TexasCHLforum.com

Happy Thanksgiving,

Thank you for all the responses, read through everything, and did some more research on the many topics. I watched a lot of church security videos among other things.

The one area I am focused on is the goal of using 30.06 and 30.07 signs to control the environment. My contention is that there should not be either sign as it creates the perception of a gun-free zone. I could tolerate a 30.07 sign as I understand the desire to not see folks open carrying; I believe verbal notice would be just as effective for open carry.

The statement was often made that the security team wants to control the environment from others who may be carrying a handgun. They do not know these other individuals, do not know their qualifications, state of mind, etc. Should a situation ensue, there may be chaos as individuals carrying draw their handgun and the security team did not know they were carrying.

Additionally, the example I cited briefly of the woman leaving her purse unattended with her handgun in the purse.

The general answer for this is to restrict all but a select few from carrying a handgun with 30.06 and 30.07 signs (along with other perceived benefits from having these signs up). I understand a modicum of control but felt putting up the signs is a negative.

I did not bring up that some of our liberal friends in New Zealand or even here in Texas (Beto) are doing the same thing; trying to control the environment by controlling the gun situation in their respective environments.

My assertion would be to have neither sign, or just the 30.07 sign should be in place. Realize that “unauthorized” individuals will carry in your church (often with these signs up), be they criminals or off-duty low enforcement (as examples) and chaos usually ensues during encounters where weapons are drawn. I would reach out to the congregation to ask LTC carriers work with the security team.

If individual LTC carriers are doing irresponsible things, leaving a weapon unattended in a purse, I would have a talk with that individual and believe verbal notice could be given that they are not welcome to carry if not up to reasonable standards. I believe a much better choice than signs restricting others rights.

Regardless, thank you for your responses and as always encouraged by the pro-gun stance seen on this forum.

Hello,

I was really bummed out as had a house of worship safety meeting (minimal info as my goal is to change attitudes not to out “individuals”, places of worship, churches, etc.). It was attended by some ex-military and current LTC instructors, as well as lay individuals as myself.

Background: House of worship in state of Texas with proper 30.06 and 30.07 signs at all entrances and fairly good security by LTC holders to the best of my knowledge. Unarmed and armed members including a vehicle on the outside of the building that has a magnetic “Security” tag on the door and in the past an individual who was wearing a “Security” T-shirt (it was reiterated to me he was unarmed).

The security process is to attempt to control all means of ingress and egress, alarms on doors, cameras, and “select” members with LTC/handgun; no metal detectors. The comment was made that they want to “control” access of “non-approved LTC handgun holders”. I did point out that ONLY LTC holders would follow the signs as in TX, non-LTC handgun holders are already breaking the law (I did mention long guns a totally different issue and I know how concealable some long guns can be).

Lots of ideas bandied about, e.g. hiring off-duty LE intermittently. They were firm about keeping the signs; by the way I have a signed letter from head clergy (effective consent despite effective notice with the signs). The contention is that there a lots of irresponsible LTC carriers and those that are poorly trained (e.g. the woman who leaves a loaded revolver in her purse without supervision was cited). I mentioned the study showing LTC more law-abiding than off-duty police officers and other stats. Unfortunately, individual experience TRUMPed (pun intended) data (again).
https://www.dailywire.com/news/report-c ... %20percent.


My 2 contentions are the signs advertise 2 things:
1. We are a gun-free zone; though in reality we are not.
2. We have a gun control ideology, something often linked with the leftists/liberals.

Areas of concern during the meeting (i.e. inaccurate statements):
1. Handguns have not been legal in places of worship in Texas until 9/1/19. I tried to explain Ken Paxton’s AG opinion from 2017 and linked a law office FAQ with clarification it was legal in 1997 (if no signage).
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/ne ... s-churches
http://www.lapinlawtx.com/firearms-blog ... of-worship
2. I was told that the 30.06 and 30.07 signs now give the safety team the ability to question individual for their LTC information (obviously another area of disinformation).
https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._ ... on_411.205
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... GV.411.htm
3. 30.06 and 30.07 signs do not advertise that we are a gun-free zone but rather the criminals will look at our formidable array of cameras, locked doors, and select CONCEALED handgun carriers, and determine the facility is hardened against attack.

I was probably a little too passionate but was disappointed that these individuals reacted as they did in the great state of Texas.

Not really going to leave the church, maybe become affiliated with the security team to attempt change.

Any help, references or insight appreciated.

Thank you.