Man arrested for practicing God-given right to bear arms in church

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
http://www.fox13memphis.com/news/man-arrested-for-bringing-guns-to-bellevue-baptist-church/182470122

Man arrested for bringing guns to Bellevue Baptist Church

The Memphis Police Department has arrested 31-year-old Marcus Donald for bringing multiple weapons into Bellevue Baptist Church on Sunday morning.

MPD said Donald brought "a loaded 40 caliber Beretta in the pocket of his pants and a 300 Blackout Assault Rifle in a backpack" during the 11 a.m. Easter Sunday service.

Donald told police "people in society are a threat to him and that he must be vigilant."

"We are thankful for the diligence of (our) security and the Memphis Police Department," Jim Barnwell, Bellevue Baptist Church, Director of Communication Services, said.

Barnwell said an estimated 4,500 people were at the church at the time the armed man with two guns and extra ammo entered the church campus.

Donald was arrested for emergency commitment and is currently being evaluated by police.

According the Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) at the University of Memphis, being arrested for Emergency Commitment means "the only time a mentally ill person can be taken into custody solely for being mentally."

After Donald was arrested, FOX13 went the suspect's last known address, but the woman at the house declined comment.

Neighbors near his last known address, who did not want to go on camera, told FOX13 Donald does live in the area.

FOX13 spoke with another large church in Memphis how they handle guns in their church and about the importance of armed security in churches.

Mississippi Boulevard Christian Church chief operating officer Rev. Anthony Self said armed security in churches are necessary.

"In years past, it would have been optional to have church security,” Rev. Self said. “Now it's becoming mandatory because everybody that comes through the door doesn't have the best intent.
 
what would Jesus open carry

A sword.

Edit: At least we know His followers carried. He did tell his disciples to sell their garment and buy a sword if they didn't have one. And Peter must have taken Him at his word.

John 18:10-11
Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus. So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?”

Notice that Jesus didn't condemn anything here....not even the use of the deadly weapon as an act of self defense. He just indicated that Peter needed to let things happen because that was what God intended for Jesus to do...be arrested and die on the cross.

As an aside, I always wondered what Malchus thought when Jesus healed him and put his ear back on. I wonder if he was as interested in arresting Jesus after that.
 
Last edited:
fv-churches-and-guns-art-g5fl8mkl-1churches-and-guns-tl-043-jpg.jpg


NECESSARY IN CHURCHES FOR PROTECTION - GOOD (WHITE) GUY WITH A GUN



blackman-in-church.jpg



BLACK MAN WITH A GUN? HE MUST BE CRAZY :eek2: - CALL THE PO-PO!

As Donald was making his way to the sanctuary where Pastor Steve Gaines and 3,500 others were about to celebrate the Risen Christ, a church hostess noticed a pistol sticking out of the young man's pocket.

She told a minister who notified Bellevue's director of security, Andy Willis, a Memphis police officer.

"The suspect told Andy he had a permit to carry," Gaines told church members in an email Monday.

Turns out, he did. That should have ended the discussion. Donald was exercising his constitutional rights, as interpreted by the Tennessee legislature.

It seems he didn't break any laws and won't be charged. If any house of worship wants to prohibit valid permit holders from carrying guns on the property, it has to do so expressly.

In effect, the state allows it unless the church forbids it with a clear and "plainly visible" sign posted at all public entrances.

"Under Tennessee's handgun permit statutes, a person is legally authorized to carry a handgun openly or concealed if they have a permit," said John Harris, executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association.


http://www.commercialappeal.com/columnists/david-waters/bellevue-gunman-tests-faith-in-laws-of-god-man-2f1d14b7-a4f3-7233-e053-0100007f19d0-373770101.html
 
To be fair, the "founders" - so beloved of conservatives - never intended black people to have the right to bear arms, did they?
 
To be fair, the "founders" - so beloved of conservatives - never intended black people to have the right to bear arms, did they?

Really?

I do know your democrat party passed gun control laws to keep the negro under control after they were freed.

First your party disarmed them. Then your party terrorized them via the KKK

You must be proud
 
Pinhead #1 posts.....

Man arrested for practicing God-given right to bear arms in church ....

"a loaded 40 caliber Beretta in the pocket of his pants and a 300 Blackout Assault Rifle in a backpack" with extra
ammo......

The hostess told a minister who notified Bellevue's director of security, Andy Willis,( Bellevue's director of security), Andy Willis, a Memphis police officer.


Pinhead #2 post.....
"The suspect told Andy he had a permit to carry," Gaines told church members in an email Monday.

Turns out, he did. That should have ended the discussion. Donald was exercising his constitutional rights, as interpreted by the Tennessee legislature.

"To be fair, the "founders" - so beloved of conservatives - never intended black people to have the right to bear arms, did they? "


He is now under a doctor’s care, as police arrested him for emergency commitment.

So Pinhead 1 claims it was the man's God-given right to
bear arms in this Chruch....

and Pinhead 2 says, he had a permit to carry and that
should have ended the incident....
then
goes on to claim that the "founders" - so beloved of conservatives - never intended black people to have the right to bear arms, did they? "

If this was Conservatives making these posts instead of Pinheaded Liberals, this
thread would have caused posters like Zappa, Rana, Rune, Christiefan, etc. to have a conniption fits....
but as we see......nothing, crickets chirping, yawns and snoring all around......
 
Can't refute those facts, can you, Blabo?

BTW, the law requires the police to send a suspect for emergency commitment in those cases.

Poor Blabo.
 
Can't refute those facts, can you, Blabo?

BTW, the law requires the police to send a suspect for emergency commitment in those cases.

Poor Blabo.


Nope ..... these are the facts...

So Pinhead 1 claims it was the man's God-given right to
bear arms in this Chruch....

and Pinhead 2 says, he had a permit to carry and that
should have ended the incident....
then
goes on to claim that the "founders" - so beloved of conservatives - never intended black people to have the right to bear arms, did they? "

If this was Conservatives making these posts instead of Pinheaded Liberals, this
thread would have caused posters like Zappa, Rana, Rune, Christiefan, etc. to have a conniption fits....
but as we see......nothing, crickets chirping, yawns and snoring all around......

Poor AssholeTroll


Incidentally, why would they have him committed if "it was his God-goven right to bear arms in church" as one pinhead says ?

and why if he had a permit to carry didn't that end the incident as the other pinhead, idiot said ?

Poor Asshole Pinheads
 
Except here you are again, Blabo.

If the man had been white, wouldn't you be crying about the police trampling his second amendment rights?

Because that's what they did.

They couldn't arrest him for guns He had a permit. They couldn't arrest him for trespass. The church was open to the public and there were no "gun-free" signs.

So, because he was black they arrested him for "emergency commitment", knowing he had done nothing wrong.

But since he's black, you (and the founders - who didn't allow blacks to bear arms or count them as whole human beings) - gave the cops a pass.

Now, post your nonsense a third time.

Poor Blabo.
 
Except here you are again, Blabo.

If the man had been white, wouldn't you be crying about the police trampling his second amendment rights?

Because that's what they did.

They couldn't arrest him for guns He had a permit. They couldn't arrest him for trespass. The church was open to the public and there were no "gun-free" signs.

So, because he was black they arrested him for "emergency commitment", knowing he had done nothing wrong.

But since he's black, you (and the founders - who didn't allow blacks to bear arms or count them as whole human beings) - gave the cops a pass.

Now, post your nonsense a third time.

Poor Blabo.

Poor Blabo
 
Except here you are again, Blabo.

If the man had been white, wouldn't you be crying about the police trampling his second amendment rights?
would I ?

Because that's what they did.

They couldn't arrest him for guns He had a permit. They couldn't arrest him for trespass. The church was open to the public and there were no "gun-free" signs.

So, because he was black they arrested him for "emergency commitment", knowing he had done nothing wrong.

But since he's black, you (and the founders - who didn't allow blacks to bear arms or count them as whole human beings) - gave the cops a pass.

You claiming "I" had something to do with blacks not being allowed to bear arms and a change in the constitution in 1787? Are you fuckin nuts ?


Now, post your nonsense a third time.

Poor Blabo.

You said the law requires the police to send a suspect for emergency commitment in those cases. You wouldn't want the cops to break the law would you ?

and to further educate you....despite popular mis-understanding, this provision did not declare that African Americans were three-fifths of a person. Rather, the provision declared that the slave states would get extra representation in Congress for their slaves, even though those states treated slaves purely as property.


You know, 'slaves'.....those people that a Republican President freed with the stroke of a pen after the Civil War.....
 
You said the law requires the police to send a suspect for emergency commitment in those cases. You wouldn't want the cops to break the law would you ? and to further educate you....despite popular mis-understanding, this provision did not declare that African Americans were three-fifths of a person. Rather, the provision declared that the slave states would get extra representation in Congress for their slaves, even though those states treated slaves purely as property. You know, 'slaves'.....those people that a Republican President freed with the stroke of a pen after the Civil War.....


The man was ordered held by Memphis Police on an involuntary commitment, which means the officers questioned his state of mind and his mental health.

https://www.memphisdailynews.com/news/2016/mar/29/last-word-back-to-nashville-dentistry-genomes-and-living-the-fable/


No, BLABO, the police did not have to arrest the man.

They knew he'd done nothing criminal, but the church's "security director", is another Memphis cop, so they "questioned his mental health" when he reportedly told police that "people in society are a threat to him and that he must be vigilant."

Sounds like a right-wing militiaman, doesn't he?

I expect litigation for wrongful arrest will be filed shortly.


and to further educate you....despite popular mis-understanding, this provision did not declare that African Americans were three-fifths of a person. Rather, the provision declared that the slave states would get extra representation in Congress for their slaves, even though those states treated slaves purely as property. You know, 'slaves'.....those people that a Republican President freed with the stroke of a pen after the Civil War.....

In the 13 Colonies, slavery was established shortly after the early settlements were established. Although many of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were personally opposed to slavery, all of them recognized that many of the agricultural plantations depended on slaves for the workers. The institution of slavery was universally accepted in the South and there were slaves working in most of the colonies.

Delegates from three of the southern states threatened that their states would refuse to be a part of the national government if it denied their citizens the right to buy, sell, and own slaves.

Delegates from other states opposed slavery, but they wanted the southern states to be a part of the United States. The southern states wanted to count the slaves as population for representation in the new Congress.

The northern states didn’t want the slaves to count if they had no rights as citizens. They thought this would give the South an unfair advantage in votes taken in the House of Representatives. Finally the two sides reached a compromise. The slaves would count as 3/5 of a person.

www.historyiscentral.org/HSI/case4C/Three%20Fifths%20Placard.pdf

1777: Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially banned slavery, freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.

1780: Pennsylvania passes An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery, freeing future children of slaves. Those born prior to the Act remain enslaved. The Act becomes a model for other Northern states. Last slaves are freed by 1847.

1783: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed.

1783: New Hampshire begins a gradual abolition of slavery.

1784: Connecticut begins a gradual abolition of slavery, freeing future children of slaves, and later all slaves.

1784: Rhode Island begins a gradual abolition of slavery.

1787: The United States in Congress Assembled passed the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing slavery in the Northwest Territories.

1794: The United States bans American ships from the trade and prohibits export by foreign ships in the Slave Trade Act.

1799: New York State passes gradual emancipation act freeing future children of slaves, and all slaves in 1827.

1800: The United States bans its citizens' investment and employment in the international slave trade in an additional Slave Trade Act.

1802: Ohio writes a state constitution that abolishes slavery.

1804: New Jersey begins a gradual abolition of slavery, freeing future children of slaves. Those born prior to the Act remain enslaved .

1807: The US makes international slave trade a felony in Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves; this act takes effect on 1 January 1808.

1807: In Michigan Territory, Judge Augustus Woodward denies the return of two slaves owned by a man in Windsor, Upper Canada (present day Ontario). Woodward declares that any man "coming into this Territory is by law of the land a freeman."

1808: The US makes it a crime to import or export slaves.

1817: New York State sets a date of 4 July 1827 to free all its ex-slaves from indenture.

1820: Compromise of 1820 in US prohibits slavery north of a line (36°30′).

1820: In Polly v. Lasselle, Indiana supreme court orders almost all slaves in the state to be freed.

1827: New York State abolishes slavery.

1828: The Illinois Supreme Court in Phoebe v. Jay rules that indentured servants in Illinois cannot be treated as chattel and bequeathing them by will is illegal.

1845: The Illinois Supreme Court in Jarrot v. Jarrot frees the last slaves in Illinois who were born after the Northwest Ordinance.

1847: Slavery is abolished in Pennsylvania, thus freeing the last remaining slaves, those born before 1780 (fewer than 100 in 1840 Census).

1863: In the United States, Abraham Lincoln issues the presidential order the Emancipation Proclamation declaring slaves in Confederate-controlled areas to be freed. Most slaves in "border states" are freed by state action; separate law freed the slaves in Washington, D.C.

1865, December: US abolishes slavery with the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; about 40,000 remaining slaves are affected.

1866: Slavery is abolished in Indian Territory (now Oklahoma).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline

Poor BLABO.
 
Back
Top