No guns in church?

[Sassy Belle]

And I am an easy mark when I'm there working by myself. People want money or gas money or some are sales people. I've had a couple of men get upset when I tell them I can't give them money. We don't keep money on site anyway. Now that I have my gun, I feel a little more comfortable when someone knocks on the door.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[SR9]

Seems funny to me that everytime you see a religous symbol on a piece of government property, it has to be removed, because of the Constitutional "seperation of church and state. So why can a government have a law against carrying a gun in church. Doesn't the same "seperation of church and state" apply there also?

This no carry in church law is un-Constitutional, right?

 

[BC1]

Seems funny to me that everytime you see a religous symbol on a piece of government property, it has to be removed, because of the Constitutional "seperation of church and state. So why can a government have a law against carrying a gun in church. Doesn't the same "seperation of church and state" apply there also?

This no carry in church law is un-Constitutional, right?

The constitution, more particularly the first amendment, does not guarantee separation of church and state. That was a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson around 1803 when writing to the Danbury Baptists.

 

[sammeow]

The following places are restricted if the 30.06 sign is posted, in which case it is a Class A misdemeanor offense.
On the "premises" of a; hospital, nursing home, amusement park, carnival, church, synagogue, or any other place of worship.
At the meeting of a governmental entity.

As an employee, you might be restricted if your employer has notified you of their no firearms policy.

Senate Bill 501 has removed the right of any city, county or state government of Texas to place a 30.06 sign on any building owned or leased by that government therefore not restricting the carrying of a handgun by a CHL holder.

 

[ezkl2230]

The constitution, more particularly the first amendment, does not guarantee separation of church and state. That was a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson around 1803 when writing to the Danbury Baptists.

And specifically addresses the need for the state to stay out of the business of the church, not the other way around.

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists


To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and, in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" thus building a wall of eternal separation between Church & State. Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect, Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience I shall see with friendly dispositions the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced that he has no natural rights in opposition to his social duties."

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & the Danbury Baptist [your religious] association assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson Jan. 1. 1802. (emphasis added)

Will someone please show me where Jefferson says - or even hints - in this letter that religion has no place in government?

 

[BC1]

And specifically addresses the need for the state to stay out of the business of the church, not the other way around.



Will someone please show me where Jefferson says - or even hints - in this letter that religion has no place in government?

It's funny thing, this thought that religion had nothing to do with government. Much of American law is based in English common law which evolved from religious teachings and the church. A read of the commandments given to Moses is like reading the state penal law or civil practice law and rules. In criminal law, thou shalt not murder, steal, covet they neighbor's things, bear false witness against another, etc. We see financial and accounting law, medical practice, alienation of affection (covet thy neighbor's wife). And then the atheist community follows those very laws while complaining they don't want to hear the word Christmas.
.
Dane Cook said it best... someone sneezed, he said "God bless you" and the guy got mad. Told him "when I die my body will rot and provide fertilizer for that might oak to grow. Nothing more." Dane said "well I hope someone cuts down that mighty oak, grinds it into paper and uses it to print bibles." Karma's a b!tch.

 

[snatale42]

Can someone explain why church carry is illegal? Makes no sense at all.

I've found TX isn't half as gun friendly as it reputation. Pretty scary when my home state of MA has less restrictions on where you can carry.

To the OP: From my Googling (take that for what it's worth) Churches aren't immune to the 30.06 req, a TX resident should confirm or deny that, but if thats true and there isn't one up there, there's your answer!

 

[Chris Rakes]

since Jesus himself told us to arm ourselves. then i think it is OK to carry in church

 

[LoneStarTx]

I will read the law more in depth. I don't worship at that church. I just work there. So I feel like its half church half work place. The fact that I'm there by myself a lot is really the reason I started the ball rolling on my CHL.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

"Don't ask don't tell" is good advice. Feel free to carry concealed unless there is a proper posted with 30.06 signs or you are told by owner not to carry. The offense would be trespass. Just remember: concealed means concealed. A co-worker of my wife showed her new cute pistol to someone at work and was fired as it was federal building. If she had not told or shown it who would have known and she would still have a job.

 

[NavyLCDR]

"Don't ask don't tell" is good advice. Feel free to carry concealed unless there is a proper posted with 30.06 signs or you are told by owner not to carry. The offense would be trespass. Just remember: concealed means concealed. A co-worker of my wife showed her new cute pistol to someone at work and was fired as it was federal building. If she had not told or shown it who would have known and she would still have a job.

I think better advice would be to know the law and attempt to follow it. I'll bet the sign required by 18 USC 930 was probably posted at the entrance to the Federal facility, thereby making possession of the firearm illegal there. In that case "If she had not told or shown it who would have known and she would still have a job" and she would still have violating Federal law. Not getting caught is completely different than not doing anything illegal.

It's the same situation with the church in Texas. If there is not a sign posted conforming to the standards in 30.06, and no other written or oral notice is personally given, than "don't ask, don't tell" and possessing the firearm violates no laws. If there is notification given meeting the standards of 30.06, then "don't ask don't tell" and "concealed means concealed" still results in committing the criminal act of possessing the firearm in a place that is illegal to possess it.

 

[LoneStarTx]

I think better advice would be to know the law and attempt to follow it. I'll bet the sign required by 18 USC 930 was probably posted at the entrance to the Federal facility, thereby making possession of the firearm illegal there. In that case "If she had not told or shown it who would have known and she would still have a job" and she would still have violating Federal law. Not getting caught is completely different than not doing anything illegal.

It's the same situation with the church in Texas. If there is not a sign posted conforming to the standards in 30.06, and no other written or oral notice is personally given, than "don't ask, don't tell" and possessing the firearm violates no laws. If there is notification given meeting the standards of 30.06, then "don't ask don't tell" and "concealed means concealed" still results in committing the criminal act of possessing the firearm in a place that is illegal to possess it.

I agree completely and I fully support our Constitution but if the weapon is concealed no one knows it and we carry there because criminals almost always carry concealed we are back to the 2nd Amendment again?
"......the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Is federal regulation thus Constitutional? And does that mean criminals actually have a Constitutional right to carry?
Catch 22?

 

[ezkl2230]

Why does it need to be cleaned up? The law is already very specific. As the law is written now, if the church does not want to prohibit firearms, they are not required to. No sign or other notice given according to section 30.06 means that carry in the church is legal. As it is written now, carrying a firearm in a church is legal by default, unless the church decides they wish to actively prohibit firearms. Seems like that is a pretty good deal to me. The current requirement requires the state to prove that the church gave legal notice.

Quite the opposite of MI, where carry of concealed firearms is prohibited by default, unless the presiding authority of the church allows it. Open carry with a CPL, on the other hand, is legal unless the church prohibits it. I lead one of our church's security teams; we are finally going through training by which the church will allow us to carry concealed.

 

[sfharrison]

check out Texas Law Shield, Link Removed.

Private property owners are allowed to prohibit the carrying of concealed handguns on their property if they provide proper legal notice of trespassing by a CHL holder with a concealed handgun given in compliance with Texas Penal Code §30.06. Notice may be given verbally or in writing with a statutory warning or by signage with the statutory warning in English and Spanish, in one inch high block letters posted in a conspicuous place.

Further, even with a CHL, these weapons may not be carried concealed under the following circumstances pursuant to Texas Penal Code §46.03 & §46.035:

In a place of religious worship if a proper TPC §30.06 warning is given.

Any of the above information is solely a general legal discussion of the law in Texas and should not be considered as giving legal advice, nor creating an attorney-client relationship. Your situation may be different so contact an attorney regarding your personal circumstances. Please call our office for more information.

877-448-6839
Non-Emergency Phone Number

Texas Law Shield, LLP
A Legal Services Company
1020 Bay Area Blvd Suite 220
Houston, Texas 77058

If told by Pastor not to carry, leave it in your car. It is always good to obey your Pastor. Remember, concealed is concealed.

 

[NavyLCDR]

It is always good to obey your Pastor.

That's a pretty broad blanket statement. Some pastors and priests have been guilty of child molestation, cheating on their spouses, sexual harassment and assaults, and other less nefarious activities. "Some" being defined as not all, but more than a couple.

 

[brownium]

The law is confusing, because it explicitly states that carrying in churches or places of worship is forbidden, then later states that it is only forbidden if the 30.06 sign is in place. That is redundant - any place the 30.06 sign is posted would be forbidden. My understanding is that the law was written to forbid carry in church, then amended to allow it. But rather than strike the original language, the added new language. So it is confusing to read, and when the stakes are so high, no one wants confusing language.