Guns at church

[rpn]

Does anyone know whether CHI book 1 the section that says that because buildings are dedicated, no firearms should enter them except law enforcement has been changed since the 2010 version?   It is 8.4.5.   (The reason I'm asking is that in depositions for a case (recently released by mormonleaks) two church lawyers said that guns were not allowed anywhere on church property.   I just wonder if Book 1 p. 85 remains the same as it was in 2010.

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, rpn said:

Does anyone know whether CHI book 1 the section that says that because buildings are dedicated, no firearms should enter them except law enforcement has been changed since the 2010 version?   It is 8.4.5.   (The reason I'm asking is that in depositions for a case (recently released by mormonleaks) two church lawyers said that guns were not allowed anywhere on church property.   I just wonder if Book 1 p. 85 remains the same as it was in 2010.

From the current CHI:

Quote

8.4.5 - Firearms

Churches are dedicated for the worship of God and as havens from the cares and concerns of the world. The carrying of lethal weapons, concealed or otherwise, within their walls is inappropriate except as required by officers of the law.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Danzo]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

From the current CHI:

Thanks,

-Smac

I guess the shotgun and rifle merit badges are out the window.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, rpn said:

Does anyone know whether CHI book 1 the section that says that because buildings are dedicated, no firearms should enter them except law enforcement has been changed since the 2010 version?   It is 8.4.5.   (The reason I'm asking is that in depositions for a case (recently released by mormonleaks) two church lawyers said that guns were not allowed anywhere on church property.   I just wonder if Book 1 p. 85 remains the same as it was in 2010.

The same as Smac quoted above is found in Handbook 2 21.2.4.  Handbook 2 is accessable by anyone with an internet connection.

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church?lang=eng

Edited May 4, 2018 by ksfisher
edited for grievous spelling errors

[ALarson]

Just now, Danzo said:

I guess the shotgun and rifle merit badges are out the window.

Ha!

It states "within their walls", so does that not include the parking lot or land outside the building?  (I think that's what is in question for this case, but I'm not sure.)

 

[ksfisher]

2 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I guess the shotgun and rifle merit badges are out the window.

Practicing for them inside the church is strongly discouraged. 

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, ksfisher said:

Practicing for them inside the church is strongly discouraged. 

That is the only mutual activity we can get the kids to come to.  

[Danzo]

35 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Ha!

It states "within their walls", so does that not include the parking lot or land outside the building?  (I think that's what is in question for this case, but I'm not sure.)

 

As a youth, I remember handling unloaded weapons as a part of the Rifle and shotgun merit badge as well as in a hunters safety course that was sponsored by the church.  But that was back when few had access to the handbook, fewer bothered to read it, and few of those took it seriously.

[Eek!]

Once upon a time I lived in a ward that would occasionally get phone calls during Sacrament meeting from a man threatening to come to the church and shoot Mormons.  Nobody else considered the possibility that he might be serious.  This was before the days of caller ID.

Since nobody else took it seriously, I decided to. 

People thought I was this really outgoing little guy who met everyone at the door with a smile, and who hovered near the doors whenever possible during meetings to assist those who arrived late.  I attended as many during-the-week meetings as I could, as the unofficial greeter, hanging around outside.  The Relief Society in particular thought it was so nice that a bishropic member came to all of their homemaking meetings.  Our smallish ward building was on a corner and the parking lot we used was in the next block, so by hanging out near the street corner I could see all approaches to the building that led to a door.

At some point I had a conversation with a High Councilman and told him about the threats and my response.  A practical man, he snorted and said to me, "Well I certainly hope you are armed!"   My response was non-committal, which of course was a "yes". 

Nobody in the ward knew that I was a competitive shooter, as I simply felt that was not one of the things a person talked about.  And no one ever suspected that each front pocket of my baggy pants held a well-tuned lightweight J-frame partially wrapped in a handkerchief to conceal its outline. 

This was well before the official prohibition against firearms in Church buildings, so that was one less moral dilemma I had to wrestle with. 

Must admit I'm not a fan of the prohibition.  Maybe a part of me is way too old-school, but there's something about a bunch of deliberately and voluntarily disarmed Mormons inside a building that makes me think of Haun's Mill. 

Edited May 5, 2018 by Eek!

[CA Steve]

Having sat through countless high council speakers who took 30 minutes more to finish a talk after saying "let me wrap up with this", I think it is a bad idea to have guns at church. 

😠

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

The same as Smac quoted above is found in Handbook 2 21.2.4.  Handbook 2 is accessable by anyone with an internet connection.

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church?lang=eng

This rule is apparently now backed up by Utah State law:

Quote

Houses of Worship Prohibiting Firearms on Premises

The following churches have notified BCI of their intent to prohibit firearms in their “houses of worship” in Utah.

• The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
• Congregation Kol Ami

Read Utah Code 76-10-530 regarding the prohibition of firearms by Utah houses of worship.

Per state statute, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints made public notice on January 9, 2018 in the Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News of their intent to prohibit firearms.

So now your only choice is to bring a bow & arrow, knife, taser, and/or pepper spray to LDS meetings.  😎

Edited May 5, 2018 by Robert F. Smith

[ksfisher]

1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said:

So now your only choice is to bring a bow & arrow, knife, taser, and/or pepper spray to LDS meetings.  😎

Was any mention made of grenade launchers?

[Prof]

If your question involves a building in Utah, you might want to do a google search on the subject.

My understanding is that the Utah legislature passed a law allowing churches to choose to forbid guns in church buildings. To the point of asking people to leave or call the authorities and charging the offender with trespassing. My understanding is that the First Presidency is that they sent out a letter to the bishops in Utah stating that The Church had chosen to forbid gun, per the new law, and provided advice on how to go about dealing with offenders.

This might be what the lawyers were discussing in the OP's post.

[Nevo]

This is the wording in the new "Security Guidelines for Church Meetinghouses" document (23 April 2018):

"Except for sworn law enforcement officers, the Church strongly discourages anyone from carrying weapons into meetinghouses or Church events: “The carrying of lethal weapons . . . within [Church] walls is inappropriate except as required by officers of the law” (Handbook 2: Administering the Church [2010], 21.2.4; italics added). Priesthood leaders should understand the laws within their jurisdiction. If there are questions about local laws, the stake president calls the Office of General Counsel as instructed in the handbooks."

[longview]

This is surprising.  There have been a number of churches (non-LDS) in Colorado that had been subjected to shooters that wanted to kill.   One in Colorado Springs was lucky to have a female LEO (law enforcement officer) engage the shooter in the parking lot before he could enter the building.  Would not advertising self as a "gun free zone" be a risky proposition?

[Duncan]

6 minutes ago, longview said:

This is surprising.  There have been a number of churches (non-LDS) in Colorado that had been subjected to shooters that wanted to kill.   One in Colorado Springs was lucky to have a female LEO (law enforcement officer) engage the shooter in the parking lot before he could enter the building.  Would not advertising self as a "gun free zone" be a risky proposition?

how would the church advertise they have no guns on the property? 

[JAHS]

Several cops in my ward. Most of them carry concealed weapons to church.
Bad idea for any any crazy gunman who tries to attack us in there.

[Duncan]

3 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Several cops in my ward. Most of them carry concealed weapons to church.
Bad idea for any any crazy gunman who tries to attack us in there.

and what if they aren't in the area where the shooting happens or don't know who is doing the shooting? how fast are they at drawing their weapon? the bigger question is why do people who want to harm have guns in the first place? it's lunacy

[longview]

8 minutes ago, Duncan said:

how would the church advertise they have no guns on the property? 

By making it a policy and putting it into a rule book.  Granted most crazies may not go to the trouble of finding and reading it.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

Was any mention made of grenade launchers?

That would come under the heading of "firearms."  However, paintball guns and air-rifles are not considered firearms, so they could legally be brought to Church.

[Duncan]

Just now, longview said:

By making it a policy and putting it into a rule book.  Granted most crazies may not go to the trouble of finding and reading it.

I think those guys pick random places or target certain people like that Dylan Roof nutjob

[Robert F. Smith]

3 minutes ago, Duncan said:

and what if they aren't in the area where the shooting happens or don't know who is doing the shooting? how fast are they at drawing their weapon? the bigger question is why do people who want to harm have guns in the first place? it's lunacy

Police are law enforcement officers 24/7, not just on duty.  There is no lunacy in an officer carrying concealed, because he can then react to a crisis quickly.  Otherwise, it may take about ten minutes for on-duty law enforcement to arrive -- by which time the perpetrator has killed a number of people and either fled or committed suicide.

[Prof]

40 minutes ago, Nevo said:

This is the wording in the new "Security Guidelines for Church Meetinghouses" document (23 April 2018):

"Except for sworn law enforcement officers, the Church strongly discourages anyone from carrying weapons into meetinghouses or Church events: “The carrying of lethal weapons . . . within [Church] walls is inappropriate except as required by officers of the law” (Handbook 2: Administering the Church [2010], 21.2.4; italics added). Priesthood leaders should understand the laws within their jurisdiction. If there are questions about local laws, the stake president calls the Office of General Counsel as instructed in the handbooks."

I have been contemplating this subject for some time since the non LDS church shooting last year in Texas.

The policy uses the words "discourages" and "inappropriate" but not"ban". Is this policy really optional?

[Duncan]

1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Police are law enforcement officers 24/7, not just on duty.  There is no lunacy in an officer carrying concealed, because he can then react to a crisis quickly.  Otherwise, it may take about ten minutes for on-duty law enforcement to arrive -- by which time the perpetrator has killed a number of people and either fled or committed suicide.

it's lunacy for the situation and bad people to have guns, not the cops carrying weapons, let's hope we never see a shootout in one of churches!

[Rivers]

Churches are very vulnerable places for an active shooter.  We need good people with guns to protect the flock.  I don’t agree with this part of the handbook.