On 8/6/05 6:29 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If signage exempts the church, I'd be hard put to see a 1st Amendment issue. A
> religious objection to firearms is conceivable, but I'm hard put to see a
> religious objection to hanging a sign. Not that plaintiffs couldn't claim
Raises an interesting question, which I've occasionally encountered before:
If they win, what is the remedy? Assuming statute says something like CCW is
illegal w/o permit, you can get permit, if you have permit can carry on places
including church property, and assume last is stricken as invali
It might help if I post the text of the statute in question in Minnesota
(though I'm interested in the question more generally; the same arguments
are being made in Oklahoma, as previous noted).
2.27 (c) The owner or operator of a private establishment may
2.28 not prohibit the lawful
On 8/6/05 8:55 PM, "Robert Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/6/05 7:50 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Raises an interesting question, which I've occasionally encountered before:
>>
>> If they win, what is the remedy?
>
> They're asking for an injunction that wo
On 8/6/05 7:50 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Raises an interesting question, which I've occasionally encountered before:
>
> If they win, what is the remedy?
They're asking for an injunction that would allow them to continue enforcing
general trespass principles against th
Proprietors don't usually post notices prohibiting weapons to be brought onto the
property because they are pacifistic. They mainly do it because they are advised
by lawyers that they risk being successfully sued if someone uses a weapon
unlawfully on the property and they didn't cover themselve
If signage exempts the church, I'd be hard put to see a 1st Amendment issue. A
religious objection to firearms is conceivable, but I'm hard put to see a
religious objection to hanging a sign. Not that plaintiffs couldn't claim one,
but it seems a rather long stretch.
I'm reminded of one statute
As the original posted noted, the church has an available remedy simply
by posting the specified legal signage, which would eliminate the
"conflict of rights" problem.
Would it be a cheap shot to observe that a pacifistic church that must
rely on the government to keep its own congregation pac
I'm venturing into unfamiliar territory, but I think the church may have
significant grounds.
1) The 1st Am. prohibition against free exercise of religion means, in part,
that churches religious doctrine cannot be interfered with.
2) If a church holds that the presence of guns are in some way off
