SleepingZ

Short, sweet, and spot-on.

Z

__________________
9 out of 10 engineers agree that 1 out of 10 engineers are idiots.

Andy W.

I don't know any LEOs that shoot 300 rounds per week, I guess they shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun.

__________________
The Bill of Rights: Void where prohibited by law.

preachertim

I agree

__________________
Why Would A Preacher ever need a Gun? Its Not for the Sheep , its for the Wolves!

Springfield Armory Service XD 40
Taurus PT 1911 45 acp
Ruger 22/45 Ruger P95 9mm, Ruger SR9
Kahr CW 40, Heritage 22, Rossi 38 special

billpocz

My $0.02...

My church has about 150 folks on any given Sunday. There is an off duty LEO (a constable) who attends and carries using an ankle holster. We have had frequent, long discussions about the potential of a church shooting in our present environment.

The nearest LEO coverage is at least 30 minutes away - which would be Kentucky State Police (that is what happens when you really live in the middle of nowhere), and he was actually glad to have some CCW 'back-up'!!

__________________
*
**
--- Proud SIG P6 Owner
**
*

eldorado

"MinistrMalic ,CCW holders are the most law-abiding citizens around and have consciously decided against being victims. They are the very people I want armed."


A mouthful,thank you!

JerryM

I have been with some LEOs during qualification, and have a best friend who has conducted training and qualifications.
The average LEO is not a good shot. Many are not gun lovers, as we are, and practice very little except just before time to qualify.

The fact that one is an LEO has little bearing on his skill with his handgun. I suspect the average person on this board is better than the average LEO.

Those on SWAT are the exceptions and they are in general excellent shots, as we would hope.

FWIW I do not consider I am a particularly good shot, but used to shoot 1,000/mo. Recently as a result of ilness I have not had the energy, and my practice is down to about 400 rds/mo with my CCW guns, and 400-500 .22 from my conversion unit.

I tend to agree that it takes 300 rounds per month to maintain a high skill level. However, dry fire practice can help offset that. Today that amount of practice gets expensive.

But I can tell you from actual experience discussing the amount of shooting with friends and those who have obtained CHL that most don't shoot 25 rounds/month, and many not that many in 6 months. They can probably pass the no time limit 25 rds at 3 and 7 yards at a 12x18 target, but I sure would not consider them skilled enough to shoot inside a church.

Regards,
Jerry

mi2az

Or you can think of it this way, if the BG decides to make you the next victim, You have the ability to shoot the guy and not have to sit there while he/she takes aim at your family's heads.

I will take my chances if someone would get hurt. It could be a mass killing with any terrorist group and will need to stop them.

__________________
"When the people fear the government you have tyranny...when the government fears the people you have liberty."

--Thomas Jefferson --

archer51

It's nice if you have the time and resources for that. Not everyone is lucky enough to. Ammo is still in short supply and expensive, and time is always at a premium, especially if you have a younger family. Just conservatively figuring, 300 rounds of .40 cal will cost you $120.00 then add in another $50.00 for gas for the 2 or 3 trips to the range. A lot of families don't have that money to practice monthly.

Your suggesting that since they don't they should go without protection? Maybe we should apply that to other things as well. Unless you can go to the driving range and hit 5 buckets of balls and spend 10 hours on the putting green every month in practice, you shouldn't be allowed to play golf. If you can't practice casting 2 hours a day, every day you shouldn't be allowed to fish. Unless you can shoot your bow, or rifle for at least 3 hours a week, every week you shouldn't be allowed to hunt.

If you have the time and resources then yes, by all means practice as much as you can. But don't try and say if you don't have the resources you shouldn't carry.

JerryM

Hi MinistrMalic ,

I appreciate the comments. I don’t see anything with which I disagree.

My own church (mine because I am a member and am also head usher) runs slightly over 100 at the main service, and probably 60-70 at night and Wed.

We have only two that carry; a friend who is a good shot, and myself. Most of the time one of us is outside the main entrance to the auditorium, and the other immediately inside. Our intent is to stop the threat before it develops. That is not always possible as someone could get inside and at some point in time attack someone. However, no one with an AK 47 is going to get inside the first set of doors. AK 47s and ski masks are not allowed in the church, or even in the parking lot.

We do have an LEO who is an excellent shot and is a member of a SWAT team but does not carry. Another is an employee of a security company that guards prisoners, and does not carry. I would conclude that they do not see a threat in our area.

Except in the mega churches, which can afford to hire security, I think that if a church is targeted it is probably a result of a jilted lover, or someone who hated the pastor. I do realize that there have been instances of attacks that do not fit that mold.

We had an instance of a teen who came inside with a cap and a sweat shirt hood pulled over his head. The pastor immediately confronted him, and asked that he remove the head coverings. The teen objected and was told to do it or leave. He elected to leave. I suggested to the pastor that I station myself at a point where I could watch the parking lot in case he returned with a friend to get even. I did that for several weeks, but nothing happened.

But if you looked at the main service in a mega church there is no one good enough to shoot farther than his immediate presence.
Yes, it is dangerous to go on the offensive unarmed to protect, but who are we if we cower? I do not believe that we would cower with men and women around the shooter in my church.

But if we ever got larger, and had people with CHL who wanted to carry it would be my recommendation that we examine the individual, assess his maturity and skill,and provide some orientation before we would allow him to carry.

I do appreciate your input. Thanks.

Regards,
Jerry

azshooter270

Sounds to me like you're struggling with all the same issues that are true in any BG scenario. It is not unique to a church situation. Yes, the GG can miss. Yes, innocent people can be hurt or killed. Yes, overpenetration can happen.
The fact is that these risks are understood as the consequences of defending yourself and others. And yes it is everyone's obligation who carries and puts themselves in the position of providing protection to practice, train, equip, and mentally prepare for these situations. If you are unwilling to do that, then you shouldn't carry. Leave the job to someone else.

Bottom line is that you can't make a safe or low risk situation out of something that is almost the definition of chaos.
You can make the decision that to protect is better than to concede.
YMMV