Carrying in worship service inside of a school building

[candcallen]

Indeed. I tried to find a pic of a one-trick-pony... but, alas.

There is probably a reddit for that.

@Sasquatch might know.

 

[roadkill]

I wonder how Bruin when applied to restricted areas (schools, federal properties, even bars) would change status quo. Is it enough to get the laws repealed? Imo there’s a good chance it would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[toddnjoyce]

I wonder how Bruin when applied to restricted areas (schools, federal properties, even bars) would change status quo. Is it enough to get the laws repealed? Imo there’s a good chance it would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Repeal? No. Overturn…maybe, but you have to get past Heller which is where Scalia almost categorically affirms several restrictions, including in sensitive places.

“Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. (p. 54-55.)

 

[Sasquatch]

Repeal? No. Overturn…maybe, but you have to get past Heller which is where Scalia almost categorically affirms several restrictions, including in sensitive places.

“Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. (p. 54-55.)

There's some other cases working their way thru the Fed courts now addressing sensitive places. It might be a few more years, but no doubt we could get more positive traction and knock down sensitive places, or drastically curtail the gov'ts ability to dictate what is a sensitive place.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Hello, everyone! I am a member of a church that rents out an area inside a local middle school on Sundays to host church services. Does the 30.05, 30.06, 30.07 signs still apply to a LTC holder during this time of worship? I’ve been trying to do find something definitive but I’m either not finding anything specific to this situation or I’m not very good at researching this topic. Can anyone point me to some sources with regard this?

Thanks!

There is case law to support the position that the exercise of your 1a right should not cause you to give up any of your other rights.

I would not arrest arguing that it is a church and not a school and the (misguuded) purpose of the law is to prevent firearms from being around children, not because of some special quality of a building.

That said, it is a risk you alone can decide if it is worth taking.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[Sasquatch]

There is probably a reddit for that.

@Sasquatch might know.

If you wanna traumatize yourself, start here

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

There are others, but I don't wanna get banned

 

[RedneckHillbilly]

Clicked here wanted to see what the rule was for church going, saw it was about school. LTC only and written permission?

 

[candcallen]

If you wanna traumatize yourself, start here

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

There are others, but I don't wanna get banned

I don't do reddit.

We at least not since they forced you to use the app and get tracked. Lol.

Seriously there is a reddit rabbit hole for damn near anything. The NSFW list is a few thousand reddit long.

And Seriously I don't do reddit.

In fact I bet you there is a reddit about the purely professional Dr and nurses at your hospital. Not that a Gentleman like you would take advantage of the leverage such a thing could offer. You're like the secret service of the hospital what happens there stays there.

No I didn't believe that BS even as I typed it.

Reddit on.

 

[leVieux]

Clicked here wanted to see what the rule was for church going, saw it was about school. LTC only and written permission?

? Which other Constitutional RIGHT requires third-party “written permission”?

 

[candcallen]

Someone left the gate open, @leVieux is dropping apples everywhere again.

 

[leVieux]

Repeal? No. Overturn…maybe, but you have to get past Heller which is where Scalia almost categorically affirms several restrictions, including in sensitive places.

“Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. (p. 54-55.)

<>

Their “longstanding prohibitions” were nonexistent during the first century of the Republic !

leVieux
.

 

[RedneckHillbilly]

? Which other Constitutional RIGHT requires third-party “written permission”?

Ok, if you want to respect the legal system, while recognizing its infringement, what is the proper thing regarding said question?

 

[leVieux]

Ok, if you want to respect the legal system, while recognizing its infringement, what is the proper thing regarding said question?

<>

First; IANAL

The situation is a “conflict of rights” with competing “rights” of landowners/lease holders/managers to control activities on their properties vs) Citizens’ rights to be armed and promote their own safety.

One argument is that the citizens could just “not go”; but that violates their right to worship as they see fit.

Unfortunately, there is no duty of the property owner to assure the safety of those whom he disarms.

IMHO, there should be a distinction b/t closed private properties w/ restricted access vs) those into which the general public is invited, such as businesses, theaters, churches, etc.

There should also be a distinction b/t legally-armed honest law-abiding citizens and criminals or those with criminal intent.

As long as this remains unresolved; we’ll see the problems and complaints of those disenfranchised of their 2A Rights.

Sadly, explanations don’t seem to help. What may help would be if the States anonymously published the demographics of those who are licensed; who also constitute any business’ most desired clients.
.

 

[Sasquatch]

I don't do reddit.

We at least not since they forced you to use the app and get tracked. Lol.

Seriously there is a reddit rabbit hole for damn near anything. The NSFW list is a few thousand reddit long.

And Seriously I don't do reddit.

In fact I bet you there is a reddit about the purely professional Dr and nurses at your hospital. Not that a Gentleman like you would take advantage of the leverage such a thing could offer. You're like the secret service of the hospital what happens there stays there.

No I didn't believe that BS even as I typed it.

Reddit on.

Aw geez, now I hafta spend another few hours hunting rabbit holes, as if I needed another fetish

 

[Yall]

<>

Their “longstanding prohibitions” were nonexistent during the first century of the Republic !

leVieux
.

Interestingly enough, there were actually laws requiring people be armed when attending church services.

 

[RedneckHillbilly]

<>

First; IANAL

The situation is a “conflict of rights” with competing “rights” of landowners/lease holders/managers to control activities on their properties vs) Citizens’ rights to be armed and promote their own safety.

Dealing with private property, what would happen if you had to agree to suspend your rights to inhabit said property and enjoy intrastate commerce for shopping for necessities such as groceries, if all say are own by a said enterprise, like blackrock?

One argument is that the citizens could just “not go”; but that violates their right to worship as they see fit.

It also violates the right to peacefully assemble and right to free speech.

Unfortunately, there is no duty of the property owner to assure the safety of those whom he disarms.

Actually the workplace can be held liable for employees saftey, not sure about an individual, not unless there was a situation they didn’t inform their guests.

IMHO, there should be a distinction b/t closed private properties w/ restricted access vs) those into which the general public is invited, such as businesses, theaters, churches, etc.

If you can make distinctions, then your prioritizing someones rights over others.

There should also be a distinction b/t legally-armed honest law-abiding citizens and criminals or those with criminal intent.

It’s called a felon..

As long as this remains unresolved; we’ll see the problems and complaints of those disenfranchised of their 2A Rights.

Sadly, explanations don’t seem to help. What may help would be if the States anonymously published the demographics of those who are licensed; who also constitute any business’ most desired clients.
.

When has a state accidentally published licensed carrier’s addresses, names, etc?
this is also a violation of your 4’th and 9’th amendments. You cant publish peoples privacy and then it’s punishing other areas, based off of those demographics. Some would argue civil rights violations, since demographics and crime usually are in the lower impoverished areas. It also, ventures in red flag laws, by publishing stereotypes of people who may and may not be licensed.

More laws isnt the answer.. never was. Apply the law appropriately and fairly across everyone in context to the Constitution. Every new law made, just makes more people potentially criminally negligent, who were abiding by the law. Its like changing the rules midgame to suit other people.

 

[leVieux]

Dealing with private property, what would happen if you had to agree to suspend your rights to inhabit said property and enjoy intrastate commerce for shopping for necessities such as groceries, if all say are own by a said enterprise, like blackrock?

It also violates the right to peacefully assemble and right to free speech.

Actually the workplace can be held liable for employees saftey, not sure about an individual, not unless there was a situation they didn’t inform their guests.

If you can make distinctions, then your prioritizing someones rights over others.

It’s called a felon..

When has a state accidentally published licensed carrier’s addresses, names, etc?
this is also a violation of your 4’th and 9’th amendments. You cant publish peoples privacy and then it’s punishing other areas, based off of those demographics. Some would argue civil rights violations, since demographics and crime usually are in the lower impoverished areas. It also, ventures in red flag laws, by publishing stereotypes of people who may and may not be licensed.

More laws isnt the answer.. never was. Apply the law appropriately and fairly across everyone in context to the Constitution. Every new law made, just makes more people potentially criminally negligent, who were abiding by the law. Its like changing the rules midgame to suit other people.

I don’t contest most of your assertions; but think a distinction should be made b/t private property w/o granted public access vs) private property onto which the general public is invited to enter to will. It seems that the current situation is that of a landowner having dictatorial rights over the public he had INVITED IN ! Just isn’t “right” ! leVieux

 

[LoneStarTX]

Am I the only old guy who thinks all these "reasonable" prohibition laws are nuts?
These "geniuses" who make laws prohibiting protection of school children and good church going christians from the ability to stop evil killers are absolutely crazy. Evil is more real than ever and laws do nothing to save lives.

 

[leVieux]

Am I the only old guy who thinks all these "reasonable" prohibition laws are nuts?
These "geniuses" who make laws prohibiting protection of school children and good church going christians from the ability to stop evil killers are absolutely crazy. Evil is more real than ever and laws do nothing to save lives.

<>
Exactly, “nuts”, b/c those laws disarm ONLY the non-criminals.

Those who demand these laws are ignorant, and many of them insist on remaining ignorant. They stay intransigently deluded to believe they are promoting “safety”, despite their consistent bloody failures.

You are not the “only guy”, by far !

leVieux
.

 

[RedneckHillbilly]

I don’t contest most of your assertions; but think a distinction should be made b/t private property w/o granted public access vs) private property onto which the general public is invited to enter to will. It seems that the current situation is that of a landowner having dictatorial rights over the public he had INVITED IN ! Just isn’t “right” ! leVieux

It used to be capitalism or the free market determined this. If private businesses owners were being dicks, people just quit going there.
I would argue bodily autonomy is more at risk than gun rights regarding this, you could argue the right to defense is body autonomy as well. The whole private/public thing is a two way street. It seems the only time public has rights,
Is when it infringes on the business owners rights, such as being forced to do something against their beliefs. But these same public/private BIG enterprises were also demanding or wanting to enforce vaxx card passes, as to keep non-jabbed folks into their business, which is an invasion of privacy as well.