HHS staffer arrested for bringing gun and ammunition to work

[The Heretic]

HHS staffer arrested for bringing gun and ammunition to work

Health department branch chief, who has been in a stressful post overseeing coronavirus relief, calls the decision to carry the weapon “a mistake.”

www.politico.com

Read More

 

[Jcon268]

"Several staff said they were particularly concerned by Spann's arrest because of persistent complaints raised about his hostile behavior in the workplace"

Define "hostile." Sounds like the formula to a red flag law. I didn't do my job right and he yelled at me about it and so suddenly he's hostile and probably wants to shoot me

The guy broke laws (which shouldn't even be laws) but the circumstances surrounding the situation try to paint him as someone with a hot temper. I wonder what they would say about hot-headed anti-gunners? Yikes.

 

[The Heretic]

The thing I found most interesting was the "unregistered ammunition"

 

[66PonyCar]

The law, right or wrong, is pretty clear on bringing a firearm into a Federal facility. Being a Federal employee he should have known better.

18 U.S. Code § 930
(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.

 

[The Heretic]

Laws, bad or good, if you get caught and you should have known about the law, then it is your bad.

We all break laws - usually speeding laws. If I get caught (and I do about once a year) then it is my fault.

 

[Jcon268]

The law, right or wrong, is pretty clear on bringing a firearm into a Federal facility. Being a Federal employee he should have known better.

18 U.S. Code § 930
(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.

I agree with that much. He should have known. The rest seems bogus.

 

[TTSX]

Laws, bad or good, if you get caught and you should have known about the law, then it is your bad.

We all break laws - usually speeding laws. If I get caught (and I do about once a year) then it is my fault.

I don't break speeding laws and I get made fun of for it a lot. 55 means 55

 

[Knebel]

*knowingly possesses* ...oh man, I forgot I had it on me....

 

[The Heretic]

I don't break speeding laws and I get made fun of for it a lot. 55 means 55

To each their own. My car has an alert if I go over a certain speed - I have that set to 80 MPH.

 

[Knebel]

I don't break speeding laws and I get made fun of for it a lot. 55 means 55

I unknowingly go 80 and it never endangered anyone. The 55 speed limit is a leftover if the oil crisis in the 70s. It has nothing to do with safety.

 

[Unicykle]

As mentioned above, unregistered ammo ??? Misdemeanor? What state requires ammo registration so i can cross that state off my list?

 

[AirResq]

I remember walking into the Social Security Office in Bend, OR about 10 years ago. I was met inside the front door by a very large (round) Federal cop who asked me if I had any weapons. With a surprised look on my face I whispered, "I didn't know I needed any." I smiled (he didn't) and he let me through. I never did answer his question.

 

[66PonyCar]

Apparently in D.C. you are required to register your firearm with the police. As far as ammunition you can only possess ammunition that corresponds to your registered firearm. So in this case since the firearm was unregistered then possession of the ammunition is prohibited as well.

In spite of the Supreme Court ruling in Heller, D.C. continues to infringe on the Second Amendment.

 

[Capn Jack]

No permit, into a Federal Bld., obviously not concealed.

Should have had a big sign around his neck that said, "Arrest Me".

 

[TTSX]

I unknowingly go 80 and it never endangered anyone. The 55 speed limit is a leftover if the oil crisis in the 70s. It has nothing to do with safety.

It does, however, have a lot to do with whether or not I get a multi hundred dollar ticket for wanting to get somewhere a few minutes earlier.

 

[The Heretic]

I unknowingly go 80 and it never endangered anyone. The 55 speed limit is a leftover if the oil crisis in the 70s. It has nothing to do with safety.

Within certain limitations (e.g., the speed the road is designed for, weather, etc.), it isn't speed that causes accidents on most roads, it is the difference in speed between the the median speed that the traffic is traveling at, and the speed of the slowest or fastest vehicles - this is especially true on multi-lane interstate highways. At 10-20 MPH speed differences, you start to get accidents, but if everybody travels at the same speed, and that speed is safe on a given roadway, then few accidents happen.

DOT has a study out on this.

That said, if an accident does happen at a higher speed, then that increases the chance of injury or death - doubly so if there are differences in speed between the vehicles involved. There are many other factors, weather, road surface, design, the size and weight of the vehicles and so on.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

The law, right or wrong, is pretty clear on bringing a firearm into a Federal facility. Being a Federal employee he should have known better.

18 U.S. Code § 930
(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.

So let us move on to the exceptions in subsection (d), one of which is:

(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES.

Last time I looked, self defense was a lawful purpose.

 

[66PonyCar]

So let us move on to the exceptions in subsection (d), one of which is:

(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES.

Last time I looked, self defense was a lawful purpose.

I agree, but there is little case law on what "other lawful purposes" includes.
In re-reading the article it doesn't appear at this time that he's being charged under Federal law but under Washington, D.C. laws. The article refers to unregistered firearm and ammunition which are not illegal under Federal law.

 

[BPOR11]

More leading the sheeple to how their subconscious should think when it comes time to vote

 

[ZigZagZeke]

I agree, but there is little case law on what "other lawful purposes" includes.
In re-reading the article it doesn't appear at this time that he's being charged under Federal law but under Washington, D.C. laws. The article refers to unregistered firearm and ammunition which are not illegal under Federal law.

I would argue that subsection (3) exempts lawful uses (like self defense) and that the intent was to make it an add-on crime to possess a firearm on federal premises in the commission of a crime (unlawful purposes). I think it could be successfully argued that you are permitted to pick up your mail from your PO box while CCing because you are carrying for a lawful purpose. As a defense attorney I would make that argument, but I don't want to be the one to be the test case.