TexasCHLforum.com

C-dub wrote:I'm still curious how someone could be actively engaged in hunting in a PO. Even after Charles' explanation of "incident to" I still don't see the distinction between hunting and defending one's self in a PO. Saying that no one goes into a PO actively defending themselves can also be said of hunting. What would I be actively hunting in a PO?

Section 18 U.S.C. concerns any Federal facility, not just Post Offices. I believe it is also is the statue that the COE uses to enforce no firearms on lakes under their control.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

18 U.S.C. 930(c) wrote:(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

(Emphasis added).

So, if I understand your interpretation of the statue- “or other lawful purposes” does not cover being licensed by the state to carry a firearm under CHL. I totally agree that the “Hunting” phrase would not apply to CHL, but I fail to understand why the “Other Lawful Purposes” does not apply to an activity that the state has said that is in fact, lawful.

I realize that you are an attorney and I am not, but to me the “or” in the phrase says that if your activity is otherwise lawful, then it should be allowed and would not be a crime. Carrying under CHL is not by itself, an unlawful act.

Help me out here. What would be an example of "other lawful purposes"?