Alabama Senate Says Church Can Start Its Own Police Force

[smilesammich 10,727]

Quote

A large church in Alabama is one step closer to creating its own police force, a move that seems to be without precedent in the U.S. The state's Senate has approved legislation that would give church police officers the same powers other law enforcement officers have in Alabama.

After being approved by Alabama's Senate on a 24-4 vote, the bill now heads to the state House of Representatives, where an identical bill was sent to the Public Safety and Homeland Security committee in February.

Both chambers' legislation specifically names Briarwood Presbyterian Church, a Birmingham megachurch that "says it needs its own police officers to keep its school as well as its more than 4,000 person congregation safe," Alabama Public Radio reports.

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/12/523603112/alabama-senate-says-church-can-start-its-own-police-force?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=news

 

 

i don't understand, why do they need their own police force why not a security team? talk about slippery slopes..

[IAMX 3,055]

So what's the slippery slope? It's not that unusual for those who have private property to have a police force if they are large enough to fund it. Given it would likely cost more money, and such church grounds (which includes schools) encompasses thousands of people there, I'm sure the community would gladly pony up the extra cash needed for this. What's the problem?

Edited April 12, 2017 by IAMX

[Transborderwife 4,666]

There's a Salvation Army joke in here somewhere...

[Dashinka 24,598]

2 hours ago, smilesammich said:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/12/523603112/alabama-senate-says-church-can-start-its-own-police-force?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=news

 

 

i don't understand, why do they need their own police force why not a security team? talk about slippery slopes..

Not sure about the slippery slope, but I do agree with the fact that this group should be private security rather than "deputized" LEOs. It seems like it would be a possible first amendment issue?

[yuna628 9,680]

I think Walmart should have it's own police force, that way it can stop wasting the police's time, money, and efforts. They can put the jail in the frozen food aisle. 

 

((It's a nonsense law really and would probably pose many first amendment questions))

[IAMX 3,055]

16 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Not sure about the slippery slope, but I do agree with the fact that this group should be private security rather than "deputized" LEOs. It seems like it would be a possible first amendment issue?

I don't see that. Private campus police forces are likewise normal. As long as a church pays for it, or the taxpayers offer it (like in the case of some municipalities), it's really no different whatsoever than paying police for private service. I'm pretty sure the intended idea behind the thread was, "see religion, get outraged".

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

8 hours ago, smilesammich said:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/12/523603112/alabama-senate-says-church-can-start-its-own-police-force?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=news

 

 

i don't understand, why do they need their own police force why not a security team? talk about slippery slopes..

I am normally leery of Church state mixing, but in this case, if the have 4K people to protect, why not. Lots of schools and institutions have "campus police" that are legal police officers or whatever the official word is . 

[Dakine10 5,452]

38 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I am normally leery of Church state mixing, but in this case, if the have 4K people to protect, why not. Lots of schools and institutions have "campus police" that are legal police officers or whatever the official word is . 

 

   I'm also leery of church and state mixing and I would point out that schools are not church, and 'campus police' are not the same as 'church police'. Campus police are really not pertinent to the issue of separation of church and state.

[smilesammich 10,727]

14 hours ago, IAMX said:

I don't see that. Private campus police forces are likewise normal. As long as a church pays for it, or the taxpayers offer it (like in the case of some municipalities), it's really no different whatsoever than paying police for private service. I'm pretty sure the intended idea behind the thread was, "see religion, get outraged".

pretty sure the intended idea behind your response was, belittle and assert my authority as knower-aller. good job!

[Dashinka 24,598]

8 hours ago, Dakine10 said:

 

   I'm also leery of church and state mixing and I would point out that schools are not church, and 'campus police' are not the same as 'church police'. Campus police are really not pertinent to the issue of separation of church and state.

A flashback to a Monty Python skit just occurred!

 

 

[bcking 3,157]

Can someone provide an explanation of how a "Private Security Force" is different than a force that has "Police authority"?

 

If a big corporation has private security, they typically carry weapons. They can detain people. I'm assuming they can't "Make arrests" themselves, but they can detain the person until a police officer can come get them.

 

So what would the church be missing if they just went with a private security team? In many of the articles the lawyer for the Church says it would be "insufficient to address the threats facing our church", but he doesn't explain how it would be insufficient. 

 

Ideas?

[bcking 3,157]

10 hours ago, Dakine10 said:

 

   I'm also leery of church and state mixing and I would point out that schools are not church, and 'campus police' are not the same as 'church police'. Campus police are really not pertinent to the issue of separation of church and state.

There are large universities that have very strong religious affiliations (Brigham Young comes to mind immediately), and I imagine they all have "campus police" as well. 

 

To my limited understanding, campus police do not have the "same powers other law enforcement officers have in Alabama." 

 

I think it would be reasonable for the church to want the equivalent of campus police, but I don't see why they need to go the extra step to having officers that have the "same powers other law enforcement officers have in Alabama." I'm also not really sure what those additional powers are, which might help my understanding.

[IAMX 3,055]

17 minutes ago, bcking said:

There are large universities that have very strong religious affiliations (Brigham Young comes to mind immediately), and I imagine they all have "campus police" as well. 

 

To my limited understanding, campus police do not have the "same powers other law enforcement officers have in Alabama." 

 

I think it would be reasonable for the church to want the equivalent of campus police, but I don't see why they need to go the extra step to having officers that have the "same powers other law enforcement officers have in Alabama." I'm also not really sure what those additional powers are, which might help my understanding.

To be honest, I don't see why the existing police force already, with approval from the local government, can't operate in private property (i.e. churches), with their concurrent approval and payment. 

Edited April 13, 2017 by IAMX

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, IAMX said:

To be honest, I don't see why the existing police force already, with approval from the local government, can't operate in private property (i.e. churches), with their concurrent approval and payment. 

So you're saying just have the church pay extra fees and have the state/city police force have staff that are dedicated to protecting/patrolling the church's properties exclusively?

 

That I think would definitely blur some "separation of church and state" lines. I also imagine the church would probably prefer to have something it controls. 

 

I'm still not sure why the Church can't just have something like a University has. Why do they need more than that? I think the onus should have been on the Church to give specific reasons for why that wouldn't be sufficient. What exactly do they need that a private security force can't provide?

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, bcking said:

So you're saying just have the church pay extra fees and have the state/city police force have staff that are dedicated to protecting/patrolling the church's properties exclusively?

 

That I think would definitely blur some "separation of church and state" lines. I also imagine the church would probably prefer to have something it controls. 

 

I'm still not sure why the Church can't just have something like a University has. Why do they need more than that? I think the onus should have been on the Church to give specific reasons for why that wouldn't be sufficient. What exactly do they need that a private security force can't provide?

some americans don't see how important that line is, some want to do away with it all together. i don't understand these people because they're normally the first ones to pass around a facebook petition to ban sharia law in the united states. stonings are so down since isis smash trump got in office though so maybe this will cool down.