{"id":105253,"date":"2024-10-28T11:21:24","date_gmt":"2024-10-28T16:21:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=105253"},"modified":"2024-10-28T11:21:24","modified_gmt":"2024-10-28T16:21:24","slug":"105253","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=105253","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

FPC Pushes Forward In Post Office Gun Ban Challenge<\/a><\/p>\n

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has filed a motion for summary judgment in its case pending before a U.S. District Court in Texas challenging the Post Office gun ban.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit\u00a0FPC v. Garland<\/em>\u00a0challenges federal gun control laws prohibiting firearm possession, storage and carry at United States Post Offices and related properties, including post office parking lots. The plaintiffs are two law-abiding citizens licensed to carry in Texas and two non-profit membership associations\u2014FPC and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF).<\/p>\n

Brandon Combs, FPC president, said the lawsuit is one in a long line of challenges designed to restore Second Amendment rights.<\/p>\n

\u201cYour right to carry weapons for armed self-defense does not end at the Post Office,\u201d Combs said in a release announcing the action<\/a>. \u201cWe look forward to eliminating this immoral ban and further restoring the People\u2019s right and ability to protect themselves in public.\u201d
\nIn its\u00a0motion for summary judgment<\/a>, plaintiffs argue that the post office gun ban fails both of the standards set by the Supreme Court in\u00a0New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen<\/em>
\n
\n\u201cThe Carry Ban, to the extent it bars the possession and carriage of firearms in post offices and on postal property, infringes their Second Amendment rights and must be declared unconstitutional and enjoined,\u201d the motion argues. \u201cBruen<\/em>\u00a0reaffirms that any Second Amendment regulation is constitutional only if the government \u2018demonstrate[s] that [it] is consistent with this Nation\u2019s historical tradition of firearm regulation.\u2019 But there is no historical tradition supporting the ban on lawful firearm carriage in post offices and on postal property.\u201d<\/p>\n

Because of that, the brief further argues that the government cannot meet its burden of proving a historical precedent.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe postal system dates to the Founding, but there is no tradition of banning firearms in Post Offices,\u201d the brief states. \u201cOn the contrary, there is a historical tradition of protecting the mail through materially different means.\u201d<\/p>\n

In the end, the motion argues that enforcement of the ban should be stopped immediately<\/p>\n

\u201cFor all these reasons, this Court should grant Plaintiffs\u2019 motion for summary judgment and permanently enjoin enforcement of the Carry Ban to the extent it bars the possession and carrying of firearms in U.S. Post Offices and on Postal Service postal property,\u201d the brief concludes.<\/p>\n

Federal gun law bans carrying firearms on much of its property, even in bathrooms and visitor centers on national lands, where a firearm might otherwise be permitted. Post offices, their parking lots\u2014even the grounds around them\u2014have all been designated gun-free zones where being caught in possession of a firearm, even locked in your vehicle as you walked inside, could result in fines and imprisonment.<\/p>\n

In a similar case earlier this year, a\u00a0federal judge in Florida ruled<\/a>\u00a0that the federal law banning people from possessing guns in post offices or while on post office property is unconstitutional, citing the landmark\u00a0Bruen<\/em>\u00a0case in which the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Second Amendment right to bear arms as an individual right and removed a host of obstacles many states had constructed to infringe upon those rights.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

FPC Pushes Forward In Post Office Gun Ban Challenge The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has filed a motion for summary judgment in its case pending before a U.S. District Court in Texas challenging the Post Office gun ban. The lawsuit\u00a0FPC v. Garland\u00a0challenges federal gun control laws prohibiting firearm possession, storage and carry at United States … Continue reading “”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,23,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-105253","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bureaucraps","category-courts","category-rkba"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105253","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=105253"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105253\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":105254,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105253\/revisions\/105254"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=105253"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=105253"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=105253"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}