Randy F - thanks for your thoughts on this. Lots of differing opinions, I guess. I had been wondering what the actual LAW (if any) states about this issue. Years ago, when I distributed political flyers, we were told not to put them in mailboxes, but rather rubber band or tape them to the door knob, but even then we never learned whether this was LAW or just a "guide" from the post office. Using the USC you listed, it states a box erected for receiving official stamped mail from the post office cannot be used [in any way - in or on top of or taped to] for un-stamped items. However, the post [that the box sits on] is NOT considered part of the box. So, there we have it! Thanks!
Randy F - thanks for your thoughts on this. Lots of differing opinions, I guess. I had been wondering what the actual LAW (if any) states about this issue. Years ago, when I distributed political flyers, we were told not to put them in mailboxes, but rather rubber band or tape them to the door knob, but even then we never learned whether this was LAW or just a "want" from the post office. Using the USC you listed, it states a box erected for receiving official stamped mail from the post office cannot be used [in any way - in or on top of or taped to] for un-stamped items. However, the post [that the box sits on] is NOT considered part of the box. So, there we have it! Thanks!
DMM 508.3.1.2 states;
Door slots and nonlockable bins or troughs used with apartment house mailboxes are not letterboxes within the meaning of 18 USC 1725 and are not private mail receptacles for the standards for mailable matter not bearing postage found in or on private mail receptacles. The post or other support is not part of the receptacle.
Also, I failed to find any reference to a 15 foot "zone" leading to and exiting from a mailbox. There is a section that states that the area around the delivery point should be such so that the carrier is not impeded from mak9ng the delivery, but there is no specific distance stated.
I've got 32 years of service with 20 in Business Mail Entry and Mail Classification. I am sure that you know that these activities involve a lot of DMM research and interpretation. Only mentioning it so that you don't think I am just some nut, shooting off my mputh without knowing what I am talking about.
ol az hippie chick, You erect a mail receptacle with the sole intention of receiving US Mail. The USPS retains exclusive right to access that mailbox and excludes any others from doing so. Yes, you bought the box, yes, you set it up and, yes it is on your property. However, it is for your convenience to have a mailbox at your residence so you do all of that to make it happen.
The simple act of erecting a mail receptacle constitutes your acceptance of USPS and USC rules and regulations regarding its use.
Also.....the law use to be the post office only owned the air space in the mailbox. However, somewhere around the late 80s to early 90's it was changed to include around the box, flag and post. Including 15 feet in front of and 15 feet past the mailbox for vehicle usage. It was when the first larger postal vehicles (LLV) were made to replace the old jeeps. Of course it isn't very specific since some mailboxes don't have 15 feet in front or after due to the location of the mailbox. It is rather vague but since most people understand mailboxes are for postal use, they abide. It's the few butt holes that always want to challenge it. If someone puts a flyer on my mailbox, I would be tempted to call the police to report a break in and take them to small claims court.....I could use a new wide screen tv.
Btw.....the box set postal property. Technically they own the airspace in and around the box, flag and post. I've been removing layers for thirty years. Everyone. At our station, we give three to the supervisor and trash the rest as non obvious value since there is no postage on them. The supervisor is suppose to send one to the local police to report temporary tampering of the mailbox. One to the EED department who Calls the vender to offer them a time saving cheaper alternative called every door direct where the post office will deliver the flyers for them without expensive adverstisement requirements or bulk rate permit expense.....and the third to the postal inspections department that is suppose to keep track on repeat offenders. We had two cases in our zone where a lawn care service and a local restaurant repetatly ignored postal inspections warnings about putting flyers on the mailbox. The lawn care service went to court and lost and had to pay a $5000 fine to the postal service. The restaurant stop and agreed not to do it again to avoid the $5000 fine.
Well....we had a lawyer go on vacation once. Had the postal service hold his mail. A lawn care service put a flyer on his mailbox that the carrier didn't remove. It was on his box for sometime while he was on vacation. Some high school kids saw the flyer on his box and determined since it was there for days, he was gone. So they broke into his home and had a school party. Broke the up stairs bathroom and flooded the place. Causing eighty thousand dollars in damages. When the lawyer got home. He called the police who did a search of the home and found a cell phone in the upstairs master bedroom along with some used condoms in the bed. They traced the phone back to the high school kid who told the cops what happen. So they found the flyer and sued the four kids that organized the party and the lawn care provider for placing the flyer in the mailbox. The lawyer sued The five of them and won. They had to pay for the $80,000 dollar repairs plus the room, board and travel expenses of the lawyer while his home was being repaired. The lawyer now sends letters to homes that are broken into telling the residents if there's a flyer on the mailbox, the vendor will have to pay for everything that was stolen.....and the lawyer is winning. So good luck to this guy.
I appreciate the story, but as with everything, there is so much more to it. Join the Montana Filmmakers & Media group via Facebook to learn more. https://www.facebook.com/groups/MTFMA/?ref…
Get an idea of film's economic impact in Montana, with actual numbers.
Here's a plan to have the film office, the tourism office, and the Historical Society working hand in hand to get more films made about the state, and thus more interest in coming here and spending money.
Waste of time and taxpayer money. The police in Missoula have shot more people than the criminals and just how many gun crimes are committed in Missoula?
It's to bad this councilor and the others can't focus on something more relevant like getting spending under control.
Sandra - that's a good point; one I didn't think about. The box is YOUR property; therefore, the post office shouldn't have say about who else touches it. You, however, have that right.
He has no business touching any part of my mailbox. If any of my mail comes up missing, he's suspect #1.
Perfect proof that being a "rocket scientist" doesn't necessarily make you smart. Let the Californication of Montana begin, starting with outsiders such as this bozo, funded by out-of-state money. And the funniest part isn't that this legislator is trying to bypass state law, but that if this somehow miraculously passes, pawn shops and gun shops in Missoula will feel the financial brunt of this due to Missoula residents simply patronizing out-of-city pawn shops and gun shops, or making sure their private transactions occur outside of Missoula.
Way to go, von Lossberg. You're on the road to financially impacting the constituents you allegedly serve. In fact, I would charge that you don't serve your Missoula constituents, but rather the out-of-state money interests that are funding your war chest. You're a disgrace.
It will probably cost him more to go to court than it would have for bulk rate postage or for a couple of teens to hang them on doors.
"Days ahead of the Oct. 19 public hearing, Fox indicated his leanings in a press release saying he believes the proposed ordinance is prohibited by state law and "likely violates our constitutional right to keep and bear arms."
I don't have any Constitutional rights. I have unalienable Constitutionally PROTECTED rights which we the people created the govt and gave it the DUTY to protect.
"After the ordinance's public hearing in October, political and public will seemed to be in its favor. A survey of 350 Missoula County residents, commissioned by advocates, found that 82 percent of gun owners, including 73 percent of Republicans and 70 percent of independents, supported requiring background checks on all gun sales. The majority of submitted public comment and testimony was in favor of the ordinance. And the votes from council appeared to be there."
A survey commissioned by the advocates? Oh pleaeeeess. LOL If I pay you to do a survey you had better come up with results favorable to what I'm advocating. Behavior mod/group management facilitation 101
Since when in America do we have to present our tastes and plans to surrounding neighbors before we build, landscape, or even buy a car? If it is done within the law and its codes, why the brouhaha? Bitter hearts? Please! Get over it! If you want restrictions, live in a neighborhood that has deed restrictions or homeowner associations.
The complaining is getting old, and this is a very weak article. The cartoon, however, says it all!
Find another cause to focus your energy, jealousy, and power trips! Hey, how about turning it into something positive for a change of heart?!
18 USC 1702, 1705, 1708, and 1725. As far as I know, the USC, United States Code, is the Law, not a guideline or "rule". USPS does not make the Laws in the US Code.
The article states that 35 years ago, a USPS "rule" that the inside of a mail box is postal property was upheld in the courts. Later, the USPS added to the "rule," stating the box itself, but not the post, is post office property. So, if this isn't an actual law, I hope the court rules in flyer-man's favor. Anyone can make up a "rule," but does that make it a legality that we have to "obey"?
I have a question for all involved here. How many gun crimes, in the city of missoula, have been committed with a gun bought privately without a background check? I don't know if the answer is 1000 or 0. But to me this does make a difference. If its 0 quit wasting taxpayer money, if its 1000 I might get on board too.
It's the old conundrum : Where does one person's rights end, when exercising those rights may adversely impact others ? Because I could make some money by doing so, should I be allowed to set up a rock crusher or an asphalt plant on my private property, even if it's in a residential neighborhood ?
My right to swing my fist stops short of your nose.
Missoula News/Independent Publishing |
Powered by Foundation