OMG! A Gun! In A High School! OMG!

 (courtesy elevationchurch.org)

“Garrett Daniel Wyrick, 24, of Mint Hill, was arrested Sunday after two Concord police officers found a handgun in his backpack,” charlotteobserver.com reports. “He was charged with carrying a weapon onto a campus or educational property, a felony. It was not immediately clear if the gun was loaded.” Thank God! A spree killer intercepted! (Must be as the Observer used his middle name.) Well, some kind of psycho. “Police say they were checking for weapons at the event because someone had made a death threat against the church’s pastor, Steven Furtick. The threat came from ‘an unknown person,’ according to the police report.” Who . . . wasn’t Garrett Daniel Wyrick. In fact . . .

According to police, the incident took place during an Elevation Church-Concord event at Jay M. Robinson High School, which is among the satellite locations of the fast-growing church.

“In a completely unrelated incident (to the threatening call), an employee in good standing with a concealed carry permit forgot that his firearm was in the backpack he brought with him to a Saturday Volunteer event which was held in a high school,” the church said in its statement. “We are fully satisfied that there is no connection between the incident at JM Robinson High School and any threatening call received.”

Yes, well, what are the odds that the cops will drop the charges? Nil. Mr. Wyrick can kiss his gun rights goodbye. Forever.

Isn’t it  time we repealed Bush the Elder’s Gun-Free School Zones Act and all the state laws that force law abiding gun owners to abandon their right to keep and bear arms at the school gates? Isn’t it time our gun laws reflected simple common sense, so that we can protect our children from those who visit evil upon them. Can I get an amen?

comments

    1. avatar MothaLova says:

      x 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

      1. avatar Scott says:

        This x 10 to the 12th

        1. avatar SnJohnson says:

          For this guy though, I say the fault is still his. If you want people to respect you, you have to be responsible enough to know WHERE your firearms are and what condition they are in. “Accidentally” bringing a firearm somewhere has never been a good excuse for anyone. Except the well connected.

  1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    Of course this guy won’t get a pass for making a mistake. He will get the screws turned on him because he probably has no criminal record. He has to be made an example of. That is the point of nearly all gun laws anyway.

    1. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

      He should claim to be an anti-gun journalist and he’ll be fine.

    2. avatar Bob says:

      If he was a cop, well we all know how it would have turned out for him…

      1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

        What he did wouldn’t have been illegal so nothing.

        1. Until the Negligent Discharge, that would have been illegal. But an ex cop probably would have gotten a pass on that too….

  2. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    Change his name to David Gregory.

  3. avatar Excedrine says:

    Amen!

  4. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

    Is it important (and confusing) to anyone else wondering why a church has a satellite location at a publicly funded high school?

    I mean, yeah, sure, school on Saturdays is usually only for delinquents (or not at all), but somebody’s still gotta pay to keep the lights on and the boiler ticking over, and unless the church directly reimburses them, the Local, State, and Federal gov’ts are subsidizing that “satellite” location. My share of taxes in that is inconsequential, but as we like say about firearms: compromise is not an option on that kind of thing IMO.

    Isn’t the (at least nominal, before sometimes being legislated away) separation of church and state one of the fundamental tenants of the U.S. of A.?

    1. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

      No, the prohibition on using government power to establish a state religion or church, or to prohibit religious practices is a fundamental tenet of the U.S.A.

      1. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

        I’m under the impression that “state sponsorship for any religion” falls in the former category mentioned.

        Using public tax dollars for a public school that a church gets to hold events in seems improper at best to this guy.

        “Oh, your pagan / Hindu / Bhuddist / Jewish / Muslim religious organization wants to hold meetings in the local high school? Sorry, the Christians beat you to it, and you know, the building is being used for public education on your holy day.”

        1. avatar JeremyR says:

          May I suggest you read the Constitution and explore what the words actually mean rather then quote a statement made by Thomas Jefferson to a church group in what was decidedly not an official document?

        2. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

          @ JeremyR

          I have – I made a point to get more than one copy so I can just sort of leave them lying around to be read repeatedly.

          I wasn’t arguing that it’s in the Constitution itself, but I am arguing that the founding fathers (not just Jefferson) thought it was pretty damn important. Seeing as how the SCOTUS used and uses those men’s views as a guideline to modern interpretation of said document and sometimes other law, I reckon it’s still a valid point to make.

        3. avatar Will says:

          “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ”

          Show your evidence that these other religions are being barred from the use of the property when they wish to use it.

        4. avatar Paul G says:

          For the record, the capitol building in DC was used for Sunday services under Jefferson’s presidency, so it appears many misdefine his quotes.
          Also, for the record, most schools do rent their facilities out to other groups, it is an income source. So much for spending tax dollars, huh? A charitable group I affiliate with spends over a thousand dollars for use of an auditorium for six hours, one night a year.

        5. avatar rjoguillory says:

          ….if the Church had some form of legal contract that allows them to use the school building…does that not…(on those days) make the building the property of the church…and therefore…the Gun-Free-School BS would not apply? It would seem to me that the building had been “leased” to the church for those activities… and would not be subject to these ridiculous, unconstitutional edicts…

          Fu*k… the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton/Obama/Cheney/Gore/Rumsfeld Crime family…convict them all of treason..and their family…confiscate their family wealth and hang all of them…kids..wives…do not allow generational treason or wealth accumulation..that is derived from treason…convict and hang them…

          RJ O’Guillory
          Author-
          Webster Groves – The Life of an Insane Family

    2. avatar Steve says:

      Actually, there are quite a lot of churches that have services in schools. Typically, they are smaller congregations that are saving up money to purchase their own building. However, they don’t get to meet there for “free.” They pay rent (or the equivalent thereof) to the school district for the use of their facilities.

      1. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

        Good to know, Steve.

        If cost is reimbursed, it’s an efficient use of space, so that’s fine by me.

        Free publicly funded space/resources for the use of religious organizations is still sponsorship IMO.

        Either you’re giving everyone’s money to no gods, or you’re giving some money to everyone’s gods, even those creepy folks with the black and the pentagrams and such. Sounds way cheaper to not fund any religions at all.

        /end comments hijack

        1. avatar Jake says:

          I find it a bit amusing to be indignant about something of such slight cost when we spend billions sponsoring religions to kill each other and innocent bystanders off around the world. I’ll grant the principle, but we are talking a difference in actual dollar cost of orders of magnitude.

        2. avatar Will says:

          @Jake,

          They’ll deny it is religious in nature, of their support, and the also just might argue that it isn’t in the US that this is happening (where human-secularism seems to be targeting Christianity, in particular, for removal from everyday life.)

        3. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

          @ Jake:

          Unfortunately, I don’t control US foreign policy – my opinions there range widely and can even change relatively frequently (just like the real world) but even if my convictions were rock solid that’s perhaps even less of a reason for policy makers to pay attention.

          My stink about separation of church and state is because I think it’s important – and because if necessary I might be able to get some folks to pay attention to said stink, based on previous cases that have gone through the courts. It’s a lot harder to sue the State Department because they like playing Shadow Age of Empires: 21st Century Edition.

          @Will

          In regards to the above: I think you meant to italicize the first part of that statement rather than the second. “No law respecting an establishment of religion” in my book means no money for religious establishments, because laws have to be passed to both collect and disburse taxes – and if money’s being spent on any religion then IMO it’s not, well, kosher.

          I used Christianity as an example because that organized religion 1) already was using the school and
          2) would most likely be the group using or requesting use of the school even if it was not already in use, due to simple demographics.

          Freedom of religion means that I’m free to NOT hear about or spend tax money on anyone else’s religion, just as it means you are free to spend your personal time and funds on your religion.

          Regarding your comment vis a vis removing Christianity from everyday life: (and I’m sure I’ll get some hate for this) Perhaps many young and even some middle aged people in the world today have a hard time reconciling a dogmatic, inflexible, and sometimes harmful centralized religious edifice with, you know, the real world. Example? The AIDS pandemic in Africa has been exacerbated by Church policies against condoms for decades.

          I don’t give a shit about your religion – just as long as I don’t have to pay for it in any way, I don’t have to pay lip service to it, ever, and it doesn’t muck about in my life because of it’s presumed righteousness, not even one time. That’s what freedom of religion actually means, at least to me.

    3. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      You turn off the boiler and the water pipes freeze.

      The problem isn’t the church using the building, the problem is that there is a publicly funded school in the first place. A separation of school and state would do more to protect freedom than the separation of church and state.

      1. avatar AmericanSpirit says:

        First, semantics, but true. Overhead is overhead, so if someone wants to pay for the space and energy needed for that space, fine.

        Second, if we decided to eliminate the relationship between school and state, we’re gonna have a lot more bored, ignorant kids running around making mischief. There’s some places in society where having a centralized tax collection/disbursement (achievable only through some form of government) makes sense – education being the first to come to mind.

        In my state, anyway, parents can opt out of public school for their kids – as they should be able to; plus then they’re the only ones at fault if their kid turns out full new ‘Murican retard.

        Too bad the rest of us still have to deal with the aftermath of such stupidity.

        /actual end comments hijack

      2. avatar Drew says:

        Public education was one of the first institutions created by the government and it was done specifically to preserve the union and the republican system of government. Unless you can propose an alternative that dose the same job as well or better you might not want to work so hard at undoing what was done with great deliberation.

        1. avatar JR says:

          Bullsqueeze that that’s why public school was created. I suggest you do some reading of the research conducted by John Taylor Gatto, a man who more than earned the right to educate the rest of us on the topic.

          Here’s the text of his NY Teacher of the Year acceptance speech which is well worth the read:

          http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html

          Public school was created for the purpose of creating good worker drones for factories.

          Another fun fact: literacy has DECREASED in the US since compulsory public education was instituted.

          And I can not only propose a better system; I have implemented one. It’s called Homeschooling.

        2. avatar Will says:

          Interesting to note then that public education seems to be shifting toward teaching for a singular competency test instead of for real life, in which would educate students to be able to pass said test AND use the same skills in the real world. (FYI, I got kids in the public school system, and I see this first hand with what they are being taught.) Teachers that want to teach real skills are hamstrung to teach more than how to pass that test.

        3. avatar JR says:

          Will, if you are talking about Common Core, the case can be made that the purpose is to prepare students solely for government jobs.

    4. avatar NJDevils72 says:

      The separation was originally to prevent a state-sponsored religion from being enacted, i.e. freedom of religion for the people. This original intent has been twisted many times to support specific agendas. In this case, I actually do hope it is twisted again to se this young man free without any repercussions. He was in legal possession of a firearm, he shouldn’t be disallowed from owning any for the rest of his life.

      1. avatar ErrantVenture11 says:

        Read about how the German government (tried) to co-opt the German protestant church during the rise of the Nazi party. Severe limitations on the exercise of religion were enacted, and this is what the U.S. Constitution aims to prevent.

    5. avatar Ofnir says:

      There’s a school and church around here that do that. It’d be illegal if the school were running it, but the school rents out its auditorium on weekends to any group who will pay the rent fees. The church takes up a few hours every Sunday and pays rent, and pays like a year in advance. Anyone else who wants to can do it too in any available time slot as long as they pay the venue rental fees, ergo, not violating Establishment Clause.

  5. avatar K-Bizz says:

    A church event at a high-school? I smell a church/state separation issue. That said, what’s about to happen to this guy is much, much worse.

    1. avatar Will says:

      smell what you want. As long as no other religious organization is barred from being able to do the same during any non-school hours, there is no issue.

    2. avatar Docent says:

      If schools allow their facilities to be used by the public, they can’t engage in view-point discrimination by preventing religious groups from also using the facility.

  6. avatar Jared says:

    Rob,

    For the sake of accuracy. The Bush gun free schools act doesn’t apply to this guy since he has a NC concealed carry license.

    He’s being charged with a state felony… Regardless of the federal gun free schools act.

    1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

      And not a victim in sight!

    2. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Text amended.

  7. avatar Mark N. says:

    I don’t know what NC laws are, but even here in California, CCW carriers are exempt from the GFSZA (unless the issuing agency puts a specific restriction on your license, which some are wont to do).

  8. avatar Bob says:

    This kind of thing is a big problem with all of the gun laws, it makes being human a crime.

    Who here can say he/she never left his/her wallet at home and didn’t realize it until at the store?

    In this scenario, a licensed carrier could be kidnapped and thrown into a cage (arrested by a cop). For what? Simply for the very human act of forgetting. Of making a small mistake.

    Shame on all of you politicians who made these stupid laws and to the law enforcement officers who blindly enforce them.

  9. avatar CaribooLou says:

    Maybe its because I live in Maryland and cant carry, but how in the hell do you forget where your gun is.

    1. avatar maniakmedic says:

      I had an LCP once that I used to carry in the cargo pocket of my shorts as a BUG. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think about what I have in my pockets all the time. Before I went on a trip overseas I told my sister to remind me to check my pockets before she dropped me off at the airport so I wouldn’t get so focused on not forgetting my ticket and passport that I forgot about a gun I had on me all the time. I have also on at least one occasion had my EDC gun in a shoulder holster and “forgot” I had it on me because I was so used to the weight that it didn’t register. I put forgot in quotes because it’s not so much forgetting as just being so comfortable and used to having that gun with me that I don’t think about it, much like I don’t think about the keys, wallet, knife, and cell phone in my pocket until I need them for something.

      May be different for other people, but that’s my experience with a tool I don’t think about any more than any other tool I carry – which I see as being the point of pro-carry (open or concealed) activism: normalizing an object so people don’t freak out whenever they see or hear about one.

    2. avatar Dave the dude says:

      The only time I notice my EDC is when it’s not there. Like in the “gun free zone” at my school. It’s like there’s a hole where it should be. Nothing but a reminder that I’m being (illegally) forced into being a soft target.

      1. avatar Russ Bixby says:

        Firm target, at least in my case.

        Not going to hide, or go at a monster bare handed.

        Still fairly soft, but that’s why I carry a good knife and learned to throw it.

        Rather have my Tok, though…

  10. avatar shawn says:

    Repubtards will never admit to a mistake they did and change it.

    1. avatar Will says:

      Democraps sure are not in any hurry to fix those mistakes either, only to call them out when it suits their agenda. For example all this patriot act stuff… Democraps cried foul over it when the Repubicans were in charge and ran it, but now they’re in charge, it’s a necessary thing that needs expanded to cover ALL citizens, not just those immediately suspected of being a terrorist.

      (See, I can call a party names too. Childish, isn’t it.)

  11. avatar Thomas Pain says:

    i was at a high school basketball game last night. The cops were there for security. I told one of the cops that the school was a ‘gun free zone’, while motioning to his holster…..

    He laughed in my face.

    1. avatar Dave the dude says:

      Of course he did. You aren’t understanding the law (act). Police and military IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY are exempt. Knowledge IS power. Read up, don’t derp up.

    2. avatar Patrick says:

      Don’t worry. I think most of us actually understood your point.

  12. avatar Dave the dude says:

    I’m trying. And trying. And trying. I will not give up. Please visit http://www.concealedcampus.org

    As you were.

    1. avatar Dave the dude says:

      *edit* That last post was in response to Mr. Farago’s last paragraph in the lead in article.

      Just wanted to provide context so I don’t get a *wat* (Matt)

  13. avatar Hannibal says:

    Bad law… but it’s not as if it’s a secret. Don’t go to such events and explain why to the organizers.

  14. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    Isn’t it time to eliminate discrimination against gun owners everywhere? I keep hearing the same old crap that a property owner/government has the right to discriminate against lawfull gun owners. I don’t hear Blacks,Lesbians,Gays being told they can’t shop at the local mall, go in the school etc etc. I guess our rights aren’t near as important as what color to paint transvestite bathrooms in CA..sigh, Randy

  15. avatar Russ Bixby says:

    Amen!
    So mote it be.
    So say we all.
    Om Shanti Shanti.
    Glockhu ackbar!

    Yeah, what RF said.

  16. avatar A samurai says:

    Amen!

  17. avatar Ted says:

    My father in law still tells me stories of his youth where, during hunting season in PA, students were allowed to keep firearms in their lockers.

    How have we sunk so far in a generation?

  18. avatar rlc2 says:

    To answer your question, Robert- is it time to repeal the federal GFSZ act? Yes.
    Of course. Its past time.

    Its impractical, and like much well-intended legislation, has the perverse opposite effect – another example of the law of unintended consequences.

    The GFSZ INCREASES the dange of violence against children, who are packed together in a free-fire zone that the police simply can’t get to in time, unless one is stationed on duty right there. The reason is simple- it restricts the law abiding who would deter the nutcases. This is not an exercise in wishful thinking, its proven fact based on enough examples to matter, to anyone with common sense and intellectual honesty. Look at the Kelly School shooting in Carlsbad, CA, with the Safety Center no more than 2 miles away. Without two brave CIVILIAN workers who bravely charged the guy, on foot and in a pickup, it could have been MUCH MUCH worse.

    Add to that the truth that 95% of public school district simply dont have the money for a full-time trained officer, even at the newbie level (typically called the Schools Resource Officer), plus someone to rotate in for him/her sickness, days off, etc)

    AT EVERY SCHOOL (at best, some affluent districts, like mine- share a couple across a dozen elementary/middle/high school campuses, so they might be miles away at any given time, and this is easy to predict and plan for, by any determined sociopath, just like at Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine…)

    So this means its ALL the kids, but especially the POOR KIDS we have all put at MOST RISK, thanks to prog-left beliefs and policies and the denial-of-reality that takes place when belief systems by the Elite-Who-Know-Whats-Best-For-You trump rational thinking.

    MS Watts and Mr Bloomberg are smart enough to get this, even if the well-meaning PTA Mommies they market to on FakeBook and Twit4NitWits do not:

    Persisting in putting kids in danger is morally repugnant, maybe even evil, if its done in favor of power vs what works,

    and if there is a final judgement in heaven, at the end of their days, I suspect they will earn their karma at the slug or bug level, next life.

    In the meantime, we just have to keep telling the truth, changing minds one at a time, speaking to School Boards, your Congressional Reps and Senators, and electing enough who “get it” until it can be changed by law.

  19. avatar rlc2 says:

    And if you can’t “trust” trained school teachers or administrators with your kids safety, or carefully vetted and trained volunteers as “hall monitors”, “lunch noon-dutys”, “playground supervisors” what every they are called at your kids and grandkids, niece and nephews school- then who can you trust?

    With school budgets and city fire/police budgets under increasing long-term pressure, (over lavish pay increases in 2000’s post 9/11, under-funded pensions, under-performing investments, denial of reality union politics, and the dismal economy jobs train wreck in slow motion underway)

    It isnt going to get better, unless people face the truth. Well trained armed citizens on campus INCREASE safety, and make someone elses liberal school the target.

    Sorry to put it that way so cynically, but its the only way to get thru sometimes to these self-obsessed elder yupsters for whom “its all about them”…
    Ms Watts gets it. The cool kids all want to be in the hip club…and that doesnt include “the other” no matter how they lie to themselves about it.

    Obama gets it- private ARMED security at his kids school, the choice of the elite in DC (Carter, Clinton, Gore, kids all went there, etc etc) is probably the best in the nation, even without the Secret Service.

  20. avatar Van says:

    This person is carrying conceal, if they didn’t check his backpack they wouldn’t have know there was a gun. I believe if you have a permit to carry conceal then you have been trusted by the courts, had background checks , finger prints, photo, and met all he criteria ,so it shouldn’t be illegal to carry anywhere. You are a LEGAL GUN OWNER!!!
    Plus I don’t get it,,,, its sad that kids can’t say the pledge in school because of the word God we trust and those that argue about their beliefs or religion, so why is a church function going on in a school in the first place?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email