Guns In Vehicles: Don't Do It.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let me get this straight. I live 35 miles from the nearest VA clinic. VA clinics are victim disarmament zones. To be more efficient and a better steward of the planet I combine as many errands into the one trip to the city, one which has a relatively high crime rate. Now, since the parking lot at the VA down not have sight lines from the building I cannot keep a visual on my car,which is alarmed BTW. So to comply with the standards set forth in th op I must travel to a high crime area without means of protection because I cannot maintain a visual on the vehicle and VA appointments are seldom over in a short period of time meaning I must leave the firearm at home instead of securing it in the vehicle.

LE leave firearms in vehicles every day. I guess once again it is a do as I say not as I do situation.

It is not a matter of line of sight at the VA. VA property being
federal property, are a gun free zone. You are without any
protection till you reach the buildings where there might be
a VA police officer on duty. So you have to travel thru gangland
turf to reach it is not a concern to the government.
 
It is not a matter of line of sight at the VA. VA property being
federal property, are a gun free zone. You are without any
protection till you reach the buildings where there might be
a VA police officer on duty. So you have to travel thru gangland
turf to reach it is not a concern to the government.

Veterans Administration hospitals, facilities, and their parking lots are now "gangland turf"?

Who knew? I'm blown away by all the new things I learn on this forum every single day.
 
No he isn't. There are states that have passed laws placing criminal liability on gun owners who fail to secure firearms that are then stolen and used criminally:

California Passes AB-231 Criminal Storage Act - The Truth About Guns

And civil liability has also been found in similar incidents:

Homeowners Must Lock Up Guns, Massachusetts Court Rules

federali's concern appears justified...

You're pretty darn selective in quoting "similar incidents."

In CA, you missed this specific caveat:

...Unless you stored the firearm in a locked container...

and in the MA case doesn't even apply. It says specifically:

The document noted that the homeowner was aware Jason Rivers had a history of violent criminal activity and accused her of not doing enough to keep her live-in boyfriend's weapons secure.

So, you either deliberately tried to misapply two cases that do not support the OP's position, or you were negligent in reading the very examples you cited. Neither paints a very compelling picture supporting your (or the OP's) argument.
 
Veterans Administration hospitals, facilities, and their parking lots are now "gangland turf"?

Who knew? I'm blown away by all the new things I learn on this forum every single day.

"So you have to travel thru gangland turf to reach it is not a concern to the government."

Bad attempt to put words into his mouth. Some VA facilities are located in bad areas, Gangland turf if you prefer.
 
Last edited:
I once had a lady friend whose father of her child (not married) was killed by a stolen gun in a beer joint. The gun in question was a Colt detective special. She sued Colt and was awarded mucho money. And this was 30 years ago. One can only guess what would happen now. JM2CW.
 
It is not a matter of line of sight at the VA. VA property being
federal property, are a gun free zone. You are without any
protection till you reach the buildings where there might be
a VA police officer on duty. So you have to travel thru gangland
turf to reach it is not a concern to the government.

Now that you mention it I have not seen a VA Police officer at our clinic since the beginning of the fiscal year.
 
Last edited:
MY house can be broken into. A butcher knife can be stolen and used to kill someone. My car can be stolen and used to run someone over. An armed mugger could get the drop on me and disarm me.

I'm not morally responsible for the actions of criminals that I don't willingly abet.
Thread should've ended after this ^^^
 
Always consider the CIVIL liabilities Leave your gun in a vehicle or a unoccupied motel room and someone gets killed or maimed you'll get "served" a few months later - if you're a federal agent you've got Uncle deep pockets Sam, that's good but otherwise they'll go after your home owners liability and whatever else they can get
 
You're pretty darn selective in quoting "similar incidents."

In CA, you missed this specific caveat:

and in the MA case doesn't even apply. It says specifically:

So, you either deliberately tried to misapply two cases that do not support the OP's position, or you were negligent in reading the very examples you cited. Neither paints a very compelling picture supporting your (or the OP's) argument.
There's (at least) a third alternative: you've failed to logically connect the cited sources and their relevance to questions posed in this thread.

That the California law stipulates a threshold for "secure" storage is a detail against the larger question of whether theft victims can be held accountable for what the thieves did with the stolen property. The California law says they can.

In the Massachusetts case, you failed to acknowledge this: "The decision in Massachusetts 'follows rulings in other states holding gun owners liable for shootings that occur because they have failed to secure firearms in their homes,' Vice said. 'Courts in Indiana, Kansas and Montana have recently expanded liability of gun owners who fail to secure their guns.'" The defendant's knowledge of the perp's prior history is secondary to the bottom line: a civil court found against a firearm owner whose stolen weapons -- in this case, stolen by a mentally ill family member who was denied access -- were used in the commission of a crime.

Both illustrate instances where firearms owners can be or have been held criminally culpable or civilly liable for how their stolen firearms are used by the criminals who took them.

The question of whether or not this was a valid concern for firearms owners arose in this thread; the provided links show it can be, depending on where you live.
 
Veterans Administration hospitals, facilities, and their parking lots are now "gangland turf"?

Who knew? I'm blown away by all the new things I learn on this forum every single day.

I never said that VA property was gangland turf. I said you have to drive thru gangland turf to get there. And the government
does not care what turf you have to drive thru to get there.
They are not concerned about you being murdered by some
thug 30 miles away, while you are on your way there.
You think a criminal is not going to murder someone just
because they are on their way to VA or Federal Property and
are obeying the law by going unarmed to gun free zones?
But then that would be one less veteran for them to treat.
Lots of things can happen between your location and federal
property.
 
Last edited:
We know that these cases are just the states trying to dissuade their citizens from owning firearms. So if you "abetted" a homicide, they probably can forbid you from owning any other firearm.
 
Federal Law on Parking Lot Guns in Autos

Having looked up and quoting Federal Law regarding parking lot guns in autos, I have to say Federal Law trumps VA "Policy" when it comes to PARKING LOTS.

That said, I frequently visit my local VA Hospital and NO such required signage is present at the gated entrances to the VA parking lots. Federal Law is specific in defining what a Federal Facility IS:
(1) The term “Federal facility” means a building
Thus keeping your weapon secured INSIDE your vehicle while going to your VA appointment is legal under the law. Just be quiet about it as the VA Handbook is NOT accurate.

Links:
18 U.S. Code § 930


VA Handbook 0730

BOTH quoted below:


18 U.S. Code § 930 - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities

(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.

(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(c) A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

(e)
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal court facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (d).

(f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.

(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 21/2 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.


----------------------------------------------------------
Department of Veterans Affairs
Washington, DC 20420
VA HANDBOOK 0730 Transmittal Sheet
AUGUST 11; 2000

t. Firearm and Dangerous Weapon Prohibition (18 U.S.C. 0 930). The following notice
will be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to the facility:

NOTE: The VA misquotes Federal LAW (in RED below)

Whoever knowingly possesses or causes the presence of a firearm or other
dangerous weapon :eek::eek::eek: on the grounds or buildings of this facility, or attempts to
do so, is subject to fine or imprisonment of not more than one year, or both.
18 U.S.C Section 930a.
Whoever intends that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the
commission of a crime and knowingly possesses or causes the presence of a
firearm or other dangerous weapon on the grounds or buildings of this
facility, or attempts to do so, is subject to fine or imprisonment of not more
than five years, or both. 18 U.S.C Section 930b.
 
Last edited:
Having looked up and quoting Federal Law regarding parking lot guns in autos, I have to say Federal Law trumps VA "Policy" when it comes to PARKING LOTS.

That said, I frequently visit my local VA Hospital and NO such required signage is present at the gated entrances to the VA parking lots. Federal Law is specific in defining what a Federal Facility IS:
(1) The term “Federal facility” means a building
Thus keeping your weapon secured INSIDE your vehicle while going to your VA appointment is legal under the law. Just be quiet about it as the VA Handbook is NOT accurate.

Links:
18 U.S. Code § 930


VA Handbook 0730

BOTH quoted below:


18 U.S. Code § 930 - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities

(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.

(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(c) A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.

(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

(e)
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal court facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (d).

(f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.

(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 21/2 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.


----------------------------------------------------------
Department of Veterans Affairs
Washington, DC 20420
VA HANDBOOK 0730 Transmittal Sheet
AUGUST 11; 2000

t. Firearm and Dangerous Weapon Prohibition (18 U.S.C. 0 930). The following notice
will be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to the facility:

NOTE: The VA misquotes Federal LAW (in RED below)

Whoever knowingly possesses or causes the presence of a firearm or other
dangerous weapon :eek::eek::eek: on the grounds or buildings of this facility, or attempts to
do so, is subject to fine or imprisonment of not more than one year, or both.
18 U.S.C Section 930a.
Whoever intends that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the
commission of a crime and knowingly possesses or causes the presence of a
firearm or other dangerous weapon on the grounds or buildings of this
facility, or attempts to do so, is subject to fine or imprisonment of not more
than five years, or both. 18 U.S.C Section 930b.

I see what your saying but I would not want to be one of their
test cases, i figure they would go by their VA policy manual
anyway. The VA is always the VA way or the highway.
As for how safe it is, i have heard there have been a few
assaults of VA employees, on VA property. Whether or not
the VA policy conflicts with Federal Law, i can't argue, but
the VA is not very flexible about the way they do things.
 
I keep an M&P .40c in the center console of my Jeep. I always lock the vehicle. My philosophy is that if someone breaks into my vehicle and steals the gun they have to deal with the consequences. Not me. I am taking the insurance money and buying a new gun. I am not going to let the potential actions of a criminal inconvenience me.
 
Regarding CCW in a post office:

That's just one example of the concept of right and wrong and the law being totally divorced from each other.

There is no wrong-doing involved with CCW in a post office.

The government and liberals have this thing about control.

A post office is federal and you cannot legally carry in a federal building. Unfortunately federal laws and regulations are believed to supercede state laws in our courts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top