Previous Post
Next Post

Another Post Office shooting (courtesy

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky is trying to eliminate the ban on guns in U.S. Post Offices. Shannon Watts of Moms Demand Illegal Guns for Mayors Against Action (or something like that) opposes the move. “Prior to the current ban on guns inside federal buildings, mass shootings at U.S. Post Offices were so frequent that the phrase ‘going postal’ became a popular way to describe workplace violence in America.” Which implies that ‘going postal’ has gone out of fashion because the gun ban was/is so effective. Yes, well, in 1972, the Postal Service enacted 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(l) (“USPS Regulation”). That reg stipulates that . . .

Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

So how many post office shootings pre-date the ban and, indeed, the turn-of-phrase? For that info we turn to the hive mind at Wikipedia:

The expression derives from a series of incidents from 1983 onward in which United States Postal Service (USPS) workers shot and killed managers, fellow workers, and members of the police or general public in acts of mass murder. Between 1986 and 1997, more than 40 people were gunned down by spree killers in at least 20 incidents of workplace rage.

Of the 21 entries in Wikipedia’s List of postal killings all of them occurred after the law went into effect. More to the point – well, my point – all of the incidents involved armed killers murdering unarmed victims. What’s more, “researchers have found that the homicide rates at postal facilities were lower than at other workplaces.”

So much for that then. Except of course, for Shannon’s shrieking. Here’s her full press release on the subject of gun ban reform in U.S. post offices:

(Indianapolis, IN) Feb. 3, 2014: Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America vehemently objects to any attempt to amend existing federal law and lift the ban on guns in post offices, as proposed by Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. Sen. Paul’s amendment to the Senate postal reform bill would allow licensed gun owners to carry weapons inside post offices. Guns are currently banned in all American federal buildings, including post offices.

Sen. Paul is attempting to have the amendment included in a postal reform bill being debated by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Prior to the current ban on guns inside federal buildings, mass shootings at U.S. Post Offices were so frequent that the phrase “going postal” became a popular way to describe workplace violence in America.

“As mass shootings continue to trend upward in America, it is unthinkable that Sen. Paul would attempt to remove a ban on guns in a workplace where mass shootings have occurred,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. “Moms will not sit idly by while our lawmakers pick apart existing common sense gun laws. We will fight tooth-and-nail to help protect our families from senseless gun violence.”

“There is simply no reason why post offices should be exempt from the ban on guns in federal  buildings, especially given the history of shootings inside post offices,” said Watts.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Why are you bringing facts, logic, and reasoned discourse into this conversation you insurrectionist, misogynistic bully?!?!?!!!???

    • For simply saying that all 21 incidents occurred AFTER the USPS banned firearms in their buildings, you would likely be banned from commenting on MDA’s Facebook page and blocked from responding to their tweets.

      • Been there, done that. I’ve also been banned from their frakking YouTube channel. The same with MAIG, CSVG, and a whole host of other Facebook pages, internet forums, and blogs.

        So much for “wanting a national debate.” Ha! They can all bend over and kiss my bleach white, Irish ass.

        • We need TTAG merit badges. There could be one for completing a review of a firearms related product. One for getting an article/essay published on the blog, and the most coveted badge would surely be for getting banned/blocked from any MDA social media pages.

  2. I hate when she says crap like, “moms will not sit idly by!” I mean… one again… I don’t care that some 6 lb baby plopped out of your vagina. It does not give you credibility… at all….

    Look at how they straight up lie. This is why gun control advocates are losing. Their argument IS NOT based on fact, but on lies and myths.

    • I’m a mom too (it was a 9 lb, 11 oz baby by c-section), and that fascist liar doesn’t speak for me. I’m angered that she presumes to speak for me.

    • unless somehow Shannon is claiming some child is mine (hey man, there have been times over my life that mr jack daniels has clouded my judgment and I cannot account for broad swaths of time . . . .), then she needs to drop the I am a mom crap. doesnt work for my mother, wont work for her

    • It stems from our victim obsessed culture. We give special credence and credibility to victims whether it has anything to do with the topic or not. One of my favorite ones is Colin Goddard claiming some kind of expertise on guns and gun laws because he got shot a few times in the V. Tech shooting. Every time he’s ever made a statement of any kind to any publication he invokes his getting shot, as thought that’s his credentials. Every article that quotes him introduces him as getting shot at vtech and then has some vague emotional quote about guns killing children. Being a mother doesn’t make you an expert on guns or guns laws and it doesn’t make you an expert on alcohol or driving under the influence.

      If I get run over by a car in a crosswalk, I don’t magically become an expert on cars or traffic laws.

    • The same assumed credibility is asserted by the families of victims of criminal shootings because of their (understandable) axes to grind.

      Credibility is not and cannot be validated by emotion, it can only be certified by facts.

      While we can sympathize, we can’t grant them what they don’t deserve.

  3. Shannon Watts Weekly Planner for February 3-7. Monday: Stop Dana Loesch from cohosting The View. (Epic Fail)
    Tuesday: Go Postal on Rand Paul. Wednesday: Sob uncontrollably on Bloomberg’s shoulder. Thursday: Piss and moan about lack of media attention on Moms Demand Illegal Guns for Mayors Against Action . Friday: Scour the internet for some random shooting that can be twisted in the MSM to further her cause.
    She really needs to get a life.

  4. Just so I’m clear because it wasn’t explicitly put in these terms, creating a “gun free zone” in the Post Office didn’t stop determined shooters from bringing in a firearm and killing someone? They ignored the law?

    This is my shocked face….wait for it….

  5. “There is simply no reason why post offices should be exempt from the ban on guns in federal buildings, especially given the history of shootings inside post offices,” said Watts.

    Well yes there is actually. (Not that there should be a ban in any federal building but thats a different point) The post office, unlike other federal facilities, is visited more frequently and by a larger number of people then other federal facilities. It also isn’t a regular federal facility, it is more of a retail location where business is conducted. So it isn’t the same as say, a federal courthouse, IRS offices, or something of the like.

    • another key – most federal buildings have security. the post office does not. and to really cause Shannon some brain hurt, the post office a quasi-federal agency. Let her marinate on that one.

      • Don’t give them any ideas… start reminding them that they’re a federal agency and pretty soon they’ll want SWAT teams just like everyone else….

        • they are “quasi” federal . . . they have their own police force. However, given their “quasi” federal nature, Congress has special oversight over them. If anything, I question their authority to even maintain their ban on firearms in light of the recent Colorado Federal District Court decision.

        • I’m sure the Postal Inspector’s office already does have SWAT teams. Probably have a right-hand-drive MRAP or two, parted among all the right-hand-drive Jeeps out on the back lot.

      • “Let her marinate on that one” I’m tired of her getting to”Nate” on the rest of us, I’d rather she’d just piss off and drop her next rat out of country……..

        This is why I would rather go to a UPS store to spend my bucks. They don’t care if I carry concealed in there.

      • People love to bitch about all of the alphabet soup agencies wanting SWAT Teams, but most do not realize that the Postal Inspectors is the oldest Federal Law Enforcement Agency in existence. Say what you want about other federal agencies, but the Inspectors do not make their bones by trying to screw over normal law-abiding citizens. The Inspection Service actually pre-dates the declaration of Independence.

        For the skeptics:

  6. This is fantastic. There is so much stupidity and so little research on her part that it makes her look like a fool. I know that reflexive low-information blue team voters won’t change their minds on this issue, but those who dabble more in the center can see her and MAIG more and more for their true colors.

  7. As a 27 year old, what’s a post office? Next you’ll be telling me that phones have to be connected by wires or some such nonsense.

    I would claim that I avoid post offices but can’t, honestly, think of ever having to go to one since I’ve been old enough to carry.

  8. Any study of workplace violence will show that it was the media hype of post office shootings that generated the phrase, “going postal”, NOT the actual frequency of the shootings there. In fact, workplace shootings were more frequent in many other kinds of workplaces at the time.
    See, Loren Christiansan’s book, “Surviving Workplace Violence”.
    Once again, Shannon proves herself fact-immune.

    • I thought that “going postal” was a term coined on Saturday Night Live back when Ackroyd & Curtain were doing the Weekend Updates…

  9. as I pointed out last night:

    “so if you read the press release MDA is putting out. . . . it says to contact BerlinRosen. BerlinRosen (apparently, fellow Tribe members with Robert who forgot certain not too recent historical facts about propaganda) is a professional hit job, I mean PR firm. So, it lookie like Shannon Watts is spending (Little) Daddy Bloomberg’s $$$, but . . . . what is this? The press release says if you have questions (I gots plenty), to contact Taylor Maxwell. She probably is not good to the last drop (although, hell, my dumb ass thinks Shannon Watts would be a freak in bed). No, Taylor is a JUNIOR ASSOCIATE!!!! She is at the bottom of their damn org chart. Riddle me this Batman. If you have a midget billionaire’s $$ and he is a sworn enemy of the 2nd Amendment, how the hell do you end up with the person who fetches coffee and extra cream as your new mouthpiece at your new “high powered” PR firm (these are the same people taking credit for getting MAIG’s newest criminal to be (fingers crossed), Bill deBlasio elected. . . .

    hmmmm. . .. . maybe Shannon is on a tight budget because she didn’t produce for Daddy??”

  10. “There is simply no reason why post offices should be exempt from the ban on guns in federal buildings, especially given the history of shootings inside post offices.”

    The obvious solution is to hang up more and bigger signs!

    • In some countries they just install really thick bullet-proof glass between the tellers and the customers. Shy of RPG’s it doesn’t matter what the customer carries. Kinda makes mailing large packages a hassle though…

  11. I was going to post a comment regarding this on Facebook . . . and then I realized that there wasn’t a single mainstream news article I could link to. Seriously, trying checking the news tab on google. The closest thing I found was the Sacramento Bee. I’m starting to think this website actually IS giving her more coverage than anyone else, nobody else seems to care too much when she opens her mouth.

    • Honestly, I always liked “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America (a wholly owned subsidiary of Mayors Against Illegal Guns)”. Truth in advertising…

    • Considering the criminality rate of the MAIG constituents, “Mom’s Demand Illegal Mayors” woks fine too. Or “Mayors Against Demanding Moms,” if you think Bloomy and Watts are hooking up. I had another decent one a while back, I wonder what it was.

  12. Two major issues or circumstances here: In front of the counter and behind it.

    1. Having to unstrap to get my mail out of my P.O. Box or to send a package, having to go to the counter is different than:
    2. Working behind the counter, in the back, or at a sorting center.

    Work rules should be considered separately than those concerning USPS customers walking into the front end of a building. Let’s at least fix the simple one for the customer.

  13. “Moms will not sit idly by while our lawmakers pick apart existing common sense gun laws.”

    Going by the pictures at MDA rallies, yes, they will sit idly by because they don’t buy in to the idiocy of the gun ban agenda.

  14. Perhaps someone can remind Dirk’s squeeze that when Patrick Sherrill killed his co-workers, Oklahoma law banned private individuals from carrying arms of any kind (except unloaded hunting rifles during hunting season):

    Edmond Post Office massacre: Marking 25 years.

    On Aug. 20, 1986, gunman Patrick Henry Sherrill shot and killed 14 co-workers, wounded six and then took his own life inside the post office where he worked.

    The only option his defenseless co-workers had was to die.

  15. So here’s a serious question. If the law forbids weapons inside the Post Office, why do they post the signs _inside_ the Post Office, and in every case I’ve seen, so far inside that there is absolutely no chance for you to become aware of it until you’ve walked up practically to the counter?

    • Ah, but it doesn’t just prohibit them inside the post office, it prohibits them on post office property. Which, unless it’s in a big city building that fronts directly on the sidewalk, includes the parking lot. So legally, you can’t even leave it in your car in the parking lot. To be completely legal, you’d have to park at the curb, or next door, or across the street, and leave it in your car there.

      Your question still stands, I just made it bigger.

      • I thought the inside/outside question was settled in federal court last year in the Tab Bonidy case, allowing firearms in vehicles on postal property, but not inside the buildings. I haven’t followed the case since then, though, so I don’t know whether there’s been any appeals court activity on it or if it’s limited to just that district.

        • Bonidy did indeed decide that the Post Office could not ban firearms in the parking lot–but there are several questions that remain. First, this was just a trial court decision, not an appellate decision, and therefore it was merely persuasive authority, not binding on any other court, state or federal. Second, although I haven’t seen the actually language of the order, there is a question as to whether the decision applies outside that court’s jurisdiction. [By way of example, the Army Corps decision recently discussed here specifically applied to all property owned or controlled by the Corps, and thus had nationwide effect.] Third, USPS appealed, and so that decision is not final. Therefore, the current regulation, barring possession on any USPS property, remains in effect.

        • Was “postal property” defined? How about a post office in a strip mall, sharing parking lot, roads, pedestrian walkways, and even building with other, private businesses?

        • There’s an interesting sentence near the end of the ruling in the Bonidy v. USPS case:
          In sum, openly carrying a firearm outside the home is a liberty protected by the Second Amendment.
          Since this was a federal district court covering Colorado, how does that square with Denver’s open carry ban?

    • At this point, she probably does. I can’t find any verification of it, but Bloomberg for sure does (to the point where, when he takes vacations to the Caribbean, where civilian possession of guns is illegal, he has to (and of course, can) get a special exemption for his armed guards to travel with him.)

      While if that is the case I’m sure she’s keeping it on the down-low, if it ever were revealed, she’d likely have an excuse that she feels is “common-sense”, such as “I’m a MOM! I have CHILDREN! And I’m targeted by GUN BULLIES!”

      For people who make their life’s occupation promoting an ideology, it’s never necessarily true that they live the ideology which they promote. Again, there’s no evidence of it, but it would not shock me one bit if Shannon Watts carries concealed. There would be a rationalization in her mind that her circumstances are exceptional, and that of ~course~ she’s responsible enough to, after all, she’s a *MOM*.

      We already know that Bloomberg, with his private armed detail and previously with the NYPD as his “own private army”, has no interest in practicing what he preaches, as he’s of a different class than “we are”. The fact that he protects himself, directly or indirectly, with guns, is also no secret. It’s easily researchable, and few people seem to care.

      With Watts and her inherent feeling of authority due to being a “mom”, I have no reason to think she wouldn’t be of the same mindset – that her circumstances and authority is “different” and therefore there should be an exception to the rules for her.

      I might be wrong, but I really wouldn’t be surprised.

  16. Sometimes, like right now, I just want to stand in front of Ms. Watts’ face, look her straight in the eyes and, in a tone of voice her husband or father should have LONG since taken with her, tell her “Girl, give it a frickin’ rest, will you?!?!”; with a double interrobang for good measure.

    • A lot of people say this about her face, her expression. It’s all in how you hold yourself, and I haven’t seen a single picture of her where she was not transmitting an “I know better than you” smirk. I’m sure it’s how she goes through her everyday life.

  17. The Democrat Party ordered the Midget Mayor to stand down on gun control until after the midterm elections. That’s why Bloomberg bought MDA. It’s political cover for MAIG, using Shannon as the mouthpiece.

    The Dems placated the egotesticle (sic) bastard by giving him freedom of action on immigration.

    Once the midterms are over and done with, the Midget will be back after guns with a vengeance.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here