Pawpaw wrote:No, that would be SOuthern Baptist. What did you think I meant?surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Pawpaw:
SOB - Is that a "Small of Back" carry style? :-)
Oh, I knew what you really meant.
I was just funnin' with you!! :-)
SIA
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Pawpaw wrote:No, that would be SOuthern Baptist. What did you think I meant?surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Pawpaw:
SOB - Is that a "Small of Back" carry style? :-)
Don't read the bulletin!!!Pawpaw wrote:IANAL but as I understand it, the only alternative to a church posting would be if they gave written notice... like in the church bulletin.
I've never seen that, but it's a possibility.
Believe me, as the guy up front in the white robe, I've had the same scary thoughts. I've analyzed again and again the how/what/when of responding to an armed intruder. Finding a place to engage an aggressor from (relative) safety is tough in our little church, and it would almost have to be done from the floor firing upwards. The only thing that keeps me from having nightmares is that there are a few other CHLers around who can take care of any problems that may arise.camlott wrote:One of the main reasons for me getting a CHL was specifically to carry at church. That being said... The logistics of actually firing my weapon in an auditorium full of most likely panicked people scares me to death!!!!
This guy sounds as bad as that youtube ninja guy.HankB wrote:Relax and take a deep breath . . . I've had three different CHL instructors, and have found something I disagree with in the teachings of all three, either from interaction with the police or interpretation of plainly-written law.Beiruty wrote:find a new CHL instructor . . .
So what.
Arguing with a "professional" instructor is like wrestling with a pig - all you get is dirty and the pig likes it . . . you won't convince him but if anything, it will make the class run longer than the already annoying statutory requirement. I'm there simply to "get my ticket punched" and unless the instructor is a total loser (none of mine actually fit that category!) paying attention to what he says will make passing the written test a breeze.
In the case cited by the original post, the instructor was simply wrong. Fine. You know the real situation: licensed carry is OK in church unless given notice pursuant to the law - end of story.
Welcome to the wonderful world of DPS! And instructors (even DPS instructors) with their own agendas!wrightcrew wrote:Again -- thanks for the responses. I corresponded with the instructor via email and asked for clarification. The response was as follows:
"I understand the confusion. This is why is stated that DPS wanted us to be sure as instructors to tell you that you are not to carry period into a church regardless if they have the signs posted or not. But then I also stated that the church and other attorneys interpret it as you did.
If they do not post the 30.06 sign then your not prohibited."
So, now I have two questions:
1. Do other instructors understand the same guidance from DPS -- "that DPS wanted us to be sure as instructors to tell you that you are not to carry period into a church regardless if they have the signs posted or not"?
2. If the answer to question #1 is yes, then why would DPS want instructors to tell students something that is clearly contrary to the written law?
sjfcontrol wrote:I don't believe they told us that in the July 19th class (don't carry in church anyway). But there were other issues where their answers were less than helpful, and I believe, based on what they WISHED to be true.
I can assure you that our local police department is not interpreting this the way that DPS "wants" them to! - I askedwrightcrew wrote:
"I understand the confusion. This is why is stated that DPS wanted us to be sure as instructors to tell you that you are not to carry period into a church regardless if they have the signs posted or not. But then I also stated that the church and other attorneys interpret it as you did.
If they do not post the 30.06 sign then your not prohibited."