ELB wrote:Carrying all by itself is serious business, even if there is no shooting involved.
great way to put it.
When discussing CHL with non licensees who are interested, I sometimes get the question "Have you ever had to use your gun?" I respond quite seriously "I USE my gun every day."
The simple act of carrying a gun is using it to improve my odds of surviving a violent attack. It's not a clothing accessory. It's a serious and sobering responsbility, and a potentially life-saving tool.
By staying in the mindset that I am USING my gun every time I carry it, I am better able to keep it in proper context and not become complacent. Carrying my gun every day is a conscious act, not merely a mindless routine.
Just looking at it along the lines of them not currently having a "Security Detail" currently and they don't want you to carry tells me a number of things. First as KD5NRH pointed out do you really want to get spiritual guidance from someone who doesn't trust you unless your disarmed? Secondly they see a potential risk but don't want to do anything about it until they put together the security team which tells me that they either don't care what happens to the congregation or they don't believe anything will happen.
Kinda reminds me of the joke where the man suddenly finds himself before God and asks "Lord, why did you let that train hit me after I prayed for you to save me?" to which the lord replied "I sent my son to die on a cross to save your soul and I gave you time and two good legs to get out of the trains way."
How do you explain a dog named Sauer without first telling the story of a Puppy named Sig?
R.I.P. Sig, 08/21/2019 - 11/18/2019
Churches have tons of interpolitical issues and pastors have the unenviable job of navigating all of those, meeting people where they are, and leading them to God.
If they already are talking about a "security detail," it tells me that you unwittingly stepped into a hotbed that's long been brewing. Different people have different takes and the pastor is trying to keep peace and move them forward. The LEO saw fit to tell you with authority what to do, but he apparently did not have that authority from the pastor.
Maybe the pastor did not want to act without talking to the LEO first and was trying to not involve you in their ongoing frustrations, so he said that for the time being you should leave it in the car and he'll be going to do behind the scenes work now to find out what's going on and trying to move everyone forward yet again.
I don't think the response necessarily looks poorly on the pastor. It does say that this might not be a good long-term fit for you as you'll be constantly clashing up against some of the old guard on issues of great concern to you.
Pray as though everything depended on God. Work as though everything depended on you. -St. Augustine We are reformers in Spring and Summer; in Autumn and Winter we stand by the old; reformers in the morning, conservers at night. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
austinrealtor wrote:In the context, verbal notice may or may not be valid under PC 30.06 depending upon whether the verbal notice was oral or written and if written did it conform to requirements of the statute for written communication.
So Morse code via armpit-noises wouldn't be binding, but actually speaking the dits and dahs might be?
austinrealtor wrote:In the context, verbal notice may or may not be valid under PC 30.06 depending upon whether the verbal notice was oral or written and if written did it conform to requirements of the statute for written communication.
So Morse code via armpit-noises wouldn't be binding, but actually speaking the dits and dahs might be?
If you reasonably understood it to mean you couldn't carry, sure! XD
On AR's note earlier, the difference between oral and verbal is very important. I freely admit to constantly mixing them up myself XD
The Statute states 'oral', which means you must physically be told, from another person's mouth.
Now, something else to ponder... Could Stephen Hawking give 'Oral' notice?
dicion wrote:Now, something else to ponder... Could Stephen Hawking give 'Oral' notice?
In a church?
CHL 08/00
“We have no government armed in power capable of contending in human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
John Adams – 2nd President of the United States
chefkristian wrote:Person of authority or not, I believe they need to have proper signage posted in order for them to prohibit you from carrying. Correct? Could you possibly face arrest since you were verbally told not to carry? Or will a good defense attorney get you off the hook bcause of the signage loophole.
Inquiring minds want to know!
-K
Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.
they have several LEO in the congregation other than himself to look over everything. He also mentioned that he wasn't carrying his weapon. He asked me to leave it in the vehicle
for the time being. He also informed me that the church is currently getting a security detail together and someone may get with me in the future on this.
Interesting thoughts I had while reading: the above:
I'd have asked the preacher ...Will the unarmed Deputy be part of this security detail, and if so, since the unarmed certified Peace Officer is supposed to intervene if he sees a felony being committed, how could you slide your pistol to him if you left it in the car. Or, does the deputy just carry a heavy enough purse to incapacitate the bad guy(s) if the deputy throws it at him/them.
I had a couple police officer buddies who USED TO run around unarmed a lot, and I'd say shame on them ... (In their defense, they knew I'd toss them a pistol and ammo, a BUG or something)
At my church, we have a retired LEO (currently a CHL) who sometimes is unarmed, but his wife is (she's a CHL too) ... and he and the other CHLs know that I'm usually carrying 4 to 6 pistols at church, in case a CHL in the congregation needs to borrow one, so I don't gripe at them.
I'm no lawyer
"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"
I wonder why the no-CHL policy in the first place? Did he explain why he wanted it that way? As a long time believer and student of the Bible myself, I can find no justification in the Bible for disarming a parishioner prior to granting him/her admission to the church. What I do find are elliptical references to being at peace, peaceful, a peacemaker, etc., etc. But one can be at peace and armed. One can be peaceful and armed. One can be a peacemaker and armed. Peace, and being armed are not mutually exclusive propositions - as even Jesus instructed the Apostles in Luke 22:36.
In my book, a church that tells its members that they should not be armed before entering, is also a church that would tell its female members not to wear lacy panties under their dresses to church, or tell its male members not to wear red undershirts under their dress shirts. It's an invasion of one's personal choices, and the church would have no way of knowing unless the member shared that information...
....all with the following caveat: obeying a command to not wear a red t-shirt or lacy panties will not likely get you killed, whereas obeying an order to not CCW may very well get you killed. That's not an area over wich any church ought to have any moral authority in my view. It tells me that this church is more concerned about their rules than they are about my life or health. I would have a lot of difficulty accepting spiritual direction from someone who had such little concern about it. And having an unarmed security detail (if made up of church members, it would HAVE to be unarmed, since your CHL does not grant you authority to carry as a security person) is not as good as being able to defend yourself in extremis.
I realize that, as a newcomer, you're trying to do right by your girlfriend and her family, since this is their home church. But if I were in your shoes, I would not attend with the goal of making this church my church home. If/When you get married, I would start church shopping - if not sooner.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
austinrealtor wrote:In the context, verbal notice may or may not be valid under PC 30.06 depending upon whether the verbal notice was oral or written and if written did it conform to requirements of the statute for written communication.
So Morse code via armpit-noises wouldn't be binding, but actually speaking the dits and dahs might be?
Either way Morse code doesn't work because the communication must be in WORDS not CODE or various noises.
And no, R2D2 cannot give 30.06 oral notice on his own - not without C3PO to interpret and repeat the notice in one of the six million forms of communication he knows that is closest to human English
The Annoyed Man wrote:I can find no justification in the Bible for disarming a parishioner prior to granting him/her admission to the church. What I do find are elliptical references to being at peace, peaceful, a peacemaker, etc., etc. But one can be at peace and armed. One can be peaceful and armed. One can be a peacemaker and armed. Peace, and being armed are not mutually exclusive propositions - as even Jesus instructed the Apostles in Luke 22:36.
maybe they'll let him carry a Colt "Peacemaker" in their church
