https://foxsanantonio.com/news/local/pr ... -in-church

Some talking heads on cable news clamor for 'common sense' gun laws; and I think the proposed Texas law fills that need.

A proposed law would allow Texans to carry guns in churches and other places of worship.

State senator Donna Campbell filed Senate Bill 535 to secure Texans' right to carry in church.

"We have learned many times over that there is no such thing as a gun free zone. Those with evil intentions will violate the law and carry out their heinous acts no matter what," Campbell said. "It makes no sense to disarm the good guys and leave law-abiding citizens defenseless where violent offenders break the law to do great harm."

SB 535 does not restrict the rights of churches to post signs to prohibit weapons on their premises if they choose, which has been established law for most privately owned property in Texas.

johndoe3 wrote:https://foxsanantonio.com/news/local/pr ... -in-church

Some talking heads on cable news clamor for 'common sense' gun laws; and I think the proposed Texas law fills that need.
...

There is a bit more to this than just allowing people to carry in churches.

AFAIK, people who meet the legal carry requirements in Texas can already carry in churches where it is not prohibited by the appropriate signage or where individuals are expressly requested to refrain from carry by owners/management of the property.

I *think* the carry of some knives and "weapons" is specifically spelled out as prohibited in places of worship but I'm not familiar with any penal code that specifically denies the right to carry in church for individuals whose carry rights are recognized by the state of Texas. But the proposed legislation does nothing to prevent a place of worship from hanging 30.06 and/or 30.07 signs.

The legislation proposed carries with it at least a couple more changes beyond the "clarification" of carry rights in places of worship.

It theoretically reduces the penalty for armed people who 'accidentally' carry into a prohibited location and increases the penalty from misdemeanor to felony for armed people who fail to leave a prohibited location.

There is no free lunch in politics.

It theoretically reduces the penalty for armed people who 'accidentally' carry into a prohibited location and increases the penalty from misdemeanor to felony for armed people who fail to leave a prohibited location.

Thanks for the clarification.

It's unreasonable in my mind to have a penalty of a felony for carrying in a prohibited place, even for people who fail to leave a prohibited place when armed. Some legislators seem to lose their minds in escalating penalties beyond what is needed. An example is making speeding above a certain speed over the limit a felony (+35 mph in some localities). Felonies should only be instituted for serious crimes.

I'm on the fence for carrying in a prohibited place being a felony. Probably because I believe there should be no prohibited places.

I believe a felony for accidentally carrying into a prohibited place is ridiculous. Specifically because I have personally observed too many places where 30.06 and/or 30.07 signs are only placed at one entrance of an establishment and at least a few establishments where the 51% sign has been placed over the entry on the inside of the building where it's only 'conspicuous" once you're inside, most often as you're leaving.

I don't like the idea of prohibited places but as long as there are prohibited places I believe there should be a strict penalty on the books for intentionally violating the prohibition. Whether or not the penalty is enforced will always be discretionary.