Church Security

[Steven2006]

The message sent to the unsaved would be that we as Christians value the lives of our children and will protect and nurture them as God instructed. We would also be good stewards by protecting the church facility in our care.

Let's face it. This isn't the dark ages where people can find sanctuary in a church or monestary. It's a tough reality that the world is getting worse. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there are soon lawsuits by people claiming the church didn't do enough to ensure their safety or the safety of their children.

I was responding directly to this statement:


"If God isn't going to protect His people, then we need to protect ourselves. "


And as quickly as that thought came up on a Christian board, I have to believe that it would come to the minds of the unsaved as well.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I'm personally against any kind of violence or retaliation on the part of Christians.

I can certainly understand the sentiment, but are we not also called to protect those who cannot protect themselves? Unless you are a total passivist (reject war, self-defensive, police forces, government order by force), I’m not sure how you can draw a hard and fast objection to all forms of response.

God has taught us not to be avengers.

I don’t think anyone has been talking about vengeance... just ending a situation before others get hurt. For what it’s worth, most of the time when a CHL holder pulls a weapon (a rare thing in itself), the incident ends without the weapon being used. It actually prevents violence because people don’t like to get shot. If you try to fight someone by hand, you will usually have more injury to innocents and well as the perpetrator.

What we have been talking about (spree killers and persons who are mentally ill) are usually going to take their life at the end of their rampage anyway. You may be able to save them by taking them down in a less lethal way (although shooting to kill) than a point blank shot to the side of the head or in the mouth through the brain like they usually do.

Christ healed the man whose ear had been cut off by one of his disciples.

And we certainly need to tend to the wounded (including the “bad guy”) when the situation becomes stable.

As soon as I heard this sad story I immediately shuddered at how many churches would soon allow some members to begin carrying firearms into their sactuaries and in the halls.

People have been doing it in many states for more than a decade and there hasn’t been an escalation of violence by armed church members.

While we can, and should, encourage appropriate security measures by vigilant people we should never condone the carrying of weapons as a defensive measure.

Sorry, have to disagree here. Should we discourage people from using their bodies as weapons to forcibly take down people who are harming innocents? In my seminary days, I worked for a department store and I took down dozens of shoplifters and thieves unarmed. We didn’t try to hurt anyone, although they often tried to hurt us. In incidents I was involved in, one of our security officers had his hand broken very badly and a “bad guy” I was chasing got cut to ribbons when he ran through a glass door trying to escape.

Everyone who takes a CHL course (at least in Texas) has extensive training on the proper and legal use of force, and it’s only used as a last resort. But when someone comes into a room and starts shooting people, it’s pretty clear that you need to resolve the situation quickly.

Just my opinion. Again I say it having served in two churches where the senior pastor was guarded by at least two armed guards because of his noteriety and (in one case) over realized sense of self.

Well, I know you went to seminary in Fort Worth, and I know a number of people who were under fire in the Wedgwood Baptist Church massacre. I’ve also dealt with a situation in our congregation with an emotionally-disturbed person who has been violent and threatened future violence towards members of our congregation, so I don’t take refuge in the fantasy that it can’t happen at my church.

How many accidental shootings will it take to shift public opinion the other way?

Can you give me an example of an accidental shooting? I’m not saying you’re wrong, I just haven’t heard of any.
Back in the mid-1990s when Texas was considering conceal-carry of handguns, I was against it. I believe (and the media reinforced the idea) that it would increase violence since more people might be tempted to act violently out of anger. Texas passed the law, and nothing of the sort happened. In fact, crime went down. Furthermore, conceal carry holders have stopped many acts of violence before they became much worse. I realized I was wrong and reconsidered the real evidence. And for various reasons, I have personally become trained and licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

It seems to me the greatest testimony of a church community is what happened with the Amish shootings several years ago, and how this church is acting in light of the more recent tragedy.

The Amish did well, but there is more than one manifestation of the way a church can honor and express the Kingdom of God.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I was responding directly to this statement:


"If God isn't going to protect His people, then we need to protect ourselves. "


And as quickly as that thought came up on a Christian board, I have to believe that it would come to the minds of the unsaved as well.

God certainly protects His people, but we should not presume upon His grace.

Should we get rid of medicine, first aid kits, fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, seat belts, weather radios, storm cellars, lists of sex offenders, background checks for those who work with children at the church, etc., because we believe God will protect His people?

God has certainly protected me from my own stupidity more times than I know, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't take responsibility for the safety of myself and others.

God calls us to protect our children. Shouldn't we, as churches, be concerned about protecting our children from harm? What about our spouses? What about our senior adults? What about our pastoral staff? What about the lost attending our worship?

Remember, Jesus is not only a lamb, but He is a lion. Jesus is a mighty warrior as well as a comforting friend.

 

[Steven2006]

God certainly protects His people, but we should not presume upon His grace.

Should we get rid of medicine, first aid kits, fire extinguishers, smoke detectors, seat belts, weather radios, storm cellars, lists of sex offenders, background checks for those who work with children at the church, etc., because we believe God will protect His people?

God has certainly protected me from my own stupidity more times than I know, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't take responsibility for the safety of myself and others.

God calls us to protect our children. Shouldn't we, as churches, be concerned about protecting our children from harm? What about our spouses? What about our senior adults? What about our pastoral staff? What about the lost attending our worship?

Remember, Jesus is not only a lamb, but He is a lion. Jesus is a mighty warrior as well as a comforting friend.

I think you missed the point. I was responding directly to the comment that said God wasn't going to protect His people, and the message that sends.

 

[Marcia]

We have men who carry, but security involves more than just an armed response to a shooter. There must be someone trained to watch for people coming in late to a service and walking down front as was the case. It starts at the front door and the best security is what people don't see in terms of watchful men and women.

The problem with an armed response is that too often innocents get it because at a church service there will be men trying to stop the assailant while someone else is trying to shot him.

Unless the men who are firing are trained marksmen who have been trained in firing a weapon in stress related circumstances there is a very poor chance that they will really hit what they are aimed at. Police forces have a variety of means that train their people in firing under stress. Just because someone has a carry permit doesn't mean that they can fire a weapon when innocents are around.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of having people at church carry guns. As you point out, more innocent people might get shot this way. In VA, I don't think you can carry a concealed weapon unless you are a police officer or something. But even if trained people are in the congregation, I would still not feel any safer than I do now.

 

[Marcia]

I do not think there have been enough church shootings to justify having armed men in the church. We cannot always protect ourselves from everything.

If shootings were more common in churches, I can see some people wanting to having weapons at church. But how many church shootings have been in comparison to how many churches there are in the U.S.? It is probably not even a fraction of a percentage point.

 

[Tom Butler]

I'm personally against any kind of violence or retaliation on the part of Christians. God has taught us not to be avengers. Christ healed the man whose ear had been cut off by one of his disciples.

As soon as I heard this sad story I immediately shuddered at how many churches would soon allow some members to begin carrying firearms into their sanctuaries and in the halls. I was sad. While we can, and should, encourage appropriate security measures by vigilant people we should never condone the carrying of weapons as a defensive measure.

What kind of security measures would you suggest?

 

[JustChristian]

What kind of security measures would you suggest?

What kind of retaliation did Christians take when the disciples were martyred?

 

[abcgrad94]

What kind of retaliation did Christians take when the disciples were martyred?

Apples to oranges. Back then, the government condoned killing Christians. Today, murder is illegal, except for the unborn.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of having people at church carry guns. As you point out, more innocent people might get shot this way.

Have you noticed that most spree massacres occur in so-called "gun free" zones like schools? That's because the killer doesn't expect others to be able to forcefully defend themselves.

"More" innocent people will get shot if a spree shooter cannot be adequetely challenged with equal force. And again I ask the question, can someone give a single example where a person with an otherwise concealed handgun shot innocent people instead of the attacker? Furthermore, even if we can come up with an example, how is being unarmed going to help resist the force of the attacker?

 

[Steven2006]

Apples to oranges. Back then, the government condoned killing Christians. Today, murder is illegal, except for the unborn.

So what you are saying is we should follow what is common excepted practice or the governments lead? So in your opinion Christians in persecuted countries should not defend themselves but we here in America should? I don't follow that logic.

 

[Tom Bryant]

I was checking over the Secret Service's response to threats and attempts against the life of the President and other public figures. Their repsonse is to gang rush the assailant. Their idea is that there are too many non-combatants who will get hurt if they begin firing in the midst of the confusion of shots being fired.

Now maybe people who have gotten their carry permit are more trained than those who protect the President, but I doubt they are. Police officers are trained not to return fire if it will put innocent lives at risk.

 

[Baptist Believer]

What kind of retaliation did Christians take when the disciples were martyred?

Martyerdom is certainly a valid option. If you are a complete passivist, that is the only option. If you believe that there are valid situations to use force and resist those who attack you, then you're back in the discussion about the appropriate method of resistance.

For what it's worth, if you hold to the view that we should just be martyrs, be sure and inform your congregation that no one is to contact the police in the event a killer comes into the midst of the congregation and attacks. Because the police will come quickly and use, up to and including, lethal force against those who are murdering you (at your request), and that completely undermines the virtue of martyrdom.

Paul did not seen to have any problems with his conscience when he used the rights accorded him as a Roman citizen to defend himself, and Jesus himself checked to make sure his disciples carried a couple of swords. Not only that, but John the Baptist (a martyr) did not tell Roman soldiers who responded to his preaching to leave their profession. He told them to not abuse their position and sent them on their way to exercise force in the name of the Roman emperor.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I was checking over the Secret Service's response to threats and attempts against the life of the President and other public figures. Their repsonse is to gang rush the assailant.

Absolutely. That makes sense if you are working in a tight space. Frankly, that's what a lot of us would do in most situations.

It seems that some around here assume that people with concealed weapons are trigger-happy or that they think their pistol is the first and only response to a threat!

Their idea is that there are too many non-combatants who will get hurt if they begin firing in the midst of the confusion of shots being fired.

Yep. But there may be situations where that is not true.

Now maybe people who have gotten their carry permit are more trained than those who protect the President, but I doubt they are.

You're talking tactics... assuming that people with conceal-carry permits haven't given it a bit of thought. Please give us a bit of credit for simple intelligence and an element of training.

And FWIW, the security service that trained me was led by a former Secret Service agent and used many of the training methods. It has been the only private security firm to work jointly with the U.S. Secret Service when President Clinton came to Fort Worth to speak a number of years ago.

Police officers are trained not to return fire if it will put innocent lives at risk.

No kidding. So are conceal-carry holders.

 

[abcgrad94]

So what you are saying is we should follow what is common excepted practice or the governments lead? So in your opinion Christians in persecuted countries should not defend themselves but we here in America should? I don't follow that logic.

I can't speak for persecuted Christians elsewhere. I'm not in their shoes and don't wish to be. My point is, in the US, we have the legal right to defend ourselves against unprovoked attacks. Baptist Believer explained it better than I can in his last post.

 

[Marcia]

Have you noticed that most spree massacres occur in so-called "gun free" zones like schools? That's because the killer doesn't expect others to be able to forcefully defend themselves.

"More" innocent people will get shot if a spree shooter cannot be adequetely challenged with equal force. And again I ask the question, can someone give a single example where a person with an otherwise concealed handgun shot innocent people instead of the attacker? Furthermore, even if we can come up with an example, how is being unarmed going to help resist the force of the attacker?

Can you give me the percentage of churches of all churches in the U.S. where shootings have occurred? Like I said, I doubt it's even measurable.

 

[preachinjesus]

I'm in the midst of traveling (again) and can only pause to make a quick statement. (I'll return later.)

Did anyone else notice the side point in most stories? The gunman only got off 3 or 4 shots but had ammunition to potentially kill 30 people. His gun jammed.

Seems God does protect His people in some ways was my immediate thought.

What do you all think?

I also reflect to the shooting at the New Life Church in Colorado about a year ago where (I believe) that shooter's gun also jammed before he could do more harm. That said I do realize the implication about an armed security force that goes with it. But isn't the point an interesting one?

 

[RevGKG]

I'm personally against any kind of violence or retaliation on the part of Christians. God has taught us not to be avengers. Christ healed the man whose ear had been cut off by one of his disciples.

As soon as I heard this sad story I immediately shuddered at how many churches would soon allow some members to begin carrying firearms into their sactuaries and in the halls. I was sad. While we can, and should, encourage appropriate security measures by vigilant people we should never condone the carrying of weapons as a defensive measure.

So as a Christian we should never call the police when we are the victim of a crime, especially a violent crime? Or in the name of being non-avengers we allow the criminal to go about his way.

 

[Tom Butler]

Baptist Press carried an article on this subject today, by David Roach, writer for Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=30078

The article quotes two security officers with some tips I hadn't thought of before. There's obviously more to this than just strapping a .38 police special on your belt.

A couple of points:
There needs to be a plan in place.
Security officers should sit in specific places.
What should the pastor do if someone comes down the aisle in the middle of the service?
Local Police and Sheriff's Departments sometimes will be delighted to provide help with emergency planning.
Think about installing security cameras with recording capabilities.

David Roach's article also recommends two books on the subject: "Keeping Your Church Safe" by Ron Agular, and "An Introduction to Security and Emergency Planning for Faith-Based Organizations" by Jeffrey Hawkins.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Can you give me the percentage of churches of all churches in the U.S. where shootings have occurred? Like I said, I doubt it's even measurable.

Not counting last week's shooting in Illinois here's a quick list I compiled in about five minutes (by no means complete) of church shootings over the past ten years:

• July 27, 2008: motivated by a desire to kill liberals and Democrats, gunman Jim David Adkisson fired a shotgun at members of the congregation during a youth performance of a musical, killing two people and wounding seven others.
• December 9, 2007: Six persons were shot, two churchgoers dead at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
• August 12, 2007: A lone gunman, Eiken Elam Saimon, opened fire in a Missouri Micronesian church, killing a pastor and two other churchgoers.
• May 20, 2007: A standoff between police and a suspect in the shootings of three people in a Moscow, Idaho, Presbyterian Church ended with three dead, including one police officer.
• Although not at a church building, the Oct. 2, 2006, attack in Lancaster County, Pa., by a gunman who killed five girls and then himself at an Amish school targeted a religious site.
• May 21, 2006: Louisiana. Four were killed by a man at Jesus Christ Church.
• Feb. 26, 2006: Michigan. Two people were killed at Zion Hope Missionary Baptist Church by a man who reportedly went to the church looking for his girlfriend. He later killed himself.
• April 9, 2005: A 27-year-old airman died after being shot at a church in College Park, Ga., where he had once worked as a security guard.
• March 12, 2005: A man walked into the services of the Living Church of God in Milwaukee and open fired immediately, killing seven people.
• Oct. 5, 2003: A woman opened fire in Turner Monumental AME church in Kirkwood, east of Atlanta, killing the pastor and two others.
• Sept. 15, 1999: Seven young people were killed when a man opened fire during a prayer service for teen-agers at the Wedgwood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas.

There are also a number of shootings that don't make national news.