Churches Denying Right of Self Defense Dates of Notice

12630 Views 44 Replies 26 Participants Last post by Jeff Johnson, Oct 20, 2008

Cinhil

Discussion Starter · Mar 5, 2007

Currently any church which desires to refuse lawful concealed carry within the borders of their establishment are required to at least, on a yearly basis, update BCI with a letter of intent. see the following from the law:

as the division shall prescribe.
(ii) The division shall post on its website a list of the churches and organizations operating houses of worship who have given notice under Subsection (4)(a)(i).
(b) Any notice given pursuant to Subsection (2)(c), (d), or (e) shall remain in effect until revoked or for a period of one year from the date the notice was originally given, whichever occurs first.

The problem with this is that no date of this letter of intent is posted, or required to be posted on the BCI website. This is an absolute must! The date of the submitted letter ought to be a requirement for posting on the BCI site so that everyone is positive of compliance otherwise it is nothing more than anarchy. A person ought to be able to go to the BCI website & find the church & the date of notice, especially if they are new to the state, so that they may be compliant, otherwise we are all done a dis-service. Who knows when a letter may have been received? A letter could continually stay up on the site beyond the posted and acknowledged date of intent over one year, and we would never know. Churches & the BCI website ought to be required by the law to post the date of the notice.

Maybe Clark could have some influence on the Hill to make this a reality. As it is now the issuance of this statement by BCI is too arbitrary and the actual date of the request, or date of notice received by BCI is unknown and it should be known. If we are to comply with the law, then this is a Must!

I think that most of us would like to see this addition to this idiotic legislation.

See less See more

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

blackpuma

· #2 · Mar 5, 2007

IMHO this stupid "special privilege" needs to be revoked and we go back to requiring the "no guns" signs.

Better yet, don't hand out special privileges to organizations that don't have natural rights in the first place.

UTOC-45-44

· #3 · Sep 27, 2007

To carry in a Church ( ie LDS ) is only an infraction any ways. So I would say CARRY.

God might protect you, but carry enough ammo to hold off the BG(s) til he comes in the form of Cops

Tarzan1888

· #4 · Sep 27, 2007

UTOC-45-44 said:
To carry in a Church ( ie LDS ) is only an infraction any ways. So I would say CARRY.

God might protect you, but carry enough ammo to hold off the BG(s) til he comes in the form of Cops

You get the gold STAR!

Tarzan

Paul

· #5 · Sep 27, 2007

Define "infraction." What is the punishment (legal punishment, not religious or spiritual) if you get caught carrying on LDS property?

Also is prohibited to carry on any church property (parking lots, church owned sports facilities, etc.) or just inside church buildings? I ask this because I actually walk across a church parking lot or through the grass on the side of an LDS building almost every single day of the week. I walk past / through LDS owned property every day on my way too and from work. If I pull into an LDS owned parking lot and leave my gun in my car, am I breaking the law?

I keep having this moral dilema on how to handle this situation. I want to support my church, but at the same time I am disappointed with the current policy. Suggestions, solutions?

-PW

ebrinton

· #6 · Sep 27, 2007

PW said:
Define "infraction." What is the punishment (legal punishment, not religious or spiritual) if you get caught carrying on LDS property?

An infraction is a crime for which you can be fined, but you can't get put in jail. If you were caught carrying in an LDS "house of worship," you would most likely just get a slap on the wrist and told not to carry again. I wouldn't worry about cutting across LDS property as long as you are carrying concealed. This is better left a don't-ask-don't-tell situation.

Cinhil

Discussion Starter · #7 · Sep 27, 2007

I was told it would be ok to keep my weapon in my glove box by a member of my Bishopric, or to park on the street where no law/infraction would occur.
I think that unless otherwise authorized by the building supervisor you aren't supposed to even do that. But concealed & locked away is out of site & they have no right to look in your vehicle. If you are passing through, or on the sidewalk I believe you cannot be prosecuted. At least the sidewalk IS public property, not church property & therefore exempt from their control.
My 2 cents.

Paul

· #8 · Sep 27, 2007

I have actually had my scouts meet at the church house to go shooting .22's or shotguns. Technically we were probably breaking the law by doing this. I have kind of just taken the don't-ask-don't-tell policy as you suggested. Nobody knows I carry anyway and hopefully never will. It was actually quite funny though, when I showed up at the concealed class with my wife, there were 2 of my ward members in the same class. One of them was my assistant scoutmaster, and the other was one of my scouts fathers. We got a good laugh.

I don't carry into any LDS buildings, but have sure been tempted too....Sure is annoying.

-PW

Jeff Johnson

· #9 · Sep 30, 2007

I think that a caution is in order in this thread. It is true that an infraction is an offense that does not carry the risk of jail time. However, it is possible to get your CFP revoked or suspended if you are convicted of an infraction of weapon laws two or more times.

I base this statement on the following section:

U.C.A. 53-5-704. Division duties -- Permit to carry concealed firearm -- Certification for concealed firearms instructor -- Requirements for issuance -- Violation -- Denial, suspension, or revocation -- Appeal procedure

...
(b) The division may not deny, suspend, or revoke a concealed firearm permit solely for a single conviction for an infraction violation of Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 5, Weapons.
...

This prohibits BCI from suspending or revoking a CFP because of a single conviction of an infraction of weapons laws. However, this implies that BCI can indeed suspend or revoke a CFP on a second conviction for such an infraction.

How much BCI does that, I don't have any idea.

apollosmith

· #10 · Oct 1, 2007

Jeff Johnson said:
How much BCI does that, I don't have any idea.

There are details on this type of info in the BCI reports at http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/CFStat.html

Approximately 200 permits have been revoked each year for the last several years. Around 55 have been suspended each year.

In the couple of years that I searched through, I only found 2 that were revoked for weapons violations (no indication what the offense was). Most of them are revoked or suspended for other things, such as DUI, tax evasion, sex abuse, drug possession, etc.

UTOC-45-44

· #11 · Oct 18, 2007

ebrinton said:
PW said:

Define "infraction." What is the punishment (legal punishment, not religious or spiritual) if you get caught carrying on LDS property?

Click to expand...

An infraction is a crime for which you can be fined, but you can't get put in jail. If you were caught carrying in an LDS "house of worship," you would most likely just get a slap on the wrist and told not to carry again. I wouldn't worry about cutting across LDS property as long as you are carrying concealed. This is better left a don't-ask-don't-tell situation.

I agree to what has been said.

My interpretation is that the infraction is when you are in the LDS building and not the property. On the property you can be asked to leave and if you don't you will be charged with Trespass.

Kevin Jensen

· #12 · Oct 19, 2007

76-10-530. Trespass with a firearm in a house of worship or private residence -- Notice -- Penalty.

(1) A person, including a person licensed to carry a concealed firearm pursuant to Title 53, Chapter 5, Part 7, Concealed Weapon Act, after notice has been given as provided in Subsection (2) that firearms are prohibited, may not knowingly and intentionally:
(a) transport a firearm into:
(i) a house of worship; or
(ii) a private residence; or
(b) while in possession of a firearm, enter or remain in:
(i) a house of worship; or
(ii) a private residence.

76-10-501. Definitions.

(13) "House of worship" means a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, or other building set apart primarily for the purpose of worship in which religious services are held and the main body of which is kept for that use and not put to any other use inconsistent with its primary purpose.

The LDS church owns a lot of property in Utah. I frequently Open Carry on some of this property. Take Deseret Industries for example. While they are owned by the LDS church, they are not a house of worship. So when I need cheap computer parts, guess where my firearm and I go shopping. Also notice the law says nothing about having a firearm ABOUT their property, like a school. It only says IN a house of worship.

See less See more

bane

· #13 · Oct 19, 2007

blackpuma said:
IMHO this stupid "special privilege" needs to be revoked and we go back to requiring the "no guns" signs.

Better yet, don't hand out special privileges to organizations that don't have natural rights in the first place.

Although at this point in the development of our "mixed economy" such arguments are almost pointless, I entirely agree with you... if only there were a way to wake people up to the realization that superseding individual rights with laws like this is exactly the type of thing that every fascist/socialist/communist country has also done... but most people just don't seem to believe (or care) that we have been gradually slipping into fascism for decades... they just don't care... it's frustrating...

Tarzan1888

· #14 · Nov 5, 2007

Posted: Sun 04 Nov 2007 9:35 pm Post subject: Two conflicting laws

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. 1 Timothy 5:8

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.

Tarzan

See less See more

jaredbelch

· #15 · Nov 16, 2007

SGT Jensen said:
76-10-530. Trespass with a firearm in a house of worship or private residence -- Notice -- Penalty.

(1) A person, including a person licensed to carry a concealed firearm pursuant to Title 53, Chapter 5, Part 7, Concealed Weapon Act, after notice has been given as provided in Subsection (2) that firearms are prohibited, may not knowingly and intentionally:
(a) transport a firearm into:
(i) a house of worship; or
(ii) a private residence; or
(b) while in possession of a firearm, enter or remain in:
(i) a house of worship; or
(ii) a private residence.

76-10-501. Definitions.

(13) "House of worship" means a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, or other building set apart primarily for the purpose of worship in which religious services are held and the main body of which is kept for that use and not put to any other use inconsistent with its primary purpose.

Here's my thought, since we have specifically mentioned LDS churches. The chapel is really the only place in most of the meeting houses that is used primarily for worship. The rest of the building, specifically the cultural hall is used primarily for other activities, therefore there would be no intention to bring a firearm into the house of worship if you brought it on Wednesday night. As long as you stayed out of the main chapel of course.

Just a thought - I'm not a lawyer... so take it for what it's worth.

bane

· #16 · Nov 16, 2007

I don't know... if you read the definition of a "house of worship" closely you'll notice it talks about the fact that the "main body, which is kept for [worship]" -- this infers that the building may have other rooms that are not primarily used for worship. And yet it still talks about the building *as a whole* being an entire "house of worship" since it's primary function is to worship and the main part of it's building is reserved exclusively for worship.

jaredbelch

· #17 · Nov 16, 2007

bane said:
I don't know... if you read the definition of a "house of worship" closely you'll notice it talks about the fact that the "main body, which is kept for [worship]" -- this infers that the building may have other rooms that are not primarily used for worship. And yet it still talks about the building *as a whole* being an entire "house of worship" since it's primary function is to worship and the main part of it's building is reserved exclusively for worship.

Good point.

Strategic Tactical

· #18 · Nov 16, 2007

I think this has been a good thread. I like to watch everyone bounce their opinions off of each other and see the reactions.

Jeff Johnson

· #19 · Nov 17, 2007

We can try to micro-analyze the statute to try to work around it somehow, but it just won't work if you are found to be in violation. No jury (if it got that far) would see the subtle distinctions people are trying to wring out of it. The simple fact is that you are committing an infraction if you carry inside an LDS church building, no matter which room you are in.

That's the way I see it, but I'm not a lawyer either.

UtahRSO

· #20 · Nov 18, 2007

I have to agree with you, Jeff. It's either don't carry anywhere in the building, or carry and risk the infraction. All the rationalizing we might do about the use of a particular room in the building probably wouldn't hold up in court.

My son and I were discussing this topic today. His Kel-Tec .380 is small enough he could have it in a pocket holster, and it would never be noticed. And I still have my "Sunday-go-to-meetin' gun. But the problem is, for him (and me) it's not just a matter of "don't ask, don't tell." It's whether he and I, believing as we do, are willing to be obedient to the Church's request.

Some day perhaps, the policy (and it is only policy) will change, and the LDS Church won't renew with BCI. I'm afraid though that any change would be because someone was killed or seriously hurt by some bad guy inside the meetinghouse. Could I hope for that? Of course not!

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.