a reserved parking lot for them on the adjacent corner. The rest of the parking is parallel parking in front of the suites. Trying to get a picture
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:34 pm
by Grundy1133
I'm standing at the opposite end of the post office.

Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:47 pm
by Grundy1133
And also since the sidewalk is public could I use the side walk in front of the post office if I was just passing by? I ask because our instructor had told us any public sidewalk parking lot parking garage etc we can carry on but apparently that's not true. Lol
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:43 pm
by Keith B
Grundy1133 wrote:And also since the sidewalk is public could I use the side walk in front of the post office if I was just passing by? I ask because our instructor had told us any public sidewalk parking lot parking garage etc we can carry on but apparently that's not true. Lol
You can carry on the property that is not owned/leased by the federal government. So, in this case, if it is an official Post Office or sub-station, then you can't carry inside or on the parking lot that is dedicated to the post office.
For a violation of Texas penal code 46 for weapons, which applies to other than federal property, the term 'premises' stated in the prohibited locations says
(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.
Now, for 30.06/30.07 the penal code states 'property', which is all of the property posted with the sign that is under control of the owner. It does not include inside your vehicle in the parking lot.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:54 pm
by bblhd672
After seeing the building in question on Google street view, the post office is located in the "Federal Building" which I believe means you cannot carry inside that building. But that doesn't mean the federal government owns the public sidewalk or the public streets in front of or beside, much less other buildings in the block. The parking lot in back has a sign that says "Postal Parking Only" so I would not park my car in there if I were carrying.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:57 pm
by rotor
You can never be sure you are legal all the time. From the picture posted I really couldn't tell where the post office was so I can't comment. How many Texans park in a post office parking lot every day with a gun in their car? I certainly don't know. How many people have been prosecuted for parking in a post office parking lot with a gun in their car? I don't know but I am sure unless there is a drug deal going on, probably none. My post office doesn't even have a firearm warning on it. Not even a gun buster. Who would be the arresting officer for a post office violation. A federal marshal? Would a local cop ever be doing any law enforcement over a parking lot gun violation? I would certainly say don't push your luck on this issue. I wish that this GFZ would be eliminated.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:07 pm
by JustSomeOldGuy
Every PO I've been in has an 8 1/2" x 11" sheet of paper with a revolver shape on it citing Title 18 USC Section 930 somewhere in the building. And in 2 out of 3, it's somewhere that's not near the entry door........
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:16 pm
by Grundy1133
JustSomeOldGuy wrote:Every PO I've been in has an 8 1/2" x 11" sheet of paper with a revolver shape on it citing Title 18 USC Section 930 somewhere in the building. And in 2 out of 3, it's somewhere that's not near the entry door........
I know I cant go in the PO i was more curious about the other suites in the building because they're all technically linked together into 1 big building. but from what i've gathered, I can enter any suite that isn't being leased by the govt.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:38 pm
by jmorris
18 USC 930 only includes buildings, not parking lots.
(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.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930
39 CFR 232.1 - Conduct on postal property.
(a)Applicability. This section applies to all real property under the charge and control of the Postal Service, to all tenant agencies, and to all persons entering in or on such property. This section shall be posted and kept posted at a conspicuous place on all such property.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/39/232.1
I would say that a city owned public sidewalk does not fall under control of the PO.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:54 am
by RPBrown
I have a similar situation in Irving and it involves the main PO. They lease a space in a strip shopping center and on the corner. They have 2 drive up post boxes in the parking lot. However, there is no designated parking for them or any of the businesses in the center and they have businesses next door to them. IANAL, but I feel as I can lawfully carry anywhere in the parking lot or adjacent stores (no 3.06 or 30.07) without repercussions. Now, if they were to convince the landlord or property owner to post the parking lot, I would be in violation.
Re: Suites vs buildings?
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:47 am
by Grundy1133
RPBrown wrote:I have a similar situation in Irving and it involves the main PO. They lease a space in a strip shopping center and on the corner. They have 2 drive up post boxes in the parking lot. However, there is no designated parking for them or any of the businesses in the center and they have businesses next door to them. IANAL, but I feel as I can lawfully carry anywhere in the parking lot or adjacent stores (no 3.06 or 30.07) without repercussions. Now, if they were to convince the landlord or property owner to post the parking lot, I would be in violation.
unless you stayed in your car right?