Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:22:14

� 18.2-283. Carrying dangerous weapon to place of religious worship.

If any person carry any gun, pistol, bowie knife, dagger or other dangerous weapon, without good and sufficient reason, to a place of worship while a meeting for religious purposes is being held at such place he shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.

As I understand it, the underlined and bolded phrase is the hair splitter. Anybody have any comments on what would suffice as described?
I've had several people ask me what would be a "Good and sufficient reason" and I can't answer the question.
Just for the record, I DO attend worship service and I DO NOT carry in the building. That's my choice for my own personal reasons and it has nothing to do with the law, allowed or not.

by **jaywade** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:28:56

one of the things I was let down about when I got my permit, my wife and I have failed to find a new church family since moving here to VA (been 6 months), we've attended services in a couple different places haven't found one that fit yet, anyway church is one place I was hoping to be able to carry, Tara and I are Bapist, there have been serveral shooting at church's across the nation espically bapist church's, christ himself said believer's would be singled out and scorned and attacked and I think you can see the evidence of this espically lately.

At our church we are members of back in Md we had serveral LEO's that were members they always carried on Sundays.

I know of a church in Alexandria that has armed secruity at it's services .... I would like to carry at a church if there was no security or off duty Leo's there

by **VBshooter** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:23:22

IMHO Yours and your wifes personal self defense is Good and Sufficient Reason to carry concealed.. Do it and don't advertise it.

by **allingeneral** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:28:02

VBshooter wrote:IMHO Yours and your wifes personal self defense is Good and Sufficient Reason to carry concealed.. Do it and don't advertise it.

+1 (*2)

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:39:33

jaywade wrote:.....At our church we are members of back in Md we had serveral LEO's that were members they always carried on Sundays.

I'm not sure without reading through the law again, but, as I understand it, LEO's are allowed to carry virtually anywhere.

I know of a church in Alexandria that has armed secruity at it's services .... I would like to carry at a church if there was no security or off duty Leo's there

I'm guessing the law was written to protect the congregation from multiple fields of fire in the event of an active shooter. That doesn't protect me and/or you, though, does it?

Rick, do you suppose we, the gun owners, could petition for this to be rewritten so that it can be clearly interpreted? Maybe something about a letter of approval from the pastor or some such? I dunno, I'm just throwin' darts here. Clearly(no pun intended), it is not definable as it is written.

by **gunderwood** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:42:57

jaywade wrote:one of the things I was let down about when I got my permit, my wife and I have failed to find a new church family since moving here to VA (been 6 months), we've attended services in a couple different places haven't found one that fit yet, anyway church is one place I was hoping to be able to carry, Tara and I are Bapist, there have been serveral shooting at church's across the nation espically bapist church's, christ himself said believer's would be singled out and scorned and attacked and I think you can see the evidence of this espically lately.

At our church we are members of back in Md we had serveral LEO's that were members they always carried on Sundays.

I know of a church in Alexandria that has armed secruity at it's services .... I would like to carry at a church if there was no security or off duty Leo's there

I know lots of people who carry in churches around VA. If the church doesn't have a problem with it, who is going to say otherwise? Now if you do something stupid, like fire a warning shot towards an aggressor, then it is not out of the question for a zealous prosecutor to heap that charge on you. If you are concealing, in general, people shouldn't know you have it. If that is the case and you end up needing the gun for legitimate SD, what jury is going to convict you? The very circumstances which required you defend yourself and the rest of the congregation, prove you had sufficient cause.

by **Jakeiscrazy** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:45:58

Rick, do you suppose we, the gun owners, could petition for this to be rewritten so that it can be clearly interpreted? Maybe something about a letter of approval from the pastor or some such? I dunno, I'm just throwin' darts here. Clearly(no pun intended), it is not definable as it is written.

This is know doubt a really stupid law and not only does it go against gun but any "dangerous weapon". I believe that this was almost change but got killed up by a "Deathstar sub-committee" made up of anti-gunners. It should be change. BTW IF your pastor is OK with it maybe he can appoint you "security" and that can't hurt.

by **gunderwood** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:47:43

Jim wrote:I'm guessing the law was written to protect the congregation from multiple fields of fire in the event of an active shooter. That doesn't protect me and/or you, though, does it?

No, the law exists for other reasons. I don't remember what the argument was when this specific instance of it was enacted. However, VA has bounced between no guns and mandatory guns in church many times. At one point, politicians were complaining that the people were keeping the letter of the law (requiring everyone to bring arms to church), but ignoring the spirit of the law because when they arrived at church they were handing the guns over to a black (possibly/probably a slave). The intent of that instance was because of several slave rebellions that started while the white owners were at church and unarmed.

Like most gun laws, there is no rational base for it.

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:37:58

I thank all of you for your responses. This is quickly becoming a good thread, IMHO. I'd like to hear from others and from those that have already posted about further posts.
Again, thanks, fellas.

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:48:52

gunderwood wrote:.....I know lots of people who carry in churches around VA. If the church doesn't have a problem with it, who is going to say otherwise?
I agree. If nothing ever happens, it's a static issue.
Now if you do something stupid, like fire a warning shot towards an aggressor, then it is not out of the question for a zealous prosecutor to heap that charge on you.
I would fully expect that to happen.
If you are concealing, in general, people shouldn't know you have it. If that is the case and you end up needing the gun for legitimate SD, what jury is going to convict you? The very circumstances which required you defend yourself and the rest of the congregation, prove you had sufficient cause.

This is where I'm confused. To start with, you're right and I agree with you. But if the jury is going to say "Oh, well it's OK, then", there would be no need for this law to begin with. Or so I'm guessing.
You see where I'm going with this? It looks like a catch 22 situation to me. If I carry, I risk being prosecuted. If I don't carry, I risk being killed. That ain't no good!
I'm back to where I started. I think this thing needs to be rewritten so it's clear as to what is "good and sufficient reason".

by **PistolPilot** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:50:16

My CCW course instructor said that he has trained and sold many "carry" guns to members of one particular church. They got trained and went shopping because their pastor recommended it.

Now if THAT'S not reason enough...

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:54:46

So, guys, do y'all think that a letter from the pastor authorizing CC in service would kill a D/A's attempt to prosecute?

by **VBshooter** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:07:30

Unfortunately I don;t beleive the pastor can preempt VA state law, however It would carry a lot more weight with a jury IMHO... I still consider self defense as good enough reason to CC,,

user · by **user** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:11:19

Mere authorization from a religious leader would not suffice, in my opinion. However, if the leader cited apprehension due to a specific threat or even a general threat (violent attacks against congregations on the increase), and expressed a need for protection for the congregation, and requested the carry in church, that would do it.

My personal opinion is that, given recent decisions in Heller and [i]McCormick[I], preparation for self defense is not only a good and sufficient reason but a Constitutionally protected reason which the state cannot abridge other than upon a showing of compelling state interest. I don't agree with either of those decisions, myself, and I think Virginia's Constitution already prohibits statutes like the one under consideration. Besides, the statute is probably unenforceable because as a criminal statute it cannot be vague or ambiguous.

by **gunderwood** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:13:22

Jim wrote:
gunderwood wrote:.....I know lots of people who carry in churches around VA. If the church doesn't have a problem with it, who is going to say otherwise?
I agree. If nothing ever happens, it's a static issue.
Now if you do something stupid, like fire a warning shot towards an aggressor, then it is not out of the question for a zealous prosecutor to heap that charge on you.
I would fully expect that to happen.
If you are concealing, in general, people shouldn't know you have it. If that is the case and you end up needing the gun for legitimate SD, what jury is going to convict you? The very circumstances which required you defend yourself and the rest of the congregation, prove you had sufficient cause.

This is where I'm confused. To start with, you're right and I agree with you. But if the jury is going to say "Oh, well it's OK, then", there would be no need for this law to begin with. Or so I'm guessing.
You see where I'm going with this? It looks like a catch 22 situation to me. If I carry, I risk being prosecuted. If I don't carry, I risk being killed. That ain't no good!
I'm back to where I started. I think this thing needs to be rewritten so it's clear as to what is "good and sufficient reason".

Churches should be treated like the private property they are. Let each church choose if they wish to allow it or not. The State should not be involved in telling one private property owner what they should or should not allow. It doesn't need rewritten, it needs deleted IMHO.

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:31:35

gunderwood wrote:..... It doesn't need rewritten, it needs deleted IMHO.

So, how do we make that happen?

by **gunderwood** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:40:07

Jim wrote:
gunderwood wrote:..... It doesn't need rewritten, it needs deleted IMHO.

So, how do we make that happen?

I'd start by talking to VCDL and see what contacts they have. Surely, someone would be willing to sponsor this next session and these sorts of bills have a much better chance of getting through this year. However, I'm sure we will find out which politicians voted pro-gun because they knew the governor would veto it or they got a back door assurance that the "Death Star" committee would handle it.

by **Jim** » Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:44:31

Whadda ya' say, fellas? Y'all wanna tackle this? If we band together and approach VCDL on this, we just might get something started.

by **zephyp** » Wed, 27 Oct 2010 05:06:03

Bottom line is if you carry concealed correctly and no one ever finds out unless you are forced to use it in SD then that becomes your good and sufficient reason. Nothing to worry about otherwise unless your church uses detectors or strip searches...

by **srwg9mm** » Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:33:46

gunderwood wrote:It doesn't need rewritten, it needs deleted IMHO.

+1
I think we need to leave it be as is or seek to have it scrapped altogether. Trying to get it changed for clarification is just asking to get stuck with an even more restrictive law.

Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Re: Interpretation of "Carrying in Church" law

Who is online