Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 123

Thread: No Carry in Utah LDS Chapels

  1. #1
    Regular Member NewZealandAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Greater Salt Lake City Metro area far south suburb of Provo in UTAH
    Posts
    349

    Post imported post

    I think this would be a good opportunity for all of us in the gun community in Utah to put pressure on the Presidency and Quorum Of the Twelve at Church Headquarters in Salt Lake to repeal their carry ban on church members. I am a member of the church but I still live here in Illinois and have not yet moved to Utah which is where i want to move to before Fall this year, probably Provo. My church records (membership)is based here in Illinois, so for me to draft a letter would not be effective as it would be from all of you who are in Utah who are also chuch members. Spread the word to all your friends and family who are church members.

    Please can you guys unite and let's come up with a large number to petition the Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints to stop preventing the right of it's members and visitors from being armed for self protection.

    I can't wait to move to Utah, (permanently) that is, and I know i will have instant friends when I arrive.

    Lastly I thank all of you for this awesome forum and what each of you do to help spread LIBERTY and armed self defense



    (Dion Wood) 800-808-KIWI

    http://www.MySpace.com/NewZealandAmerican

    Got LIBERTY? The world's Best Alternative RADIO for TRUTH and restoring our CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!

    We The People Radio Network http://www.WTPRN.com
    (Dion Wood). MY FREEDOM PAGE[/COLOR] with valuable links to ALTERNATIVE MEDIA, Internet Radio shows and other sites to restore our FREEDOM & LIBERTYhttp://www.QRZ.com/db/KB9QFH TELEPHONE: +1(800)808-KIWI that's +1(800)808-5494 Tollfree. "NewZealander By Birth, American By The Grace Of God." See also http://www.facebook.com/NewZealandAmerican & http://RTR.org/NewZealandAmerican IN MEMORY OF OUR GOD, OUR RELIGION, AND FREEDOM, AND OUR PEACE, OUR WIVES, AND OUR CHILDREN" (The Title Of LIBERTY)

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bountiful, Utah, , USA
    Posts
    472

    Post imported post

    Brother Wood, I wrote last October and will post my correspondence here for you to see.

    Letter written to Church Headquaters is as follows:

    [line] Dear Brother or Sister,

    I am writing concerning the prohibition of firearms in Utah houses of worship. As you may or may not be aware, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has notified the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification per Utah Code 76-10-530 requesting that all firearms be prohibited in Utah houses of worship.

    Many members of the Church carry firearms daily to defend themselves and their families from the violence that pervades our society. With the recent incidents in so called “Gun Free Zones” including Virginia Tech University, the Cleveland, Ohio Success Tech School and even closer to home, the Trolley Square Shopping Center, we feel that it is of great import to us that we be allowed to defend ourselves and our families wherever we may be. It has become apparent that prohibiting firearms in any location only serves to draw violence and terrorism; manifest in our schools, shopping centers and airlines. I am disappointed with the official position of our Church on firearms in this state and ask that the BCI prohibition notice be rescinded, thereby recognizing the rights granted in the Constitution and examples laid out to us in the Scriptures.

    As the Nephites were commanded in Alma 43:47, “ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed,” and again in Alma chapter 48, particularly in verse 14, “the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives,” and finally in Doctrine and Covenants 134:11, “we believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded.”

    I ask that the Church trust its members, recognize the Constitutional right to bear arms, and make houses of worship safer by rescinding this prohibition and allowing honest, trustworthy men and women to defend themselves and those they love in the last private, prohibited location in this state.

    Please, as the Prophet Joseph and Hyrum defended themselves in Carthage Jail, allow us to exercise our God given right to defend ourselves from those who would seek to destroy us.

    Humbly, your brother,

    [line]The response I received is as follows:
    [line]
    Your letter to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was forwarded to me for a response. Thank you for your concern about the Church's policy regarding firearms in its houses of worship.

    Your desire to protect your family from evils present in society is certainly commendable. That is a concern shared by all righteous parents. As you know, the issue of an individual's right to carry a concealed firearm is one that is hotly debated in our country. There are varying points of view as to the meaning and application of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, not to mention provisions in state constitutions. However, to date, the courts have left the judgment to state legislatures as to the circumstances under which a person may privately bear arms.

    Accordingly, the Utah Legislature has determined that a church may prohibit firearms in its houses of worship if it gives appropriate notice. The Church has elected to give such notice. The judgment ofthe First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is that firearms do not belong in our meeting houses, that they are unnecessary for an individual's protection in that setting and that allowing firearms into our meetinghouses, if anything, would increase the risk of violence and bloodshed. While some may disagree with that judgment, it is nonetheless the judgment that the Brethren have made. And they have no intention of changing that policy.

    Even more fundamentally, however, it is important to remember that our houses of worship - chapels and the holy temple - are places that we should come to in a spirit of peace, seeking to claim our rightful benefits provided by the Savior through His great Atonement. Partaking of the sacrament worthily and thoughtfully, reflecting upon doctrinal principles and feeling the Spirit, which is present in our meetings, will do more for each of us to bring a sense of security in such surroundings than an entire arsenal of firearms. May the Lord continue to bless you and yours that the sweet peace of the gospel of Christ may provide happiness in all seasons of your lives, especially as you attend Church. With every good wish.

    [line]
    Many of us over at Utah Concealed Carry have tried numerous times to change this policy. To read more, please visit our thread Letter for review: Letter to send to LDS Church.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    I think there's very little chance of getting the Church's position on this issue reversed, as indicated in Dave's response. Even after the parking-lot shooting in Lehi last year (which probably promted Dave's letter), the official position is that there is no need to defend ourselves at church. Perhaps this is because the Brethren know that the Lord will protect us, or perhaps it's a bureaucratic decision, not an inspired one. I guess the only way we'll know is if a mass shooting incident takes place.

    Given the situation, there are a few points to consider:
    • Concealed means concealed
    • If you were "made", odds are that unless someone in your ward is out to get you they'll just look at you funny and your bishop may ask you to leave the gun in the car. They probably won't call the police.
    • If they did call the police, violation of the church-carry prohibition is an infraction, meaning it's the same level of crime as speeding. You can't even lose your CFP over it.
    Personally, I don't carry at church. I've made the decision that I will follow my ecclesiastical leadership, and they have clearly made their wishes known.

    On the other hand, if I ever feel prompted to carry, I won't hesitate to strap on my SmartCarry.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902

    Post imported post

    Sorry, but I don't buy this. It sounds like the LDS is trying to deny you your rights at church. Does their version of the bible not have Luke 22:36. The reality for me is that I would never step foot in a church (except in EXTREMELY limited cirumstances).

    A lot of religions are anti-rights.

    If the LDS wants people to not carry that's fine, but using their faith driven members in Utah to amend the law to make it a crime to carry in a posted church (posted on door or on the BCI site) is garbage... but many people will continue to do what the church tells them. They don't even have to post at the entrance, to be in compliance with the law; therefore, it would be prudent for a church goer in Utah to check the BCI website every time before going to church.

    I'm not trying to pick on anyones faith or belief system, but it seems that many "religions" are anti-rights and anti self-defense. I guess if you can't win at the ballot box, then try to win at the alter.

    Jehovahs Witnesses (but they don't vote, thank God)

    Vatican City, supported the U.N. global weapons ban.

    Lutherian,

    LDS (at least in Utah)

    the list goes on and on.

    What would Jesus do???? I don't know, but he probably wouldn't be a busybody at NGO's and legislatures trying to nullify the natural right to self defense.

    Your higher up there failed to inform you that the Mormon church pressured the Utah legislature into making it a crime to carry into a posted church. I know this because I remember reading the Utah certified instructor news letter when the law was changed. It wasn't the brady bunch that pushed this bill (I'm sure they would have if they knew about it) it was the LDS.

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    Post imported post

    Jared wrote:
    Sorry, but I don't buy this. It sounds like the LDS is trying to deny you your rights at church. Does their version of the bible not have Luke 22:36. The reality for me is that I would never step foot in a church (except in EXTREMELY limited cirumstances).

    A lot of religions are anti-rights.

    If the LDS wants people to not carry that's fine, but using their faith driven members in Utah to amend the law to make it a crime to carry in a posted church (posted on door or on the BCI site) is garbage... but many people will continue to do what the church tells them. They don't even have to post at the entrance, to be in compliance with the law; therefore, it would be prudent for a church goer in Utah to check the BCI website every time before going to church.

    I'm not trying to pick on anyones faith or belief system, but it seems that many "religions" are anti-rights and anti self-defense. I guess if you can't win at the ballot box, then try to win at the alter.

    Jehovahs Witnesses (but they don't vote, thank God)

    Vatican City, supported the U.N. global weapons ban.

    Lutherian,

    LDS (at least in Utah)

    the list goes on and on.

    What would Jesus do???? I don't know, but he probably wouldn't be a busybody at NGO's and legislatures trying to nullify the natural right to self defense.

    Your higher up there failed to inform you that the Mormon church pressured the Utah legislature into making it a crime to carry into a posted church. I know this because I remember reading the Utah certified instructor news letter when the law was changed. It wasn't the brady bunch that pushed this bill (I'm sure they would have if they knew about it) it was the LDS.
    There were many groups that wanted to ban guns in schools and churches, period. These are off limits locations in some other States with concealed weapons permits. There was an active, citizen petitoin under way to place the issue on the ballot. Some churches were giving it support and the LDS church was considering joining the efforts so as to have legal teeth to ban guns from their sacred property.

    Yes, they were pushing for a change. They were also willing to accept what is now current law with its default position of carrying in churches allowed unless notice is given, so long as the notice did not have to be a sign on the door of their buildings. The ban also applies ONLY to the interior of houses of worship themselves, rather than parking lots, parks, or other religiously owned property as the citizen petition may well have required. Not only do we retain our rights to carry on government property including schools, but our government employees including teachers are protected in their rights to carry on the job.

    I won't say it was a great piece of legislation or that I liked it. But it certainly prevented the LDS church from throwing its considerable political weight behind the "gun free schools and churches" petition drive which then failed miserably. I will also point out that the penalty for carrying into a "posted" church is less than the penalty for tresspassing. And at the end of the day, we really ought to consider the rights of churches--in particular--to control and limit access to their sacred property.

    I respect your personal view of religion. Just realize that most people, including the VAST MAJORITY of those who support RKBA, do not share it.

    The LDS Church uses the King James Version of the Bible and it contains our favorite RKBA scripture in Luke. And if you think that particular scripture is any less suspeptible to interpretation or "context" arguments than any other scripture, you need to be better understand how EVERY religion functions.

    And at the end of the day, we have NO RIGHT to be on private property unless invited and the owner is allowed to set pretty much any condition he likes. You have a first amendment right, but don't expect to bring porn into my home. A business open to the public is a slightly different matter. But religious or sacred property has ALWAYS been given the greatest deference possible.

    As an active member of the LDS Church, I do not understand nor even agree with the decision of church leadership to ban lawful, privately owned guns from their buildings. But my faith trumps my politics and I'm not going to get too uptight over the issue. As others have said, I follow the counsel of my church clergy on this matter and intend to do so short of some kind of personal and specific revelation that I should do otherwise on some specific occassion. However, in that case, I pray the revelation is not to carry a gun to church, but instead to take the family to visit a relative's congregation or even keep everyone home sick. I don't ever want to have to use my gun against another person.

    Those who feel strongly about this issue should simply avoid visiting LDS churches or other congregations that ban guns. But I HIGHLY doubt that any amount of "pressure" is going to change this policy. Spend your time and efforts elsewhere in more productive pursuits.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    Post imported post

    NewZealandAmerican wrote:
    I think this would be a good opportunity for all of us in the gun community in Utah to put pressure on the Presidency and Quorum Of the Twelve at Church Headquarters in Salt Lake to repeal their carry ban on church members.
    Dion,

    Especially in light of the response received by GeneticsDave, I highly doubt that any change is going to be forthcoming on this policy. As an active member of the LDS Church, I do not understand nor even agree with the decision of church leadership to ban lawful, privately owned guns from their buildings. But my faith trumps my politics and I'm not going to get too uptight over the issue. As others have said, I follow the counsel of my church clergy on this matter and intend to do so short of some kind of personal and specific revelation that I should do otherwise on some specific occassion. However, in that case, I pray the revelation is not to carry a gun to church, but instead to take the family to visit a relative's congregation or even keep everyone home sick. I don't ever want to have to use my gun against another person.

    Those who feel strongly about this issue should simply avoid visiting LDS churches or other congregations that ban guns. But I HIGHLY doubt that any amount of "pressure" is going to change this policy. Spend your time and efforts elsewhere in more productive pursuits such as making sure the legislature hears your voice.

    I do note that the LDS Church has not pursued similar efforts in other States either legislatively or even through church policy. We have family in New Mexico and discreet possession of guns at their LDS church has never been an issue. Utah remains a unique place and you may well be surprised at the number of very anti-LDS protestors and even businesses that exist here. While I think the approach is counter-productive, I do understand why the LDS church leadership (perhaps on advice from their lawyers or security experts) would be extra sensitive to security concerns here in Utah.

    And remember, if the gun ban in LDS (and a couple of other) churches in Utah stands out, it is only because it is in such stark contrast to the rest of the State. Compared to Illinois, Utah is a veritable celestial kingdom of RKBA.

    Good luck with the move.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902

    Post imported post

    utbagpiper wrote:
    There were many groups that wanted to ban guns in schools and churches, period. These are off limits locations in some other States with concealed weapons permits. There was an active, citizen petitoin under way to place the issue on the ballot. Some churches were giving it support and the LDS church was considering joining the efforts so as to have legal teeth to ban guns from their sacred property.

    Yes, they were pushing for a change. They were also willing to accept what is now current law with its default position of carrying in churches allowed unless notice is given, so long as the notice did not have to be a sign on the door of their buildings. The ban also applies ONLY to the interior of houses of worship themselves, rather than parking lots, parks, or other religiously owned property as the citizen petition may well have required. Not only do we retain our rights to carry on government property including schools, but our government employees including teachers are protected in their rights to carry on the job.

    I won't say it was a great piece of legislation or that I liked it. But it certainly prevented the LDS church from throwing its considerable political weight behind the "gun free schools and churches" petition drive which then failed miserably. I will also point out that the penalty for carrying into a "posted" church is less than the penalty for tresspassing. And at the end of the day, we really ought to consider the rights of churches--in particular--to control and limit access to their sacred property.

    I respect your personal view of religion. Just realize that most people, including the VAST MAJORITY of those who support RKBA, do not share it.

    The LDS Church uses the King James Version of the Bible and it contains our favorite RKBA scripture in Luke. And if you think that particular scripture is any less suspeptible to interpretation or "context" arguments than any other scripture, you need to be better understand how EVERY religion functions.

    And at the end of the day, we have NO RIGHT to be on private property unless invited and the owner is allowed to set pretty much any condition he likes. You have a first amendment right, but don't expect to bring porn into my home. A business open to the public is a slightly different matter. But religious or sacred property has ALWAYS been given the greatest deference possible.

    As an active member of the LDS Church, I do not understand nor even agree with the decision of church leadership to ban lawful, privately owned guns from their buildings. But my faith trumps my politics and I'm not going to get too uptight over the issue. As others have said, I follow the counsel of my church clergy on this matter and intend to do so short of some kind of personal and specific revelation that I should do otherwise on some specific occassion. However, in that case, I pray the revelation is not to carry a gun to church, but instead to take the family to visit a relative's congregation or even keep everyone home sick. I don't ever want to have to use my gun against another person.

    Those who feel strongly about this issue should simply avoid visiting LDS churches or other congregations that ban guns. But I HIGHLY doubt that any amount of "pressure" is going to change this policy. Spend your time and efforts elsewhere in more productive pursuits.

    Charles

    I remember when Utah tried to ban guns in schools and churches. My great aunt was telling me about it when she was on vacation back east years ago. I told her how that was an absurd petition and it would not accomplish anything and how she was wasting her time in such an effort. I'm glad that petition failed... you all need to keep it that way out there.

    As far as the church having rights,as I thought I made clear in my previous post,they have the right to ask you to leave as it is private property; however, getting the state to dotheir dirty work is not acceptable. Kind of like Virginia, business can post no firearms, but if you violate it, it's a tresspessing offense and NOT a firearm offense. From an rational viewpoint, my comparison makes perfect sense and shouldn't confuse anyone.

    As far as the vast majority of RKBA supporters being religious, that's purely an anecdotal statement. I've known gunowners and RKBA supporters who were religious/not religious, homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual, liberal/conservative/libertarian etc.

    I've been involved in this for years and as the NRA realized not too long ago, RKBA supporters are much more diverse than a lot of people originally thought. Heck, in my former state, the minority leader of the state assembly would ban hunting tommorrow if he could, but he was always extremely supportive of CCW laws, self defense laws, no AWB laws etc.... see how diverse the issue is.

    This was not meant to get into the "Utah has great gun laws debate" or was it meant to challenge peoples religion or faith. Yes, overall Utah does have great gun laws, but there are plenty of states (even shall-issue states) that have few to no places off-limits that are a bit superior to Utah. When I was a teenager growing up in New England, New Hampshire completely respected my RKBA.... if I was a teenager in Utah at the time.... I would not really have the RKBA...so it's really tough to beat NH.

    For the record, I've studied many religions and a good friend of mine wrote a dissertation on the Mormon religion... I'm well versed in the issue.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    swillden wrote:
    I think there's very little chance of getting the Church's position on this issue reversed, as indicated in Dave's response. Even after the parking-lot shooting in Lehi last year (which probably promted Dave's letter), the official position is that there is no need to defend ourselves at church. Perhaps this is because the Brethren know that the Lord will protect us, or perhaps it's a bureaucratic decision, not an inspired one. I guess the only way we'll know is if a mass shooting incident takes place.

    Given the situation, there are a few points to consider:
    • Concealed means concealed
    • If you were "made", odds are that unless someone in your ward is out to get you they'll just look at you funny and your bishop may ask you to leave the gun in the car. They probably won't call the police.
    • If they did call the police, violation of the church-carry prohibition is an infraction, meaning it's the same level of crime as speeding. You can't even lose your CFP over it.
    Personally, I don't carry at church. I've made the decision that I will follow my ecclesiastical leadership, and they have clearly made their wishes known.

    On the other hand, if I ever feel prompted to carry, I won't hesitate to strap on my SmartCarry.
    I read something to the effect of "God might protect us but I sure will have enough ammo to hold off til God arrives in the form of Cops". (if they ever will arrive)

    Remember INFRACTION.

    When I heard about LDS stance on guns in the worship buildings I stopped going all together and haven't been back since.

    TJ

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    Private property trumps your rights.

    I don't know what your beef is. If you don't like that Church go to another.

    I was visiting a friend in Montana and he invited me to his Church. He is the President of the local LDS Church group and he didn't care if I carried my gun concealed to his Church.

    If he had I wouldn't have carried it.

    Private property has rights. Respect them or stay out.

    If you don't like what a Church teaches, find one you do like.

    Don't come to my house and tell me what to bekieve or do.

    I would never tell my friend what the rules in his Church had to be.

    Have a nice day.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    Sa45auto wrote:
    Private property trumps your rights.

    I don't know what your beef is. If you don't like that Church go to another.

    I was visiting a friend in Montana and he invited me to his Church. He is the President of the local LDS Church group and he didn't care if I carried my gun concealed to his Church.

    If he had I wouldn't have carried it.

    Private property has rights. Respect them or stay out.

    If you don't like what a Church teaches, find one you do like.

    Don't come to my house and tell me what to bekieve or do.

    I would never tell my friend what the rules in his Church had to be.

    Have a nice day.
    I said -"When I heard about LDS stance on guns in the worship buildings I stopped going all together and haven't been back since. "

    You said- "Private property has rights. Respect them or stay out."

    Isn't this what I said



    TJ


  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:
    Sa45auto wrote:
    Private property trumps your rights.

    I don't know what your beef is. If you don't like that Church go to another.

    I was visiting a friend in Montana and he invited me to his Church. He is the President of the local LDS Church group and he didn't care if I carried my gun concealed to his Church.

    If he had I wouldn't have carried it.

    Private property has rights. Respect them or stay out.

    If you don't like what a Church teaches, find one you do like.

    Don't come to my house and tell me what to bekieve or do.

    I would never tell my friend what the rules in his Church had to be.

    Have a nice day.
    I said -"When I heard about LDS stance on guns in the worship buildings I stopped going all together and haven't been back since. "

    You said- "Private property has rights. Respect them or stay out."

    Isn't this what I said



    TJ
    I hadn't read all the posts when I posted.

    We agree then don't we.

    I have heard some people from Utah belly ache before.

    It is kind of like the tail wanting to wag the dog isn't it?

    It is also like all those Wal-Mart threads. If they ask you to leave, leave and take your money with you.

    If you don't like the place don't go there. EOS.

  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    Post imported post

    Jared wrote:

    As far as the church having rights,as I thought I made clear in my previous post,they have the right to ask you to leave as it is private property; however, getting the state to dotheir dirty work is not acceptable.

    As far as the vast majority of RKBA supporters being religious, that's purely an anecdotal statement. I've known gunowners and RKBA supporters who were religious/not religious, homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual, liberal/conservative/libertarian etc.


    This was not meant to get into the "Utah has great gun laws debate" or was it meant to challenge peoples religion or faith. Yes, overall Utah does have great gun laws, but there are plenty of states (even shall-issue states) that have few to no places off-limits that are a bit superior to Utah. When I was a teenager growing up in New England, New Hampshire completely respected my RKBA.... if I was a teenager in Utah at the time.... I would not really have the RKBA...so it's really tough to beat NH.

    While the principle of the State helping to enforce a private policy also sticks in my craw, on the practical side, I will happily take an infraction CCW violation over a misdemeanor tresspass charge any day. But to each his own.

    Yes, RKBA is a very diverse crowd. But in terms of raw numbers, my experience is that the vast majority are politically conservative and religious people. Voting records in the Utah legislature bear this out, as does my experience with who shows up at NRA dinners, shooting events etc. It is great to reach out and encourage a more diverse group. But raw numbers are pretty tough to beat.

    I don't know how old you are, but it has been a long time since ANY State completely respected RKBA. Even Vermont and Alaska with their permitless carry have far more locations off limits than Utah. Florida with its wide recognition of its permit mandates concealed and punishes even accidental displays of a firearm. California and a couple of other disciminatory issue States have very few off limits locations, but good luck getting a permit in the first place. Some locations have better hunting laws, though I note Utah allows you to CCW even on bow hunts, just don't use you firearm to take game. Florida's stand your ground law made a lot of news recently, but Utah has NEVER required a person to retreat and is downright fantastic in its defense of habitation. Not quite as good on defense of property as say Texas, but far better in a host of other areas.

    I suppose if you spend a LOT of time in LDS Churches there may be States that have gun laws personally better suited to you. But with the greatest amount of respect, I defy you to find any States that overall have better self-defense gun laws than Utah.

    In any event, Utah's gun laws relative to churches are just about dead last on my personal areas of concern and I can think of a half dozen significantly more important pieces of legislation I'll devote energy too before I even worry about whether or not a church can push for an infraction citation for violating a private policy that decent people ought to be respecting (one way or another) anyway.

    All the best.

    Charle
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    utbagpiper wrote:
    Jared wrote:

    As far as the church having rights,as I thought I made clear in my previous post,they have the right to ask you to leave as it is private property; however, getting the state to dotheir dirty work is not acceptable.

    As far as the vast majority of RKBA supporters being religious, that's purely an anecdotal statement. I've known gunowners and RKBA supporters who were religious/not religious, homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual, liberal/conservative/libertarian etc.


    This was not meant to get into the "Utah has great gun laws debate" or was it meant to challenge peoples religion or faith. Yes, overall Utah does have great gun laws, but there are plenty of states (even shall-issue states) that have few to no places off-limits that are a bit superior to Utah. When I was a teenager growing up in New England, New Hampshire completely respected my RKBA.... if I was a teenager in Utah at the time.... I would not really have the RKBA...so it's really tough to beat NH.

    While the principle of the State helping to enforce a private policy also sticks in my craw, on the practical side, I will happily take an infraction CCW violation over a misdemeanor tresspass charge any day. But to each his own.

    Yes, RKBA is a very diverse crowd. But in terms of raw numbers, my experience is that the vast majority are politically conservative and religious people. Voting records in the Utah legislature bear this out, as does my experience with who shows up at NRA dinners, shooting events etc. It is great to reach out and encourage a more diverse group. But raw numbers are pretty tough to beat.

    I don't know how old you are, but it has been a long time since ANY State completely respected RKBA. Even Vermont and Alaska with their permitless carry have far more locations off limits than Utah. Florida with its wide recognition of its permit mandates concealed and punishes even accidental displays of a firearm. California and a couple of other disciminatory issue States have very few off limits locations, but good luck getting a permit in the first place. Some locations have better hunting laws, though I note Utah allows you to CCW even on bow hunts, just don't use you firearm to take game. Florida's stand your ground law made a lot of news recently, but Utah has NEVER required a person to retreat and is downright fantastic in its defense of habitation. Not quite as good on defense of property as say Texas, but far better in a host of other areas.

    I suppose if you spend a LOT of time in LDS Churches there may be States that have gun laws personally better suited to you. But with the greatest amount of respect, I defy you to find any States that overall have better self-defense gun laws than Utah.

    In any event, Utah's gun laws relative to churches are just about dead last on my personal areas of concern and I can think of a half dozen significantly more important pieces of legislation I'll devote energy too before I even worry about whether or not a church can push for an infraction citation for violating a private policy that decent people ought to be respecting (one way or another) anyway.

    All the best.

    Charle
    Charles it sounds like there are some reasonable people in Utah after all.

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    Post imported post

    UTOC-45-44 wrote:

    When I heard about LDS stance on guns in the worship buildings I stopped going all together and haven't been back since.

    TJ
    To each his own. Of course, if I was going to let politics get me sideways with my chosen religion, I think I could find a lot larger issues than being asked (even required legally) not to bring a weapon into a house of worship.

    For that matter, there are a host of doctrinal restrictions on my conduct that are FAR more intrusive than a limit on carrying my gun to church. But, what do you do when you happen to believe such doctrines really do come from God?

    Don't get me wrong, I have no problem carrying a gun to church and were the choice mine to make, I would not ban guns in churches, though--and I'll get flamed for this here--I would discourage open carry just on the basis that EVERYONE ought to be comfortable at church and there are those uncomfortable at the sight of guns. Church isn't the place for political statements or even the most comfortable clothing, IMO. Indeed, I'd likely encourage some volunteer security.

    All the best.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    261

    Post imported post

    utbagpiper wrote:
    I would discourage open carry just on the basis that EVERYONE ought to be comfortable at church and there are those uncomfortable at the sight of guns. Church isn't the place for political statements or even the most comfortable clothing, IMO. Indeed, I'd likely encourage some volunteer security.

    All the best.
    NO flame here, honest..(I do read you said OPEN carry)but some people's comfort is no replacement for all people's ability to protect themselves, if they choose. Indeed, if no carry is allowed (in your comment, no OPEN carry) doesn't that make it a target rich environment for someone who cares so little about a churchgoers' comfort that theydont even consider it when they intendto come shoot the place to hell?

    This is not about politics for me and I suspect,for many of us here.. it's about having the tools, God forbid, to stay alive and protect ourselves/families/fellow citizens/etc. should we find ourselves with no other choice.

    I suspect you have no issue with CC in church.. but what about the rights/preferences of those who do not want to conceal?

    Now if by "volunteer security" you mean attendees who CC just in case.. I agree, but others' who OC should be included IMO.

    Please understand, I mean nothing personal here and am not pointing my finger at you, just the mentality in general, and in my experience, of the religious crowd. I agree, private property is just that.. but like others here, I will not "worship" or anything else we spiritual humans do in a place that ignores or denies any of my rights as a human. I respect you, and your rights, but not at the expense of my own.

    YMMV

    Erus

  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,792

    Post imported post

    Erus wrote:
    NO flame here, honest..(I do read you said OPEN carry)but some people's comfort is no replacement for all people's ability to protect themselves, if they choose.
    Enus,

    I am very supportive of both CC and OC in virtually every situation you might imagine. That said, were I in charge of making decisions for a church as large and politically diverse as is the LDS church, I would certainly allow, even encourage CC. I would likely discourage OC for the same reasons I would discourage dressing too casually,

    Now, I understand that some people really prefer OC. Some of us really prefer not to get dressed up, but church is not the place for the most comfortable clothes, it is (at least for many denominations) a time and place to show respect to the Almighty by wearing "sunday best," being groomed, etc, barring some dire inability to do so.

    I also recognize that some folks don't have CCW permits. As I read the law, a property owner can authorize any non-prohibited person to CC on his private property, without a permit. Again, if I were in charge of such things, I'd do just that. Outside, the laws of man apply. Inside, the rules of the church take precedence in certain cases.

    And in all of this, I am NOT advocating for any laws. Simply stating what I'd view as a near idea policy for a large and diverse church.

    Anywhere outside the unique confines of that church, my neighbors would have to deal with me open carrying. But inside a church, I will always provide the greatest deference possible to others' feelings, even if they irrational. For me at least, it is the ONE place where discouraging OC in favor of something more discreet may well be appropriate. And again, NOT via legislation, but by simple request to members and visitors alike.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pahrump, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    261

    Post imported post

    utbagpiper wrote:
    Erus wrote:
    NO flame here, honest..(I do read you said OPEN carry)but some people's comfort is no replacement for all people's ability to protect themselves, if they choose.
    Enus,

    I am very supportive of both CC and OC in virtually every situation you might imagine. That said, were I in charge of making decisions for a church as large and politically diverse as is the LDS church, I would certainly allow, even encourage CC. I would likely discourage OC for the same reasons I would discourage dressing too casually,

    Now, I understand that some people really prefer OC. Some of us really prefer not to get dressed up, but church is not the place for the most comfortable clothes, it is (at least for many denominations) a time and place to show respect to the Almighty by wearing "sunday best," being groomed, etc, barring some dire inability to do so.

    I also recognize that some folks don't have CCW permits. As I read the law, a property owner can authorize any non-prohibited person to CC on his private property, without a permit. Again, if I were in charge of such things, I'd do just that. Outside, the laws of man apply. Inside, the rules of the church take precedence in certain cases.

    And in all of this, I am NOT advocating for any laws. Simply stating what I'd view as a near idea policy for a large and diverse church.

    Anywhere outside the unique confines of that church, my neighbors would have to deal with me open carrying. But inside a church, I will always provide the greatest deference possible to others' feelings, even if they irrational. For me at least, it is the ONE place where discouraging OC in favor of something more discreet may well be appropriate. And again, NOT via legislation, but by simple request to members and visitors alike.
    Skipping the chance that "Enus" is nothing more than a typo.. lol...

    I think that you and I are on the same page (especially that it should be up to PEOPLE, and not LAWS) with one minor exception. While I agree that if you hold a certain place as sacred (other than in the private property sense.. which I DO hold sacred) or subject to a "higher" law than Man's, I would have to pull out the biblical references and quietly state that the means and intention for self defense IS, according to they that writ it, God's Law, which is higher still for most religious dogmas.

    Shouldn'ta religious entity, like you and I as individuals,encourage this? I can empathize with other's feelings.. and I try to, I really do.. I agree that MY freedoms cost me defending YOURS... this is closer to an "ideal" policy for humanity much less any entity they/we may form... but I do not have a right not to be uncomfy, or to not be offended. I try to be polite. I do not go out of my way to bother people. I try to be a nice guy. But I am not going to give up my rights so you (not you personally) will not "feel" all squishy or nervous inside. If I felt a need to enter your home, or your church, and YOUR rules (which are your right to make) say I can not carry my firearm, so be it. Just like if there is a dress code, I will follow it or keep out. My need to be inside do NOT outweigh (for me) my NEED and DUTY to take responsibility for keeping my own rights right by my side. (though it might very well outweigh my need to be casually dressed.. lol)

    For you, going to church is worth not having you handgun with you. I disagree with you but I celebrate your right to choose for you.

    I think it boils simply down to this: For you this situation is one where you are willing to compromise your rights andfor me it is not.

    !Vive La Differance!

    ...and many apologiesif my ranting madethis seem like a debate regarding dogma, (which I do not wish to do) rather than keeping it on target, pun intended.

    BTW... you, Sir, are welcome to carry in my house, as I regard you one of the good guys.

    Erus

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    Erus wrote:
    I would have to pull out the biblical references and quietly state that the means and intention for self defense IS, according to they that writ it, God's Law, which is higher still for most religious dogmas.
    On the other hand, the righteous sometimes choose to submit without resistance. It depends on God's goals, and we're incapable of judging what really makes sense in His eyes.

    Keep in mind that the LDS faith believes that the leader of the church is a literal prophet of God, no different from Moses, or Abraham, or Elijah or any of the other prophets and apostles who wrote the Bible. Thus, the faithful have to consider the distinct possibility that the ban on weapons in church is God's Will.

    You seem somewhat baffled by the willingness of members to accept the church's decision on this issue, even though we disagree with it. What you're overlooking is that faith trumps such petty disagreements. That's why we accept it, and why you don't.

  19. #19
    Regular Member NewZealandAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Greater Salt Lake City Metro area far south suburb of Provo in UTAH
    Posts
    349

    Post imported post

    Well perhaps then we as church members should hold the church criminally liable when an incedent does occur at an LDS church where a member or several members come under armed criminal attack from outsiders while attending church, for not providing security yet denying the basic right of self defense while attending sacrament meeting. I have no desire to deny the faith and instruction of my church leaders, but at the same time I will not sacrifice one of my most fundamental and basic of all human RIGHTS to defend my self from evil doers who may seek to harm injure or kill me while i worship in peace, therefor I will wear my "life preserver" discreetly and privately while attending Sacrament. Just as Dave Points out in the scripture regarding how the Lord feels about self defense. Please do not construe this any of you who are also members, that I deny my faith and oppose my church leaders, just that the sriptures are very clear on self defense and do NOT change.

    I have a testimony of jesus Christ and the Gospel. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are indeed congruent with the gospel and our RIGHTS come from God

    Please, perhaps some may feel inclined to flame me, for my feelings on this issue, please don't. I will live with my own conscience between me and my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and perhaps to live another day to tell about it. Sometime it is best to abide by the old adage, "if you haven't got something good to say, don't say it"

    I look forward to having new "armed" friends to mingle with when i move to Happy Valley!


    (Dion Wood) 800-808-KIWI

    http://www.MySpace.com/NewZealandAmerican

    Got LIBERTY? The world's Best Alternative RADIO for TRUTH and restoring our CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!

    We The People Radio Network http://www.WTPRN.com


    (Dion Wood). MY FREEDOM PAGE[/COLOR] with valuable links to ALTERNATIVE MEDIA, Internet Radio shows and other sites to restore our FREEDOM & LIBERTYhttp://www.QRZ.com/db/KB9QFH TELEPHONE: +1(800)808-KIWI that's +1(800)808-5494 Tollfree. "NewZealander By Birth, American By The Grace Of God." See also http://www.facebook.com/NewZealandAmerican & http://RTR.org/NewZealandAmerican IN MEMORY OF OUR GOD, OUR RELIGION, AND FREEDOM, AND OUR PEACE, OUR WIVES, AND OUR CHILDREN" (The Title Of LIBERTY)

  20. #20
    Regular Member NewZealandAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Greater Salt Lake City Metro area far south suburb of Provo in UTAH
    Posts
    349

    Post imported post

    Maybe we can legislatively repeal this law that allows churches to ban carry at Sacrament meetings.
    (Dion Wood). MY FREEDOM PAGE[/COLOR] with valuable links to ALTERNATIVE MEDIA, Internet Radio shows and other sites to restore our FREEDOM & LIBERTYhttp://www.QRZ.com/db/KB9QFH TELEPHONE: +1(800)808-KIWI that's +1(800)808-5494 Tollfree. "NewZealander By Birth, American By The Grace Of God." See also http://www.facebook.com/NewZealandAmerican & http://RTR.org/NewZealandAmerican IN MEMORY OF OUR GOD, OUR RELIGION, AND FREEDOM, AND OUR PEACE, OUR WIVES, AND OUR CHILDREN" (The Title Of LIBERTY)

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    When Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden they were First told to Multiply and Replenish the Earth and Second they were told to Not partake of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

    They had to have a choice and they made the right one.

    We have First been told that if we do not provide for our own we are worse than an infidel. Providing for our own includes providing for their safety, and "By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection." (1 Timothy 5:8) (The Family a Proclamation to the World)

    Second we were told that it would be an infraction if we carried in LDS Churches in Utah.

    Now we also have a choice. Let us chose wisely.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    NewZealandAmerican wrote:
    Well perhaps then we as church members should hold the church criminally liable when an incedent does occur at an LDS church where a member or several members come under armed criminal attack from outsiders while attending church, for not providing security yet denying the basic right of self defense while attending sacrament meeting.
    It's also possible that this even will never be allowed to happen, or that it will happen, but that it will be the Father's will, as in Alma 24:20-27.

    You must make your own decisions, of course, and I can't say that your approach is wrong, just that it's not mine. Mine is that in the absence of a prompt to carry at church, I don't and won't. I'll revisit the issue in a few months when I move to Idaho, and see how I feel about it in a state where the Church hasn't (AFAIK) issued any request not to carry.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    240

    Post imported post

    swillden wrote:
    Keep in mind that the LDS faith believes that the leader of the church is a literal prophet of God, no different from Moses, or Abraham, or Elijah or any of the other prophets and apostles who wrote the Bible. Thus, the faithful have to consider the distinct possibility that the ban on weapons in church is God's Will.

    You seem somewhat baffled by the willingness of members to accept the church's decision on this issue, even though we disagree with it. What you're overlooking is that faith trumps such petty disagreements. That's why we accept it, and why you don't.
    Do the LDSprophets pass the biblical tests of aprophet? Have all of their prophesies come true?

    I can not followa succession of prophets withoutputting them to the test.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    combatcarry wrote:
    Do the LDSprophets pass the biblical tests of aprophet? Have all of their prophesies come true?

    I can not followa succession of prophets withoutputting them to the test.
    This is very OT. Response via PM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    uTAH-life member: NRA, GOA, CCRKBA, ,
    Posts
    291

    Post imported post

    OK- A couple of facts about this policy ya all may not know:



    1. It came from the churches legal dept., NOT as a doctrinal sermon over the pulpit. Think on that for a moment.



    2. It came about AFTER a certain indiviual WITH A CCW PERMIT had a ND in church while showing a fellow member his new choice for CCW.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •