Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators
Brian D. wrote:M-Q, have you seen religious spokespersons at Statehouse hearings, or even at a City Hall meeting of similar type? With some of them, as soon as they reach the dais, it turns into a pulpit. They don't offer testimony, they "TESTIFY". A few will even bring a small chorus of "A-MENers!" to amplify their message and tone. Then they won't engage in dialog with legislators, or converse with others who don't share their opinions.
I'm not saying that SHOULD be effective, but it seems to be at times. I've seen it.
Brian D. wrote:M-Q, have you seen religious spokespersons at Statehouse hearings, or even at a City Hall meeting of similar type? With some of them, as soon as they reach the dais, it turns into a pulpit. They don't offer testimony, they "TESTIFY". A few will even bring a small chorus of "A-MENers!" to amplify their message and tone. Then they won't engage in dialog with legislators, or converse with others who don't share their opinions.
I'm not saying that SHOULD be effective, but it seems to be at times. I've seen it.
Buckeyedoc wrote:Ok, I know that if a pastor authorizes concealed carry in their church, it's ok. However, a few weeks back, we visit a new church. After the service, a member of the "security" team approached me and asked if I knew it was illegal to carry in their church. Our kids had attended their VBS this summer and I knew their "security" team carried concealed. Anywho, I asked if they were certified security guards, licensed in the state of Ohio. He said they weren't licensed. I asked him if they carry based on their CHL. He said they did. It is my understanding that with churches, it's all or nothing. The pastor can't allow certain people and prohibit others. Is this correct. I can't find anything stating one way or the other. I scheduled a meeting with the pastor to discuss this topic and would like to have some ground to stand on either way.
JustaShooter wrote:MyWifeSaidYes wrote:This is one of those laws that I REALLY want to tackle, but then I realize there is absolutely NO POINT in doing so.
WITH the law, the place of worship can allow carry, IF they want to.
WITHOUT the law, the place of worship can allow carry IF they want to.
So, the fight is with the individual places of worship...not the law.
I disagree, there is a point in doing so - two of them, actually.
First, the difference between "opting out" and "opting in" is a very important distinction. They should be treated no differently than any other private entity. You don't want people to carry, post a sign. Allowing them the privilege of opting in to carry, with no signage requirement, gives them special standing in the law, and that is wrong.
Second, by making it a statutory no-carry zone, it becomes a Felony under Ohio law. This makes it worth fighting in my opinion *especially* since there is no signage requirement.
Is it as important as some of the other initiatives we are working on? Not to me, but others may disagree.
Mustang380gal wrote:I was on a quilt shop hop, going from quilt shop to quilt shop quite a few years ago which was organized by the shops. One of them had arranged for a quilt show nearby in a gymnasium. Low and behold, it was a church gymnasium. I thought it was a local community center. I saw it from the back, only seeing the gymnasium part, and didn't realize until I went into the building that it was a church. There was no sign on the back to indicate that it was a church, either. And of course, no sign indicating "no carry".
So I would at least like to see church carry reduced to a trespass violation.
airforcegrunt wrote:Mustang380gal wrote:I was on a quilt shop hop, going from quilt shop to quilt shop quite a few years ago which was organized by the shops. One of them had arranged for a quilt show nearby in a gymnasium. Low and behold, it was a church gymnasium. I thought it was a local community center. I saw it from the back, only seeing the gymnasium part, and didn't realize until I went into the building that it was a church. There was no sign on the back to indicate that it was a church, either. And of course, no sign indicating "no carry".
So I would at least like to see church carry reduced to a trespass violation.
Reminds me of those "storefront" churches.
Mr. Glock wrote:And did we learn the result of the OP’s meeting?
NealClemens wrote:Well, I got a call today from the chair of our church board. I approached them to request permission to carry after the events of a week ago Sunday in Texas. The good news is that I was surprised- we have attended a Mennonite (pacifist) church for more than 20 years. I and my wife were raised Baptist and Mennonites are theological cousins with the exception of the peace issue. I expected them to dismiss the request out of hand, as the three members of the primary governing body were raised in the church and the pacifist view is very closely held by them. I was told that they were not comfortable deciding either way- so they invited me to the full leadership meeting at the beginning of December.
My question is whether anyone here has any advice on finding helpful resources in terms of statistics and other unbiased information that could be compiled and presented to the board to make the case for why having at least one member carry in the service when your congregation is in the middle of no where may make sense. Any input would be helpful and appreciated.
Return to Ohio Concealed Carry Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests