Unfortunately, federal law would trump any permit laws.. I used to work in a government facility and they were very very very up front with the fact its against federal law to have a gun in your car/on your person/anywhere on the property.

They can be as "up front" as they want.

The Minnesota permit is significant, under federal law.



The Minnesota permit is pretty clearly a presumptive "lawful purpose."

Volunteering for the test case Andrew. And if you are stuck in the klink, we'll argue about your guilt here on the forum

Good one Brit

\
And Pat and Pinnacle will be the only ones to defend him, the rest of us will erect the gallows

Who's bringing the rope?

Tell me about it! My girlfriend works there and it's quite a hassle if I'm carrying and don't want to "break the law". I'm interested in reading about section (d) though.

If it helps any... Try crossing over the tracks on 54th street instead of trying to turn left at the light. It goes a lot faster.

If you want to discuss the issue, I'd contact the VAPD at their offices in person and have a nice chat.

Some years ago, under quite different circumstances, they were quite accommodating and allowed me to secure the hardware in their shop as it was inappropriate to carry the parts I had to go. I seem to recall they had some misgivings about being unarmed themselves.

Perhaps Erik can elaborate.

I don't know if the VA hospital, or even if all federal installations, are covered under the "post office law" Military bases/VA hospitals may be covered by a tighter law. That would be something to ask the VA security folks.

I'm fairly good friends with the Mpls VA Chief of Police, we work quite closely in a volunteer capacity on a weekly basis.

I'll try to remember to ask him when I see him this week.

Well, it's not the "Post Office Law." It's Chapter 44 of US Code, "Sec. 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities."

And I suppose one could ask the VA police what they would do if a permit holder carried there, and if they said arrest, I'd ask them on what basis.

But even that would not convince me that they were right -- only of their intentions, and their understanding of the law.

Go to this site and print it.

Highlight subsection (d)(3) with a yellow marker. Show it to him and ask what "other lawful purposes" means with respect to a permit to carry obtained under Minnesota law.

Tell him one of your pain in the ass friends put you up to it.

Great, now I have to decide which one of you to blame...

Heh, I just re-read subsection (h) which is the Federal posting requirement.

Basically, it reads (to me) that they need a sign at each public entrance that reads:

The sign "shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility... and no person shall be convicted of an offense... if such notice is not so posted at such facility"

No conspicuous sign, no conviction. You might get arrested and go through a rectal exam, but no conviction. You go first, I'll stand here and watch.

Blame me. It's popular elsewhere.