USPS no longer shipping long guns for non-licensees

[deadin]

I can not find a requirement that the mailer must declare that he is mailing a long gun as defined by postal regulations.

I don't know about your experience, but every time I mail a package the clerk always asks "Any thing hazardous, restricted or perishable?"
(Firearms fall under restricted) I always answer truthfully but also don't try to mail anything I shouldn't.

 

[dogtown tom]

deadin

Quote:
I can not find a requirement that the mailer must declare that he is mailing a long gun as defined by postal regulations.

I don't know about your experience, but every time I mail a package the clerk always asks "Any thing hazardous, restricted or perishable?"
(Firearms fall under restricted) I always answer truthfully but also don't try to mail anything I shouldn't.

Funny, in Texas they ask "Anything fragile, liquid or hazardous?"

 

[YZ]

That's how they ask around here. Not "restricted". And you know what, both ways could be correct. There is a room for their discretion. The fact that your postmaster gave you a (verbal) interpretation you liked doesn't change the way the rule appears in print. It leaves room for discretion.

There may be, I suppose, unpublished Homeland Security guidelines for postal service. Do we know exactly all the criteria the TSA operates by? This is my speculation only, if you show up at the Post Office and go all Ted Nugent, there may be a provision to give you extra scrutiny.

 

[bikemutt]

In this particular instance when I presented the rifle for shipment, with pre-paid shipping, before I could get a word in edgewise, I was admonished (loudly) for not leaving the package in a semi-public (un-monitored) area of the counter designated for pre-paids. Now I understand why pre-paids can be pooled up for later processing but I'm not leaving any shipment worth over $700 on a counter without a receipt, and where the next person could just walk off with it unnoticed. As I've already said, it did not improve thereon.

And, I'll add that when the next words out of my mouth were asking if she would scan the label and furnish me with a receipt, I was told NO, she said she did not have the equipment to do that.

Funny, the PO that did accept the shipment had no problem scanning the label and handing me a receipt, nor has this PO in the past.

At this time I believe the clerk simply did not like me, was having a bad, both, or her dog bit her earlier. I'm going to take it as a bad day and move on. Her behavior will not deter me from doing what I did again in the future.

 

[splithoof]

A bad day and move on?????? This clerk needs to be punished, and HARD! Gun owners have been beat up so badly for so long that it seems OK by many of these idiots. Letting this go will embolden the clerk to continue with totally unacceptable behavior, and more will do the same. Make a stand, this needs to stop RIGHT NOW!

 

[herrwalther]

All sorts of people have vastly conflicting information about what can and can't be done with firearms. Every time I fly with firearms, I print out all the TSA guidelines and airline guidelines to bring with me just in case some employee doesn't know their own policy. In situations like these bringing your own paperwork of their rules is your friend. If you don't have the paperwork that tells them to do so you just end up walking away frustrated, whereas they have a bad rest of the day for not knowing their own policy.

 

[Deer_Freak]

I have shipped several firearms by return label. The return label said "machine parts" on it. Anyone that saw the address might guess the machine parts are parts of a gun or the entire gun.

 

[YZ]

One would think that if TSA rules are the same in all US airports, so are the procedures. In fact they slightly vary. I have learned that at my usual point of departure I must report to the TSA supervisor. Sometimes, but not always, they will unlock the container to see the firearm. At one of my common destinations, no such thing. You declare it and check in, that's all. I never question the ritual du joir. In fact it may change constantly depending on the global risk assessment or who knows what, without public explanation.

Perhaps we should see the Postal Service as another branch of Homeland Security. We are going to be inconvenienced, and on occasion mistreated, just like at those checkpoints.

 

[bikemutt]

As far as TSA goes, I always catch a smile when I do my annual South Dakota hunt. Seattle-Tacoma all they care about is my shotgun; Aberdeen, SD all they care about are my pheasants.

 

[bikemutt]

A bad day and move on?????? This clerk needs to be punished, and HARD! Gun owners have been beat up so badly for so long that it seems OK by many of these idiots. Letting this go will embolden the clerk to continue with totally unacceptable behavior, and more will do the same. Make a stand, this needs to stop RIGHT NOW!

I hear you, and you are right of course. I do have to balance the consumption of time it would take to go back there against the fact that this is the first time it's happened out of many. Next time I'll go there prepared with the facts in hand, if I hit the same bump I'll roll them both into one and stand my ground at that time.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Give some thought as to the approach I suggested a few days ago.


Punished? Ain't gonna happen in a government job.

Follow Postal Mail policies, much better chance of a positive outcome there.

 

[btg3]

I could not believe this was the case so, I drove 5 miles to another post office and asked if I could ship a rifle to a FFL.

Been there, done that with the same result. Not every postal worker has the same level of (in)competence.