What gives the State the right to ban guns in church?

[alan1]

If churches are immune from govt gun laws (as so many seem to be implying) does that mean that the police can tell them to stick it and not respond if there's a problem?

you know, given that y'all don't want government intervention and all.

I guess you missed the part where the article said the current laws only apply to churches and bars.
Does that mean the police can tell everybody else to stick it and not respond if there is a problem?

 

[jillian]

you have five minutes to add the link or the quote is deleted for violation of board copyright rules. you also need to shorten the quote so the whole article is not copied.

thank you.

 

[Peejay]

This is a prime example of what I have been telling the religious folks for a very long time: keep putting your church issues into the political sphere (abortion, anti-gay, alcohol, drugs) and the government, sooner or later, will step into your church. It's a two way street. You don't get to push your church ideas into government and then make yourself immune to government regulation.

 

[xsited1]

If churches are immune from govt gun laws (as so many seem to be implying) does that mean that the police can tell them to stick it and not respond if there's a problem?

you know, given that y'all don't want government intervention and all.

Huh? That doesn't even make sense. Government gun laws allow concealed carry weapons in private businesses unless the business doesn't want them there. However, they have a different set of rules for Churches. That blows the whole 'separation of church and state' argument.

 

[MaggieMae]

So ... what was that about not wanting separation of church and state? (the few I am speaking of know)

As for the law, I think this is just more of those "nanny" freaks trying to protect everyone from the good people. It's stupid, gun bans are bad enough when they don't infringe on religions.

Frankly, it seems to me that anyone with good intentions by attending church services doesn't NEED a gun in the first place. It's a no-brainer. Has gun ownership become such a fanatical issue that it will eventually be necessary to have metal detectors at church entrances? If so, that further makes the case for gun CONTROL.

 

[Peejay]

Legend has it that you can kill satan with a silver bullet.

 

[MaggieMae]

You know a lot of churches whose parishoners need to wave guns around and yell "yippe ai oh kayaaaa" as part of their worship?

didn't think so.

on the other hand, i suppose if churches no longer wanted to rely on CIVIL police to protect them....

There are those who could justify carrying an assault rifle with them everywhere they go. And I mean everywhere.

There are and they may be right however I think the topic is about the government's right to regulate what happens in a house of worship.

First and foremost, "government" has the obligation to protect its citizens. What if a bin Laden type entered a church waving an automatic but didn't use it, was arrested anyway, but got off because of Second Amendment rights? It's the lunatics who hide behind the Second Amendment that is the problem here.

 

[xsited1]

So ... what was that about not wanting separation of church and state? (the few I am speaking of know)

As for the law, I think this is just more of those "nanny" freaks trying to protect everyone from the good people. It's stupid, gun bans are bad enough when they don't infringe on religions.

Frankly, it seems to me that anyone with good intentions by attending church services doesn't NEED a gun in the first place. It's a no-brainer. Has gun ownership become such a fanatical issue that it will eventually be necessary to have metal detectors at church entrances? If so, that further makes the case for gun CONTROL.

Good intentions? That's nice in an ideal world. But let's try to stay on topic. Obviously, people who are trying to kill other people don't care about 'good intentions'. That's why it is sometimes necessary to carry a gun to protect yourself and your family. Fortunately, the 2nd Amendment allows that except in the case of churches.

 

[Peejay]

So ... what was that about not wanting separation of church and state? (the few I am speaking of know)

As for the law, I think this is just more of those "nanny" freaks trying to protect everyone from the good people. It's stupid, gun bans are bad enough when they don't infringe on religions.

Frankly, it seems to me that anyone with good intentions by attending church services doesn't NEED a gun in the first place. It's a no-brainer. Has gun ownership become such a fanatical issue that it will eventually be necessary to have metal detectors at church entrances? If so, that further makes the case for gun CONTROL.

Good intentions? That's nice in an idea world. But let's try to stay on topic. Obviously, people who are trying to kill other people don't care about 'good intentions'. That's why it is sometimes necessary to carry a gun to protect yourself and your family. Fortunately, the 2nd Amendment allows that except in the case of churches.

Bars are on the prohibited list in Arkansas too. Maybe it's about the wine?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Guns in Church Bill Dies in Arkansas Senate Panel| Christianpost.com

The excuse is the same or similar one to why guns are banned on school Grounds. Because a large group congregates and there are children present. The difference is that Public Schools are Government property and Churches are not. The Government CAN regulate Government property.

I'd say the problem with passing bills regarding what can and can't be done with guns on church property is twofold. One, the government cannot Constitutionally infringe on the right to bear arms. Two, the government cannot Constitutionally interfere in the running of a church. It should be for the churches themselves to regulate what's done on their grounds, so long as it doesn't violate the rights of anyone else.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Guns in Church Bill Dies in Arkansas Senate Panel| Christianpost.com

The excuse is the same or similar one to why guns are banned on school Grounds. Because a large group congregates and there are children present. The difference is that Public Schools are Government property and Churches are not. The Government CAN regulate Government property.

A number of Southern states also ban snake handling in churches:

...Many state legislatures have long maintained that religious freedom does not extend to picking up venomous snakes.

In the decade between 1940 and 1950 six Southern states - Kentucky in 1940, Georgia in 1941, Tennessee in 1947, Virginia in 1947, North Carolina in 1949, and Alabama in 1950 - banned the practice of snake handling. In each instance, state lawmakers based their legislation on the premise that the First Amendment right to the free practice of religion was superseded by the potential danger to non-participants.

In Alabama and Georgia the practice was ruled to be a felony while the other four states deemed it a misdemeanor. The logic for a felony charge was that if someone violated the law and a death occurred, capital punishment was a reasonable sentence. However, Alabama and Georgia later repealed their laws....

Snakebite kills preacher: Should snake handlers be subject to prosecution?

A poisonous snake is inherently dangerous, because it is a living, thinking, self-directing creature. A gun, on the other hand, is none of the above, and is no more inherently dangerous than any other inanimate object that can be used by a human as a weapon, of which there are many on church property, just as anywhere else.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Do Christians feel that firearms are appropriate in a House of God where men come to stand side by side and worship together? Should it not be a place that the love of God would give them protection and guns would be unnecessary?

Is it any of your business or the state's to tell them how to think and feel on the subject? Where was I when the First Amendment was changed to give the government the right to legislate religious attitudes and actions?

 

[auditor0007]

Those dastardly Christians, if only they were like all the wonderful non-Christians who never commit any acts of violence, then this world would be a much better place.

All of you religious folks love killing in the name of your God(s), it is what you do best.

Yep, Mao, Pol Pot, and Stalin were right at the head of the list. Oh yea, they were atheists. Imagine that. People who kill others do it for many different reasons. Pointing to religion as the cause is absurd, unless the religion itself dictates that we slaughter people in the name of that religion.

 

[Jon]

If churches are immune from govt gun laws (as so many seem to be implying) does that mean that the police can tell them to stick it and not respond if there's a problem?

you know, given that y'all don't want government intervention and all.

The purpose of the police is to protect the people, regardless of where the people are. The church-goers are taxpaying citizens and are thus entitled to police protection.

 

[Peejay]

I don't know when this "no guns in churhes" law came into effect, but I am wondering if that fine example of guns in church, down in Waco, had anything to do with it?

 

[xsited1]

Frankly, it seems to me that anyone with good intentions by attending church services doesn't NEED a gun in the first place. It's a no-brainer. Has gun ownership become such a fanatical issue that it will eventually be necessary to have metal detectors at church entrances? If so, that further makes the case for gun CONTROL.

Good intentions? That's nice in an idea world. But let's try to stay on topic. Obviously, people who are trying to kill other people don't care about 'good intentions'. That's why it is sometimes necessary to carry a gun to protect yourself and your family. Fortunately, the 2nd Amendment allows that except in the case of churches.

Bars are on the prohibited list in Arkansas too. Maybe it's about the wine?

Arkansas is a very strange State. It's mostly a Democratically-controlled State, but there are people from all walks of life here. I'm here for the natural beauty and the hiking/mountain biking trails.

 

[Cecilie1200]

But if a church is a private place which allows people on its premises, don't they get the right to decide if anyone will or will not be permitted to enter the premises carrying a weapon?

I'm sure there's a nice, simple answer to this question.

Correct but the government can make it impossible to transport a weapon anywhere thereby effectively banning guns anywhere

No they can not. They can ban carrying a CONCEALED weapon but they can not legally ban the carrying in some fashion of your weapons. The Second states you have a right to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. That means carry them outside your home, that means the right to buy them and transport them to your home. With all rights there are reasonable limits that the Government can impose.

Yeah, and now all we have to do is get our government to think the Constitution is something other than a really old piece of toilet paper.

 

[auditor0007]

Frankly, it seems to me that anyone with good intentions by attending church services doesn't NEED a gun in the first place. It's a no-brainer. Has gun ownership become such a fanatical issue that it will eventually be necessary to have metal detectors at church entrances? If so, that further makes the case for gun CONTROL.

Good intentions? That's nice in an idea world. But let's try to stay on topic. Obviously, people who are trying to kill other people don't care about 'good intentions'. That's why it is sometimes necessary to carry a gun to protect yourself and your family. Fortunately, the 2nd Amendment allows that except in the case of churches.

Bars are on the prohibited list in Arkansas too. Maybe it's about the wine?

Not allowing guns in bars makes a lot of sense. But it should be up to the bar to enforce those rules if they choose, not the government. Here is what is so stupid about this whole thing. If the goverenment says nobody can bring a gun into a church or bar, how does that stop the crazy person from bringing a gun into the church when that crazy person is intent on killing a bunch of people? Is the goverenment now going to provide security to ensure that no crazy people bring a gun into a church? I didn't think so. In other words, all this law does is allow the state to prosecute a crazy person for bringing a gun into a church after they killed a bunch of people. At the same time, if a member of the church happens to be carrying and kills the crazy person who came into the church to kill a bunch of people, that member would probably be prosecuted for having a gun in a church, even though in doing so, he/she may have saved many lives.

 

[Jon]

Arkansas is a very strange State. It's mostly a Democratically-controlled State, but there are people from all walks of life here. I'm here for the natural beauty and the hiking/mountain biking trails.

I think Arkansas is THE most moderate state in the country. As he said, we are Democratically controlled, most of our national representatives are Democrats. But what you'll see is that the Democrats and Republicans in Arkansas rarely disagree with each other. They really aren't in on party lines, they represent the people who elected them. The only state that rivals Arkansas as a moderate state is Missouri, I'd say.

The state is divided into so many different regions, I'm surprised we're able to survive under one state government. Northwest Arkansas is one of the most prosperous and growing regions in the country and has been featured as one of the best places to live for years. East central Arkansas is the sphincter of the United States and one of the most depressed areas in the country.

 

[xsited1]

Good intentions? That's nice in an idea world. But let's try to stay on topic. Obviously, people who are trying to kill other people don't care about 'good intentions'. That's why it is sometimes necessary to carry a gun to protect yourself and your family. Fortunately, the 2nd Amendment allows that except in the case of churches.

Bars are on the prohibited list in Arkansas too. Maybe it's about the wine?

Not allowing guns in bars makes a lot of sense. But it should be up to the bar to enforce those rules if they choose, not the government. Here is what is so stupid about this whole thing. If the goverenment says nobody can bring a gun into a church or bar, how does that stop the crazy person from bringing a gun into the church when that crazy person is intent on killing a bunch of people? Is the goverenment now going to provide security to ensure that no crazy people bring a gun into a church? I didn't think so. In other words, all this law does is allow the state to prosecute a crazy person for bringing a gun into a church after they killed a bunch of people. At the same time, if a member of the church happens to be carrying and kills the crazy person who came into the church to kill a bunch of people, that member would probably be prosecuted for having a gun in a church, even though in doing so, he/she may have saved many lives.

Yep. Great read:

Luby's massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During the shooting, Hennard approached Suzanna Gratia Hupp and her parents. Hupp had actually brought a handgun to the Luby's Cafeteria that day, but had left it in her vehicle due to the laws in force at the time, forbidding citizens from carrying firearms. According to her later testimony in favor of Missouri's HB-1720 bill[1] and in general [2][3], after she realized that her firearm was not in her purse, but "a hundred feet away in [her] car", her father charged at Hennard in an attempt to subdue him, only to be gunned down; a short time later, her mother was also shot and killed. (Hupp later expressed regret for abiding by the law in question by leaving her firearm in her car, rather than keeping it on her person[1].)