Share this Meme: 3 months after Texas legalized guns in churches....8 citizens stop a bad guy

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's a little bit of a problem with accuracy.

Texas did not legalize church carry in 2019. It has been legal since 1997, however the law was written in a manner that was easily misunderstood. The original 1995 law did make church carry illegal, however in the very next legislative session, the law was changed. The change added a caveat down at the bottom of the section of law that was easily missed. So the main body of the text still seemed to prohibit church carry but there was a caveat that allowed it. You just had to read the entire section to figure out the truth. Here's more information on the subject.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/tx-law-on-church-carry-will-not-change-in-2019.855734/

HOWEVER, it is true that Texas has recently (in the past few years) changed the law to allow armed security teams in churches without requiring that each armed member of the security team be state certified as a security guard. Prior to the change, a church could have a security team, but none of the members of that team could be armed unless they were state certified. In the wake of the Sutherland Springs shooting, the TX legislature acted to abolish that prohibition.

It's not entirely clear if that change in the law affected this shooting because we don't know if Mr. Wilson was state certified as a security guard in TX. He is a TCOLE instructor, and he appeared to be wearing a uniform in the video so it's possible that he is. If so, then the change in the law about security teams would not have affected his ability to carry as a church security team member.
 
Thank you for the clarification. Would the 2019 change impact the other 7 people's ability to carry? Remember, the first guy that drew a gun was actually shot and killed. So it's kind of important.
 
Would the 2019 change impact the other 7 people's ability to carry?
Click to expand...
No, none of the changes to TX carry laws in 2019 would have affected their ability to carry at all. It has been legal to carry in churches that aren't posted 30.06 since 1997 and the 2019 law didn't change that, it only clarified the way the law was written. If you look at my previous post, there is a link to a history of concealed carry that explicitly states that fact.

The change in the law related to church security teams wouldn't have affected their ability to carry either. They could have still legally carried, they just couldn't have been part of any organized church security team. The original law would prevent the church from forming a church security team with armed members who weren't state certified security guards, but it wouldn't have had any effect on the ability of church members to carry if they wanted to.
Video of Joe Biden denouncing the 2019 church law.
Click to expand...
Yes, there was a lot of confusion about the law. However, there is no question that church carry has been legal since 1997 in TX. Here's a quote from the link I provided in my earlier post:

75th Legislature, 1997
A loophole creating a conflict between concealed carry rules and alcoholic beverage license regulations made a revision of the law necessary. That was accomplished in 1997, and went into effect 1 September of that year. More significantly, that same bill also effectively removed hospitals and nursing homes, amusement parks, places of worship, and government meetings from the list of places where concealed carry is automatically prohibited. ​
Actual text of the law
Click to expand...
Right. Look at the changes to the section marked (i). It deletes the (b) (6) from the caveat. (b) (6) is the portion of law that used to apparently prohibit church carry. The caveat in section (i) invalidated the prohibition unless the particular church prohibited carry per 30.06. The reason they deleted (b) (6) from the caveat is that it was no longer required once (b) (6) [the section apparently prohibiting church carry] was removed.

It was confusing. So confusing that many people truly didn't understand the law before 2019 and therefore didn't understand the changes that were made in 2019.

Bottom line is that there have been absolutely no changes affecting the legality of carry in churches in TX since 1997.

There was a change in the past few years relating to the ability to form armed church security teams, however that didn't change anything in terms of the legality of carry, it only prohibited anyone from forming a security team for a church unless all members were unarmed or any armed members were state certified as security guards.
 
One thing on the security issue, something to be aware of in the state of Texas. If you receive any form of remuneration from your work as "security" you could be in violation of the Texas Government code regarding security licensing if you are not a licensed guard. Even unarmed, you still need to licensed if you are "security," and you can not legally work security work on your license to carry (Texas term for CHL) without a security license. So while it's unlikely the folks at the Private Security Board will come knocking, it is a class B misdemeanor to do security in exchange for the church buying training ammo etc.

Just an FYI.
 
So basically this article is wrong?

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/05/20/texas-handgun-allowed-churches-sutherland-springs/

"The legislation — Senate Bill 535 by Republican state Sen. Donna Campbell of New Braunfels — strikes a provision in current law that says handguns aren’t allowed in “churches, synagogues, or other places of worship.”

To be clear, churches would still be able to prohibit licensed citizens from carrying firearms on their premises so long as they provide oral or written notice."​
 
wacki said:
So basically this article is wrong?

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/05/20/texas-handgun-allowed-churches-sutherland-springs/

"The legislation — Senate Bill 535 by Republican state Sen. Donna Campbell of New Braunfels — strikes a provision in current law that says handguns aren’t allowed in “churches, synagogues, or other places of worship.”

To be clear, churches would still be able to prohibit licensed citizens from carrying firearms on their premises so long as they provide oral or written notice."​
Click to expand...


Correct as JohnKSa pointed out above it's been legal for a quite a while to legally CCW in a Church in Texas. The way the law read however could be confusing, and so many people might have felt that they couldn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hso
So basically this article is wrong?
Click to expand...
Yes. It is absolutely incorrect when it states that the legality of TX church carry changed in 2019. As are many, many other articles which came out at the time. You will be able to find a LOT of sources that say the law changed in 2019 but in spite of how many there are, they are all still wrong.

In exactly the same way, and for exactly the same reasons that many people didn't understand the law as it stood before the changes in 2019, many people didn't understand what actually changed in 2019. All that changed was the wording of the law--no change in legality at all.

It has been legal to carry in TX churches since 1997--for over 20 years.

The TX Legislature has an interesting feature. It allows a person to go back and look at previous versions of the law.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/StatutesByDate.aspx

So here's the full text of TX Penal Code 46.035 as it stood in 2004. 2004 is the earliest date it will let me select but the pertinent sections (highlighted in red) were actually put in place in 1997.

It is clear that while the law appears to prohibit church carry, reading through to the end of the second reveals a caveat that invalidates (b)(6) unless the specific place of worship is prohibited via 30.06 posting/notice.

Hopefully this also helps explain why so many people didn't understand the law prior to the 2019 change. If you don't keep reading down to the last section of the law, it is very easy to leave with the impression that church carry is illegal. But that last line is very important and changes everything.

Penal Code 46.035 on 12/31/2004

Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER.

(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

(b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, on or about the license holder's person:

(1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;

(2) on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place, unless the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun is used in the event;

(3) on the premises of a correctional facility;

(4) on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing home licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing home administration, as appropriate;

(5) in an amusement park; or

(6) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship.
​
(c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, at any meeting of a governmental entity.

(d) A license holder commits an offense if, while intoxicated, the license holder carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed.

(e) A license holder who is licensed as a security officer under Chapter 1702, Occupations Code, and employed as a security officer commits an offense if, while in the course and scope of the security officer's employment, the security officer violates a provision of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

(f) In this section:

(1) "Amusement park" means a permanent indoor or outdoor facility or park where amusement rides are available for use by the public that is located in a county with a population of more than one million, encompasses at least 75 acres in surface area, is enclosed with access only through controlled entries, is open for operation more than 120 days in each calendar year, and has security guards on the premises at all times. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

(2) "License holder" means a person licensed to carry a handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code.

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.
​
(g) An offense under Subsection (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) is a Class A misdemeanor, unless the offense is committed under Subsection (b)(1) or (b)(3), in which event the offense is a felony of the third degree.

(h) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a) that the actor, at the time of the commission of the offense, displayed the handgun under circumstances in which the actor would have been justified in the use of deadly force under Chapter 9.

(i) Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.​
 
And for those not familiar with Texas CCW laws, Section 30.06 is the legal requirement for signage and posting that any private property is required abide by to prevent lawful carry of a concealed handgun. So in short a church since at least 2004, merely was required to abide by the normal signage and posting requirements any other private property was required to, if the choose to NOT allow lawful concealed carry. IE it functioned just like any other piece of private property in the state of Texas, regarding lawful concealed carry.
 
So in short a church since at least 2004...
Click to expand...
It's actually since 1997, it's just that the history feature of the TX statutes website will only let me go back to 2004.
 
If carry was allowed, why wasn't anybody armed at Sutherland Springs? They surely all weren't members of the "guns don't belong in church" gang.
 
Last edited:
I've posted the law as it was from 1997 until it was reworded in 2019 to clarify things. I've provided a link to the website so that others can go to the actual website and look at the law for themselves to prevent any possibility that I've either intentionally or unintentionally misread/miscopied it. I've posted other sources indicating that the law was changed in 1997 to legalize church carry.

If you are really interested, you can do a search on "Jerry Patterson" and "handguns" and "church" and see what the man who authored the original 1995 CHL bill and the 1997 change to the bill legalizing church carry has to say on the topic.

So there's really no question about it at this point. TX church carry has been legal since 1997. It was legal for the Wedgewood Baptist Church shooting in Forth Worth in 1999. It was legal for the Sutherland Springs Church shooting in 2017.

Some possible reasons that people may not have been armed at Sutherland Springs.

1. As I think this thread has made abundantly clear, many people mistakenly thought church carry was illegal in TX because it was illegal when the carry law was first passed and because the change to the law that legalized church carry in 1997 was confusing.
2. Surprisingly, not a lot of people have carry permits in TX. About 5 people out of 100 overall.
3. Not a lot of people who have carry permits actually carry on their person on a regular basis. Based on my informal survey of the permit holders I know, maybe something like 10 people out of every 100 carry permit holders actually carry on their person on any sort of a regular basis.
4. It's not that uncommon for people to feel uncomfortable about carrying in places of worship.

Articles suggest that there were about 50 people in attendance at the time of the Sutherland Springs shooting.

Let's assume that 5% of them (about the overall average for the state) actually did have permits.
Let's assume that 80% of the people at the church had no compunctions against church carry.
Let's assume that 80% of the people at the church knew the law actually allowed church carry. I think that's being extremely generous, especially given that there's a lot of confusion here even though members here are likely more knowledgeable about carry laws than the average permit holder.
Let's double the number from my informal survey and say that 20% of the permit holders who attended Sutherland Springs actually carried on their person on a regular basis.

Put all those numbers together and since we don't like dealing with fractional persons in the real world, round to the nearest whole number. We find that we would expect 0 persons (no one) to be carrying on any given Sunday.
 
JohnKSa said:
There's a little bit of a problem with accuracy.

Texas did not legalize church carry in 2019. It has been legal since 1997, however the law was written in a manner that was easily misunderstood. The original 1995 law did make church carry illegal, however in the very next legislative session, the law was changed. The change added a caveat down at the bottom of the section of law that was easily missed. So the main body of the text still seemed to prohibit church carry but there was a caveat that allowed it. You just had to read the entire section to figure out the truth. Here's more information on the subject.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/tx-law-on-church-carry-will-not-change-in-2019.855734/

HOWEVER, it is true that Texas has recently (in the past few years) changed the law to allow armed security teams in churches without requiring that each armed member of the security team be state certified as a security guard. Prior to the change, a church could have a security team, but none of the members of that team could be armed unless they were state certified. In the wake of the Sutherland Springs shooting, the TX legislature acted to abolish that prohibition.

It's not entirely clear if that change in the law affected this shooting because we don't know if Mr. Wilson was state certified as a security guard in TX. He is a TCOLE instructor, and he appeared to be wearing a uniform in the video so it's possible that he is. If so, then the change in the law about security teams would not have affected his ability to carry as a church security team member.
Click to expand...
A gun law written in a manor that makes it difficult to understand?
No way. :rofl:
 
I really appreciate the feedback. So how can we change the language of the meme to accurately reflect Senate Bill 535. Senate bill 535 was so significant even Joe Biden railed on Texas as "irrational" for "Being able to take guns into places of worship". That is significant. I think I might put semi-quotes around the word legalize to indicate I'm paraphrasing. I want to be accurate, but there are only so many words I can use in a meme. Accuracy & Brevity are often at odds at each other. I greatly appreciate your dedication to honesty.
 
I kinda like using 'Legalized' in semi-quotes. It shows there is more to the story in limited space. And if most people, including the press and Joe Biden, thought it was illegal, then it's effect on gun owners is effectively the same. It deters carry in churches.

I'm open to feedback and suggestions.
 
TX legislators clarified the legality of church carry.
TX legislators affirmed (or reaffirmed) the importance of church carry.
TX legislators rewrote the church carry laws. (This is skirting the edge of being misleading but is techinically correct.)
 
JohnKSa said:
There's a little bit of a problem with accuracy.
Click to expand...

There's more than a little that makes this an easily refuted "meme" .

As has been pointed out the TX law change didn't make it legal to carry in TX churches, it just fixed confusing language.

The other is that one person, Jack Wilson, stopped the murderer and that's been widely publicized so the meme needs to make that point and not that anyone else was involved to stop the murder.

We can't be effective in the culture struggle if we're so clearly inaccurate.

Perhaps it should focus on the number of congregants protecting the rest without making the inaccurate statement they stopped the murderer.
 
hso said:
The other is that one person, Jack Wilson, stopped the murderer and that's been widely publicized so the meme needs to make that point and not that anyone else was involved to stop the murder.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that at all. Jack Wilson was not the first to draw his gun. The first man to draw a gun is dead. That bought Jack time and alerted him to what was going on. Jack drew his weapon after the first person with a gun was shot. It's disrespectful to the dead to say he didn't contribute anything, even if it was "just" buying time. Seconds can be life vs death.
 
Last edited:
New draft. Hopefully this makes everyone happy. I used the word "affirmed" and didn't mention who was involved in stopping the bad guy.

It's not as flowy, but if anyone has suggestions on how to make it more accurate or flow better, please let me know.

Texas8-3month-shadowed2-sendate-Bill535s-news-Affirmed.jpg
 
wacki said:
I don't agree with that at all. Jack Wilson was not the first to draw his gun. The first man to draw a gun is dead. That bought Jack time and alerted him to what was going on. Jack drew his weapon after the first person with a gun was shot. It's disrespectful to the dead to say he didn't contribute anything, even if it was "just" buying time. Seconds can be life vs death.
Click to expand...
Wilson already knew what was going on. Have you watched any of the interviews with him? While it could possibly be argued that the other guy bought him time, the fact remains that the first guy that was shot, died because his draw was too slow.

wacki said:
New draft. Hopefully this makes everyone happy. I used the word "affirmed" and didn't mention who was involved in stopping the bad guy.

It's not as flowy, but if anyone has suggestions on how to make it more accurate or flow better, please let me know.
Click to expand...
I am of the opinion that memes like that just serve to reinforce the opinions of people who already think a certain way. It's extremely rare that they convince people to change their mind.
 
That's a good point There are stories out there (one in USA Today) where the opinion is that Mr. Wilson, being so well trained is to be praised, but the parade of other gun folks in various poses terrifies some. According to them, the other folks, with poor style and techinque, in another situation will just blast away some innocent. The idea of so many guns scares them.
 
wacki said:
New draft. Hopefully this makes everyone happy. I used the word "affirmed" and didn't mention who was involved in stopping the bad guy.

It's not as flowy, but if anyone has suggestions on how to make it more accurate or flow better, please let me know.

View attachment 881677
Click to expand...

Bluntly, I would also point out that 12.5% of the armed citizens died in the process as well, so maybe trying to make memes about it is the wrong approach.

bearcreek said:
Wilson already knew what was going on. Have you watched any of the interviews with him? While it could possibly be argued that the other guy bought him time, the fact remains that the first guy that was shot, died because his draw was too slow.

I am of the opinion that memes like that just serve to reinforce the opinions of people who already think a certain way. It's extremely rare that they convince people to change their mind.
Click to expand...

The other guy was honestly not in a great position, he was drawing against the drop and like William Bonney is supposed to have said, "Nobody ever outdrew a gun that was already pointed at them."

But he died trying to defend the people around him, and he probably did buy everyone else a few critical seconds. It's funny to think about your life coming to a point where you realize that you are going to give your life to buy everyone else a few seconds, and that that's a good bargain. May he rest in peace, and God judge him kindly.

GEM said:
That's a good point There are stories out there (one in USA Today) where the opinion is that Mr. Wilson, being so well trained is to be praised, but the parade of other gun folks in various poses terrifies some. According to them, the other folks, with poor style and techinque, in another situation will just blast away some innocent. The idea of so many guns scares them.
Click to expand...

That's the spin I see, but you can call the bluff, too, because the response is often "Well yes, it worked here because Mr. Wilson was so well trained." But strangely although they say this, none of the opponents of concealed carry are willing to compromise by allowing even similarly well trained individuals to carry in 'sensitive' locations... because they're opposed to the idea of anyone at all carrying, and their argument about training is almost always disingenuous.
 
Last edited:
wacki said:
The first man to draw a gun is dead.
Click to expand...

Watching the video in slow motion, the first victim died trying to draw. He never cleared the holster before he was shot.

He's no less a hero for having tried to act and absorbing the first shot before he could draw. That first blast triggers Jack Wilson into action.

But this is picking nits compared the first meme. One person killed the murderer with a remarkable shot even though another half dozen plus responded.

The latest meme is much better and a good effort.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
Citizens stopping potential mass shootings
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
X-Rap
X-Rap
D
  • Locked
Mass Killings Stopped by Armed Citizens
Replies
2
Views
413
mortablunt
M
B
  • Locked
Texas - 10 years after CCW law
Replies
21
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
D
  • Locked
Unusual Allies in a Legal Battle Over Texas Drivers’ Gun Rights
Replies
1
Views
290
TexasRifleman
T
hps1
  • Locked
Texas Governor Abbott Signs 8 Executive Orders Following Odessa Tragedy
Replies
2
Views
867
sparkyv
sparkyv
Back
Top