Originally Posted by HotGuns

No where has collateral damage been an issue. Could it be someday? Sure it could.

What does not work for me is being in a gun fight without a gun. If some jerk came into my church shooting, someone is going to die. I prefer it be him, and who does it is no concern of mine.




Sounds good in theory.




I don't care as long as they have the gonads to stand up and attempt to end a threat.



FWIW...I do carry in church. I am an LEO. We do have a church security team comprised entirely of off duty LEO's, in fact I went to church last week in uniform and armed. Here In Arkansas only LEO's can carry in church. The law to amend that recently came up in the legislation, was very close to passing and the winning vote got up an left right in the middle of session. Personally, I think he should have been censored, fired and kicked out of the Assembly for refusing to do the job he was elected for, I suppose he learned that trick from Senator Obama.

I am not opposed to any CHL holder carrying in church. For one, people that know that would be less likely to get stupid and walk in and shoot the place up.

Two, if you have a limited amount of off duty LEO's in place, in a big church there are a lot of gaps that cant be covered. I go to a big church and I know this.

Three, the ideal of any concealed weapon holder worshiping with me is fine by me. In a battle I want as many friendly guns on my side as I can muster up.

As in any gunfight there is always the possibility of collateral damage. Having no guns in a gunfight ensure that the shooter will do well until he either kills himself or escapes.

If you are worried about being killed in church by" friendly fire", then either don't go there or find somewhere else to go.

The world is getting crazier by the day. Expecting people to be disarmed in church because they may not meet your standards is a bit naive.