Page 1 of 1

New firearms policy...stirring the pot

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:10 pm
by Blashyrkh
So I just wrote a letter to my area president calling the church out for banning concealed firearms on church property. My two main points of contention were 1.The church leadership is quite hypocritical in building a firearms training facility for their own private guards yet forbid the membership from having the same ability. 2.There have been four members shot while at church in the past few years yet no threats to the leadership. Therefore the membership has a greater need for personal protection. Honestly I do not attend church but I find the leadership to be the epitomy of hypocritical on this issue.

Re: New firearms policy...stirring the pot

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 1:19 pm
by FiveFingerMnemonic
Blashyrkh wrote:So I just wrote a letter to my area president calling the church out for banning concealed firearms on church property. My two main points of contention were 1.The church leadership is quite hypocritical in building a firearms training facility for their own private guards yet forbid the membership from having the same ability. 2.There have been four members shot while at church in the past few years yet no threats to the leadership. Therefore the membership has a greater need for personal protection. Honestly I do not attend church but I find the leadership to be the epitomy of hypocritical on this issue.
Absolutely this is peak hypocrisy at its finest. The "little" people don't need protection but the "big" people do. Really it all boils down to corporate risk management and the liability risk imposed by allowing it on their worship properties given the high probability of nutty fundy's doing nutty irresponsible things.

Now if the church were to provide security professionals to every congregation I could possibly let them off the hook, but they won't so your argument is quite valid.

In this world there are certain things that may be worth the risk in civilly disobeying and keeping quiet about it.

Re: New firearms policy...stirring the pot

Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:21 am
by Just This Guy
This actually isn't new. It's been in the CHI for a long time. They just re-emphasize it once in a while. However, I can see the hyprocriscy. If you want to stir the pot, then go for it.

I'm curious their logic with their guards. Do they consider them part of BYUPD, therefore an on-duty member of law enforcement, and therefore exempt from the ban? Justification is like...

Re: New firearms policy...stirring the pot

Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2019 2:01 pm
by slk
So my concealed gun is a .380 but when you really think about, I'm probably gonna be outgunned by most active shooters. I don't attend any more but it still worries me. I hope that someone in the audience that knows how to use a gun is packing regardless of this policy. I think I'd rather end up alive and be told "you're banned from coming back but btw, thanks for the lives you saved."