Carrying Concealed When It's Prohibited

Discussion in 'The Law of God' started by smhbbag, Apr 7, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. smhbbag

    smhbbag Puritan Board Senior

    As you all know, there are many places where concealed carry is prohibited, either by the law (schools, churches, bars, etc.) or by the private property owners (malls, retail stores, etc.).

    I have heard a number of arguments, mostly from secular libertarians, with whom I sympathize on many issues, who believe that disobedience to these laws or the property-owners is valid at some times.

    Does anyone here agree? Any of you carry where it's "prohibited"? What is your justification?

    If you think it's foolish and unjustified, say so as well. Just looking for input.
     
  2. E Nomine

    E Nomine Puritan Board Freshman

    The first rule of Concealed Carry Club is you do not talk about Concealed Carry Club.
     
  3. py3ak

    py3ak They're stalling and plotting against me Staff Member

    I suppose the defense would be that the Constitution trumps lesser laws; but that wouldn't necessarily apply with regard to owners of private property.
     
  4. gene_mingo

    gene_mingo Puritan Board Junior

    I believe that owners of private business need to provide a place to store your weapon if they have a prohibition on carrying them. If they do not provide this I believe they cannot prohibit you carrying legally. Other than that you should always obey carry laws.

    -----Added 4/7/2009 at 09:53:48 EST-----

    and laws on carrying vary from state to state.
     
  5. Herald

    Herald Administrator Staff Member

    Another question to ask is whether the stiff penalties for carrying a concealed weapon w/o a permit makes it worth the risk. As you're possibly sitting in jail for a few years, will you feel justified in having stood firmly on the Constitution?
     
  6. Jimmy the Greek

    Jimmy the Greek Puritan Board Senior

    Places like Malls and Retail stores must have it clearly posted. If I don't see a posting on the door I enter, then I have no qualms. However, if it is posted properly, I will usually take my business elsewhere. If that's not feasible, I lock it in the trunk of my car for that short time.
     
  7. matt01

    matt01 Puritan Board Senior

    The only time we should be "breaking" the laws, is when those laws force us to sin. Laws restricting the carrying of weapons in certain locations are not causing us to sin. Private property owners who desire for customers to not carry are not causing us to sin. I would abide by both restrictions.

    Good point. Vote with your feet. If enough people agree, the private groups will eventually change.
     
  8. LawrenceU

    LawrenceU Puritan Board Doctor

    While I keep my practices to myself I did find a little line from a retired Spec Ops / attorney / fire arms instructor fellow interesting:

    'Better judged by twelve than carried by six.'
     
  9. Romans922

    Romans922 Puritan Board Professor

    Maybe we need to consider whether not carrying a gun is a sin...

    Westminster Larger Catechism:

    Question 135: What are the duties required in the sixth commandment?
    Answer: The duties required in the sixth commandment are, all careful studies, and lawful endeavors, to preserve the life of ourselves and others by resisting all thoughts and purposes, subduing all passions, and avoiding all occasions, temptations, and practices, which tend to the unjust taking away the life of any; by just defense thereof against violence, patient bearing of the hand of God, quietness of mind, cheerfulness of spirit; a sober use of meat, drink, physic, sleep, labor, and recreations; by charitable thoughts, love, compassion, meekness, gentleness, kindness; peaceable, mild and courteous speeches and behavior; forbearance, readiness to be reconciled, patient bearing and forgiving of injuries, and requiting good for evil; comforting and succoring the distressed, and protecting and defending the innocent.

    Question 136: What are the sins forbidden in the sixth commandment?
    Answer: The sins forbidden in the sixth commandment are, all taking away the life of ourselves, or of others, except in case of public justice, lawful war, or necessary defense; the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life; sinful anger, hatred, envy, desire of revenge; all excessive passions, distracting cares; immoderate use of meat, drink, labor, and recreations; provoking words, oppression, quarreling, striking, wounding, and: Whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.
     
  10. OPC'n

    OPC'n Puritan Board Doctor

    I think if it is against the law but allowed by the constitution, then you shouldn't carry it until your leaders acknowledge the constitution and allow you to do so. Romans 13.
     
  11. DonP

    DonP Puritan Board Junior

    You are not to use unjust and unlawful means to protect life.

    So if it is against the law of the state to carry then it would not be a means of grace one should use.

    When they pass the law here as they did in UK And Aus, to ban guns will you submit to your govt you live under and turn in your gun or lie or shoot it out with them?
     
  12. PresbyDane

    PresbyDane Puritanboard Doctor

    :lol::lol::lol:
     
  13. Jimmy the Greek

    Jimmy the Greek Puritan Board Senior

    I will not advertise my response in advance. :smug:

    Is revolution against "a government gone too far" ever biblical?
     
  14. SolaScriptura

    SolaScriptura Puritan Board Doctor

    I think this about says it all.



    Gangsters and criminals still carry in those places. Just last year there was an innocent bystander shot in the local mall in Fayetteville. Remember: Like all gun control measures, all they do is disarm the law abiding folk... giving the criminals a monopoly on gun possession.

    -----Added 4/8/2009 at 08:05:31 EST-----

    Only if a few 100,000 are involved. Otherwise you're just a criminal.
     
  15. gene_mingo

    gene_mingo Puritan Board Junior

    I will turn in my guns.
     
  16. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    You are incorrect. Private property rights precede all other rights. They are the foundation of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. What right do you have to tell a person what they can do with their property? Does that mean I must allow smokers because smoking is legal? I must allow p0rnography, because that is legal?

    I am all for concealed carry laws. But the above statement goes way too far.
     
  17. Reformed Baptist

    Reformed Baptist Puritan Board Sophomore

    I will practice civil disobedience.

    Those who plan to turn in their guns..give me a call first. I gots a place fer dem. lol
     
  18. Romans922

    Romans922 Puritan Board Professor

    So when the F.E.D.S. come looking for my guns on my property, I can tell them to get rid of their guns?

    Can we start a PB Militia? The PB will rise again!
     
  19. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    Absolutely, unless they have a warrant. That is part of the Constitution too.
     
  20. Skyler

    Skyler Puritan Board Graduate

    Not according to Paul in Romans 13. "There is no power but that which has been ordained by God." He who resists that power is therefore resisting an ordinance of God.

    Seems pretty clear to me what the Christian's response should be.
     
  21. Berean

    Berean Puritan Board Doctor

    So is the USA an illegitimate nation, having been born from a revolution against the legitimate British government?
     
  22. DonP

    DonP Puritan Board Junior

    Good questions?

    How do we determine a few 100,000 make it OK? Is this is % of total population or ???

    Does God say we can resist a corrupt govt? Can't imagine a more corrupt govt than Rome and they were told to submit not do a Revolt.

    Help us out here while you feel otherwise?
     
  23. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member

    Moved to Law of God forum.

    Please keep it from becoming political, or off it goes into Politics. That means discussions on how a believer should interact with government and how governments should act are fine, but if we start discussing particular current policies, it gets moved.
     
  24. Skyler

    Skyler Puritan Board Graduate

    Were they(the rebels) resisting the God-ordained authority that was placed over them?

    If so, then would not the answer be yes, however distasteful that may seem to our modern sense of patriotism?
     
  25. DonP

    DonP Puritan Board Junior

    Well according to this, only if there were less than 100,000 minutemen.

    Anyone know the answer?
     
  26. smhbbag

    smhbbag Puritan Board Senior

    Back on topic guys, if you please.

    For a specific argument to consider - this comes from a guy in my church who carries everywhere, regardless of the law or his employer's wishes.

    In his mind, you do of course lose a lot of ability to claim your rights when you are on someone else's property. But, one right you do not lose is your right to life, especially if (as at a retailer or employer) you are not trespassing but in fact were invited. Everyone should agree on this point.

    In his mind, the right to life necessarily includes a right to self-defense. He would say that even on someone else's property, you have no obligation to obey his demand that you not defend yourself from bodily harm. As such, if they cannot take away your right to self-defense, then they cannot rightly demand you give up your means to that defense.

    Of course, even if you do buy that whole line of thought, it is still not mandatory to carry everywhere, but it would then become a pragmatic question of potential cost/benefit of carrying that would look something like this:

    Probability of getting caught times time punishment if you do vs. probability of using it to save a life * benefit if it does.

    Comments or critiques?
     
  27. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member


    Sure, he has a right to self-defense, and the owner of private property has the right to determine who can be on his property. The owner's right to place restrictions on the other's right to carry does not infringe on the carrier's rights in any fashion, because the carrier is not obligated to be on the property.

    That is straightforward libertarian-common law property rights theory.
     
  28. smhbbag

    smhbbag Puritan Board Senior

    That was my response to him (though, it was tough to be productive, as we were at a bar during the NCAA championship game).

    I further added that it may be sin to willfully reject the authority of the owner, and enter his property with deceit in your heart. If you know the rules ahead of time, there is no excuse.

    But, I respect this guy's intelligence and his perspective on a lot of things, so I wanted to see if I was in fact missing something.
     
  29. coramdeo

    coramdeo Puritan Board Sophomore

    My friends and I have often gone out of the way to complain to the management of establishments that have signs prohibiting concealed carry and explain the we will not patronize them. We have been successful on a number of occasions in having such signs removed. Don't just let them have their way without a fight.
    :2cents:
     
  30. DonP

    DonP Puritan Board Junior

    Let them know you are Christians and how much safer he and the whole place will be with you there with your guns and God. :soapbox:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page