Ron
– opens mtg with brief explanation of process to visitors. Decided we
do want membership at OCP and are now figuring out what that will look
like. Finished discussion about volunteer hours. Mistake with “where we
are now:” left out our discussion of what the specific rules of OCP
actually are. Ron purposes we begin today’s discussion with what the
rules are, followed by code of behavior and enforcement.
Mike – wants to know in terms of framing are we looking for brainstorming session or are we going to try to lay out some limiting factors regarding rules?
Ron – I think we should start with what are the unspoken rules that are kinda a big deal? What are the rules right now that we can agree on? I’ve mentioned no drinking or drug use on the property and no child alone with an adult.
Daniel – something along the lines of no violence
Ron – are there others? What about if there are already laws prohibiting them?
Daniel – regarding laws: we might not want to call the cops, but we still have the rule here. Because we’re not necessarily going to call the police we should possibly still have rules that reinforce laws of the land.
Teig – I’d like to add no threats of violence or intimidation
Mike – I think calling the police will be part of our enforcement discussion
Kris – would sexual harassment fall under violence or intimidation? I think it is important to include that.
Heather – We have all these rules for not having violence? Isn’t that just common sense?
Mark – I think you should include a rule against theft.
Mike – I did put Ron’s “clean up after yourself” and Jonathan isn’t here and he believes that there shouldn’t be profanity at OCP.
Phil – I think Jonathan actually says there is a right time and a wrong time for profanity.
Daniel B – Are we talking about things that might get you kicked out of OCP? So we should word anything with foul language carefully.
Ron – I thought you were going to ask “is that what we’re talking about now?” Being verbally abusive to a staff member because the staff need to have a certain level of authority.
Mike – I think there is a hard and fast rule about no viewing pornography at OCP.
Sadie – YES!
Daniel B – we probably need to discuss this more I think whatever the conflict resolution process it needs to be mandatory that you respect it and follow it.
Sadie – I think the pornography rule should be rule number 1! There are some people I’d like to strangle.
Teig – Then we have to figure out what constitutes pornography?
Kris – beyond pornography, I’d say no very violent media at OCP. Or anything that is degrading.
Sadie – if it is anything distasteful you shouldn’t be looking at it anyway. Teig, let me address your question – you shouldn’t look at halfnaked women.
Daniel B – if it can’t happen at OCP you can’t look at it at OCP or if anyone is offended by what you are looking at it isn’t ok
Phil – no guns except for police. But no lethal weapons.
Daniel M – are we talking about rules that get you kicked out of OCP? Let me know when the brainstorm part is done?
Teig – what constitutes offensive behavior? What about banging on the piano?
Ron – lets just get the list up then go back and debate the finer points.
Mike – what about suggestive clothing? Dress code?
Ron –1. no drinking or using illegal drugs on property and 2. no adult alone with child in room (unless your child) I think are serious rules. 3. No pornography. 4. Honor conflict resultion process. 5. No lethal weapons. These seem to be unspoken rules that we’ve seemed to be enforced in the past.
Daniel – I have a problem with no lethal weapons. What is a lethal weapon? How do we define that?
Ron – yeah. Good point. I think no guns and no knives longer than the law of the land allows. I don’t know what to say about tazers and mace.
Mike – lots of things will need help with definitions. I think it should have something to do with brandishing. I think you know it when you see it. If its main purpose is to be lethal you shouldn’t be flashing it around.
Teig – I think that should come under threats of violence.
Daniel M – could we phrase it so that it is “no brandishing of lethal weapons?”
Ron – I can remember an incident of a guy who had a known history of violence who carried a large knife on him and we didn’t let him bring it in. Do we really want people in here with guns even if they have a concealed license?
Daniel - I would be completely satisfied with no guns allowed at all. But I’m skeptical about no knives. Perhaps on a case by case basis.
Mike – I think we don’t need to make it an issue. We aren’t going to pat people down. I think we should just say no lethal weapons if you are scaring people. The sight of weapons of any sort can make people queasy. I think we left one out – no animals in the building and no dangerous animals on the property.
Ron – I like deferring to freedom. Do we need to create some rule for every bad thing that could possibly happen?
Daniel M – I think we are operating on a slippery slope if we aren’t going to enforce them. If we make something a rule it should be enforced.
Mike – I see it as a rule but we don’t have a metal detector and we aren’t going to pat you down. I want to have the red card on lethal weapons. I resist saying “brandishing” because what if we find out about it and it is making someone uncomfortable?
Ron – what if someone shows a gun to someone but isn’t brandishing it?
Daniel – if its not a hard and fast rule there are lots of things we need to consider. Why does it having a gun have to be a hard and fast rule? I am completely ok with no guns. But how do you enforce or define no lethal weapons? Deal with knives on a case by case basis.
Daniel B – to try to summarize: outside of guns we are saying no threating, branching, or talking about using with sensitivity to peoples issues with them. As to guns: none at all, or no one can know about it.
Ron – no guns at OCP property and no brandishing of weapons is what I’m feeling cooking down.
Karen’s husband – I say no weapons at all.
Mike – I’m wondering on a process basis are we leading up to a proposal?
Ron – I think this has been a topic for years so I’m ok if it takes some time. I’d like to agree with the first six rules we’ve discussed.
Kris – I agree with Ron. We should go through the six.
Phil - I really want to hear Anna because police come here. I’m curious to know how we address that?
Ron – I want to reserve the possibility that we make the rule and then have a philosophical discussion.
Anna – I just don’t know. We live in a fallen world, nothings perfect. So if there’s an emergency and our mediation system won’t work, then we probably can’t permit them from showing up with guns. But if we’re inviting them to come to us here at OCP, then to have a discussion about what we do and what they do, I don’t think it would be out of line to tell them we have this rule that there are no guns at OCP and we want you to respect that rule. Why can’t they honor that? What would they use a gun for in that instance? Shows a lack of willingness to problem solve if we say “if we make this rule, then no police can come and talk with us” We could say, “We are a Christian organization heavily influence by non-violence and Mennonite perspective,” then why couldn’t they do that? If OCP is not willing to make a stand about no guns, then can we expect anyone? If not us, who?
Charles – I would be more comfortable if the chief of police if he came without his gun.
Daniel B – I have hesitation to passing these rules if they don’t apply to everyone.
Ron – I’m super interested in Mr. Rhodes opinion on this? I’ve never know a police officer to shoot someone in Harrisonburg. If we’re using them we should let them in. But if a cop shows up to talk to someone we shouldn’t escourt them off the property. It sounds self-righteous to me. I don’t know if you can tell them (the police) not to have a gun.
Daniel – I’m really supportive of the idea that if the chief of police wants to come to chat with us and learn about us and NOT bring a gun. Otherwise I think we’re fighting a losing battle if we expect the police to come without a gun. Police are typically involved in emergency situations.
Felicia – why bring the police here? Everyone knows that police do?
Daniel - I think we want them to learn from us.
Mike – I never thought this had anything to do with the police. What they are doing is completely legal when they come with guns. Or we could talk about brandishing?
Mr. Rhodes – I like the bias against having weapons here. Or we could send a delegation to send the police office. I support no weapons at all here.
Ron – can I ask you “it is quite common for police to come here looking for people in full uniform – what do we do about that?”
Mr. Rhodes – don’t invite them but if they show up we can’t do anything about it
Phil – this chief of police I think really wants to do things differently. We need to get to know them and they need to get to know us and how can we all bend a little to make that happen?
Johnny – the Miami police put lock boxes in their cars they are also doing it in Charlottesville, too. Some of us feel safer when we see a police car.
Daniel B – I’m not so worried about a particular event but I know that the police don’t just come here in the event of an emergency and they take people in. Their having a gun is an inherent threat and gives them the power to usurp our process.
Mike – I think the police is a bigger issue than this discussion. When it comes to the police his purpose is to protect us. I don’t think we’re talking about the police issue.
Ron – I don’t think Daniel B’s argument holds water. The fact is that OCP is in the city of Harrisonburg and is very involved in the democratic process and one of the things society has decided is that the police can carry guns. We need to respect the powers that be and the system. OCP isn’t never going to call the police. It seems rude to tell them they can’t bring guns until we need them.
Mike – If it is happening in Charlottesville then it might happen in Hburg several years later. But it is against the rules for them to leave their guns anywhere.
Ron – someone pointed out that this might be a larger discussion than right now. Can we set this aside for now? I think we were headed toward “no guns at OCP and no brandishing weapons for non-law enforcement.” The community can return to the larger discussion at a later time.
Phil – I think the point that the above reflects our rule now is valid.
Kris – its one thing when they are on duty but what if they are off duty.
Ron – it can be a policy for how OCP deals with the police. If they refuse to come without weapons we can go to them, but when they are on duty and doing their job that might be different. It sounds like there is agreement among staff that that is the current policy. Is the rule that there is no guns and no brandishing weapons?
Daniel B – I would like to note in the minutes that it is not entirely resolved.
Claude – what are we trying to vote on?
Ron – I’m proposing that outside of law enforcement no guns at ocp and no brandishing weapons. Setting aside that there is a larger issue that needs to be discussed. Let the minutes reflect that we agree no drinking or illegal drugs on the property and no adult alone in a room with a child that isn’t there own. No guns and no brandishing weapons.
Phil – close in prayer
Mike – wants to know in terms of framing are we looking for brainstorming session or are we going to try to lay out some limiting factors regarding rules?
Ron – I think we should start with what are the unspoken rules that are kinda a big deal? What are the rules right now that we can agree on? I’ve mentioned no drinking or drug use on the property and no child alone with an adult.
Daniel – something along the lines of no violence
Ron – are there others? What about if there are already laws prohibiting them?
Daniel – regarding laws: we might not want to call the cops, but we still have the rule here. Because we’re not necessarily going to call the police we should possibly still have rules that reinforce laws of the land.
Teig – I’d like to add no threats of violence or intimidation
Mike – I think calling the police will be part of our enforcement discussion
Kris – would sexual harassment fall under violence or intimidation? I think it is important to include that.
Heather – We have all these rules for not having violence? Isn’t that just common sense?
Mark – I think you should include a rule against theft.
Mike – I did put Ron’s “clean up after yourself” and Jonathan isn’t here and he believes that there shouldn’t be profanity at OCP.
Phil – I think Jonathan actually says there is a right time and a wrong time for profanity.
Daniel B – Are we talking about things that might get you kicked out of OCP? So we should word anything with foul language carefully.
Ron – I thought you were going to ask “is that what we’re talking about now?” Being verbally abusive to a staff member because the staff need to have a certain level of authority.
Mike – I think there is a hard and fast rule about no viewing pornography at OCP.
Sadie – YES!
Daniel B – we probably need to discuss this more I think whatever the conflict resolution process it needs to be mandatory that you respect it and follow it.
Sadie – I think the pornography rule should be rule number 1! There are some people I’d like to strangle.
Teig – Then we have to figure out what constitutes pornography?
Kris – beyond pornography, I’d say no very violent media at OCP. Or anything that is degrading.
Sadie – if it is anything distasteful you shouldn’t be looking at it anyway. Teig, let me address your question – you shouldn’t look at halfnaked women.
Daniel B – if it can’t happen at OCP you can’t look at it at OCP or if anyone is offended by what you are looking at it isn’t ok
Phil – no guns except for police. But no lethal weapons.
Daniel M – are we talking about rules that get you kicked out of OCP? Let me know when the brainstorm part is done?
Teig – what constitutes offensive behavior? What about banging on the piano?
Ron – lets just get the list up then go back and debate the finer points.
Mike – what about suggestive clothing? Dress code?
Ron –1. no drinking or using illegal drugs on property and 2. no adult alone with child in room (unless your child) I think are serious rules. 3. No pornography. 4. Honor conflict resultion process. 5. No lethal weapons. These seem to be unspoken rules that we’ve seemed to be enforced in the past.
Daniel – I have a problem with no lethal weapons. What is a lethal weapon? How do we define that?
Ron – yeah. Good point. I think no guns and no knives longer than the law of the land allows. I don’t know what to say about tazers and mace.
Mike – lots of things will need help with definitions. I think it should have something to do with brandishing. I think you know it when you see it. If its main purpose is to be lethal you shouldn’t be flashing it around.
Teig – I think that should come under threats of violence.
Daniel M – could we phrase it so that it is “no brandishing of lethal weapons?”
Ron – I can remember an incident of a guy who had a known history of violence who carried a large knife on him and we didn’t let him bring it in. Do we really want people in here with guns even if they have a concealed license?
Daniel - I would be completely satisfied with no guns allowed at all. But I’m skeptical about no knives. Perhaps on a case by case basis.
Mike – I think we don’t need to make it an issue. We aren’t going to pat people down. I think we should just say no lethal weapons if you are scaring people. The sight of weapons of any sort can make people queasy. I think we left one out – no animals in the building and no dangerous animals on the property.
Ron – I like deferring to freedom. Do we need to create some rule for every bad thing that could possibly happen?
Daniel M – I think we are operating on a slippery slope if we aren’t going to enforce them. If we make something a rule it should be enforced.
Mike – I see it as a rule but we don’t have a metal detector and we aren’t going to pat you down. I want to have the red card on lethal weapons. I resist saying “brandishing” because what if we find out about it and it is making someone uncomfortable?
Ron – what if someone shows a gun to someone but isn’t brandishing it?
Daniel – if its not a hard and fast rule there are lots of things we need to consider. Why does it having a gun have to be a hard and fast rule? I am completely ok with no guns. But how do you enforce or define no lethal weapons? Deal with knives on a case by case basis.
Daniel B – to try to summarize: outside of guns we are saying no threating, branching, or talking about using with sensitivity to peoples issues with them. As to guns: none at all, or no one can know about it.
Ron – no guns at OCP property and no brandishing of weapons is what I’m feeling cooking down.
Karen’s husband – I say no weapons at all.
Mike – I’m wondering on a process basis are we leading up to a proposal?
Ron – I think this has been a topic for years so I’m ok if it takes some time. I’d like to agree with the first six rules we’ve discussed.
Kris – I agree with Ron. We should go through the six.
Phil - I really want to hear Anna because police come here. I’m curious to know how we address that?
Ron – I want to reserve the possibility that we make the rule and then have a philosophical discussion.
Anna – I just don’t know. We live in a fallen world, nothings perfect. So if there’s an emergency and our mediation system won’t work, then we probably can’t permit them from showing up with guns. But if we’re inviting them to come to us here at OCP, then to have a discussion about what we do and what they do, I don’t think it would be out of line to tell them we have this rule that there are no guns at OCP and we want you to respect that rule. Why can’t they honor that? What would they use a gun for in that instance? Shows a lack of willingness to problem solve if we say “if we make this rule, then no police can come and talk with us” We could say, “We are a Christian organization heavily influence by non-violence and Mennonite perspective,” then why couldn’t they do that? If OCP is not willing to make a stand about no guns, then can we expect anyone? If not us, who?
Charles – I would be more comfortable if the chief of police if he came without his gun.
Daniel B – I have hesitation to passing these rules if they don’t apply to everyone.
Ron – I’m super interested in Mr. Rhodes opinion on this? I’ve never know a police officer to shoot someone in Harrisonburg. If we’re using them we should let them in. But if a cop shows up to talk to someone we shouldn’t escourt them off the property. It sounds self-righteous to me. I don’t know if you can tell them (the police) not to have a gun.
Daniel – I’m really supportive of the idea that if the chief of police wants to come to chat with us and learn about us and NOT bring a gun. Otherwise I think we’re fighting a losing battle if we expect the police to come without a gun. Police are typically involved in emergency situations.
Felicia – why bring the police here? Everyone knows that police do?
Daniel - I think we want them to learn from us.
Mike – I never thought this had anything to do with the police. What they are doing is completely legal when they come with guns. Or we could talk about brandishing?
Mr. Rhodes – I like the bias against having weapons here. Or we could send a delegation to send the police office. I support no weapons at all here.
Ron – can I ask you “it is quite common for police to come here looking for people in full uniform – what do we do about that?”
Mr. Rhodes – don’t invite them but if they show up we can’t do anything about it
Phil – this chief of police I think really wants to do things differently. We need to get to know them and they need to get to know us and how can we all bend a little to make that happen?
Johnny – the Miami police put lock boxes in their cars they are also doing it in Charlottesville, too. Some of us feel safer when we see a police car.
Daniel B – I’m not so worried about a particular event but I know that the police don’t just come here in the event of an emergency and they take people in. Their having a gun is an inherent threat and gives them the power to usurp our process.
Mike – I think the police is a bigger issue than this discussion. When it comes to the police his purpose is to protect us. I don’t think we’re talking about the police issue.
Ron – I don’t think Daniel B’s argument holds water. The fact is that OCP is in the city of Harrisonburg and is very involved in the democratic process and one of the things society has decided is that the police can carry guns. We need to respect the powers that be and the system. OCP isn’t never going to call the police. It seems rude to tell them they can’t bring guns until we need them.
Mike – If it is happening in Charlottesville then it might happen in Hburg several years later. But it is against the rules for them to leave their guns anywhere.
Ron – someone pointed out that this might be a larger discussion than right now. Can we set this aside for now? I think we were headed toward “no guns at OCP and no brandishing weapons for non-law enforcement.” The community can return to the larger discussion at a later time.
Phil – I think the point that the above reflects our rule now is valid.
Kris – its one thing when they are on duty but what if they are off duty.
Ron – it can be a policy for how OCP deals with the police. If they refuse to come without weapons we can go to them, but when they are on duty and doing their job that might be different. It sounds like there is agreement among staff that that is the current policy. Is the rule that there is no guns and no brandishing weapons?
Daniel B – I would like to note in the minutes that it is not entirely resolved.
Claude – what are we trying to vote on?
Ron – I’m proposing that outside of law enforcement no guns at ocp and no brandishing weapons. Setting aside that there is a larger issue that needs to be discussed. Let the minutes reflect that we agree no drinking or illegal drugs on the property and no adult alone in a room with a child that isn’t there own. No guns and no brandishing weapons.
Phil – close in prayer
No comments:
Post a Comment