Bonidy loss at 10th Circuit: No carry in post offices or parking lots

Surprised to see no discussion of this here. Here's a link to the decision: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/13/13-1374.pdf

Basically, a publicly-accessible post office and its parking lot with no security whatsoever is considered "sensitive federal property" therefore the USPS's policy of "no guns 4 u" is permissible.

"Ignoring McDonald‘s command that the Second Amendment does not
protect 'second-class' rights, the Tenth Circuit held that '[t]he risk
inherent in firearms and other weapons distinguishes the Second
Amendment right from other fundamental rights that have been held to be
evaluated under a strict scrutiny test, such as the right to marry and
the right to be free from viewpoint discrimination, which can be
exercised without creating a direct risk to others.'"

If they had said Yes, one can carry in a P.O. It would open the door for CCW in All federal buildings.

Well with the new precedent set with gay marriage, new federal doors are about to be opened far and wide. This one definitely isn't over with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sniper7

Well with the new precedent set with gay marriage, new federal doors are about to be opened far and wide. This one definitely isn't over with.

---

Only the doors they want opened. The legal education system has been corrupted to ignore plain language or make up stuff that never existed when it suits them. I see the recent rulings on Obamacare and homosexual marriage as a return to ruling the way they want rather than following the actual text and precedent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter

Only the doors they want opened. The legal education system has been corrupted to ignore plain language or make up stuff that never existed when it suits them. I see the recent rulings on Obamacare and homosexual marriage as a return to ruling the way they want rather than following the actual text and precedent.

---

This can't be emphasized enough. We are no longer a Constitutional Republic, we are now an Administrative/Bureaucratic state under a Judicial Oligarchy.

"The Law" is no longer beholden to the Constitution, it is no longer "immutable". It can be twisted and interpreted any way that those in power want it to be at any given moment (and this includes maintaining conflicting interpretations at the same time with no problem).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter

Only the doors they want opened. The legal education system has been corrupted to ignore plain language or make up stuff that never existed when it suits them. I see the recent rulings on Obamacare and homosexual marriage as a return to ruling the way they want rather than following the actual text and precedent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

This can't be emphasized enough. We are no longer a Constitutional Republic, we are now an Administrative/Bureaucratic state under a Judicial Oligarchy.

"The Law" is no longer beholden to the Constitution, it is no longer "immutable". It can be twisted and interpreted any way that those in power want it to be at any given moment (and this includes maintaining conflicting interpretations at the same time with no problem).

---

Both of you are right on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo

If they had said Yes, one can carry in a P.O. It would open the door for CCW in All federal buildings.

---

From my understanding the complaint relied on the fact that there is no security there to protect patrons of the post office like there are with courthouses etc, so I'm not sure a win would have spilled over to all federal buildings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

This can't be emphasized enough. We are no longer a Constitutional Republic, we are now an Administrative/Bureaucratic state under a Judicial Oligarchy.

"The Law" is no longer beholden to the Constitution, it is no longer "immutable". It can be twisted and interpreted any way that those in power want it to be at any given moment (and this includes maintaining conflicting interpretations at the same time with no problem).

---

Depressing, but I think you are correct.

To be honest, this ruling isn't going to change my post office visit procedures in he least (I visit a post office maybe once a year).

Concealed is concealed and unless you're setting up magnetometers you can go fornicate yourself ... sideways.

Quote:

---

...which can be exercised without creating a direct risk to others.'"

---

So, are they saying that my carrying a gun creates a "direct risk to others"? The only risk is to those that mean harm to me or those around me. By denying my right to carry, the true "direct risk" is to me and my loved ones.