United93

JerryM, once again you feel the need to show your opposition to the RKBA. It is getting a little old. Your present position is such an absurd one that I am led to the conclusion that you are simply posting such things to aggravate the ones among us who are pro-CCW. I think that is kind of a waste of time.

The problems with your idea are many. As Blackeagle wrote, there are many places besides churches that are crowded or that could become crowded. To ban CC where there are innocents who might be accidentally shot is to ban CC altogether. As for training, who sets the standards? You? I hope not.

Legally armed civilians must be trusted to use common sense when faced with a threat. Could they get a permit and go around shooting at anyone and everyone? Sure. But they don't. If they are in a crowded environment where the risk of injury to innocents is high, then they must be trusted to use their heads and find a better angle to shoot from, or refrain from shooting altogether. But that is their decision to make. If you did not trust permit holders to use their heads in SD situations, you would be against all CC.

Taking guns away from the people in a church just makes it another laughable "gun free zone". It helps the BGs, and endangers the GGs.

tbrenke

4 of you? Your welcome in my church....

__________________
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.

PastorPack

Would I want to carry in a crowded place where my wife and kids are? You bet. We have about four that carry on any given Sunday.
The bottom line is that shooters LIKE soft targets. That's why these shootings happen at churches, schools and malls. All crowded places...in other words, more defenseless targets.
So the real question is, Do you want to sit there as an unarmed sheep in the unlikely event that an active shooter enters your church?
If you follow these stories, the only tactic that actually limits body count in these situations is when an armed citizen chooses to take the fight to the shooter.

__________________
God is love (1 John 4:8)

Stormtruck2

Grown men overpowering a BG worked well in the Lubby's in Texas. Multiple dead. All while a law abiding CCW permitted woman had a weapon in her pick-up outside the restaurant in accordance with then applicable law. In a firing intruder situation, most people hit the ground and take cover. Rare is the man who unarmed, will leave his family and charge an intruder, without feeling that he is abandoning his family. Law enforcement in the church is nice, multiple CCW's with weapons when needed is nicer. One can engage the intruder at a reasonable range, while remaining with the family in a cover position which is much better than than having only 1 weapon in the room. The manic intruder. I love life, I love my family more. BTW, when we go to church, there are at least 10 weapons present. Myself, my wife, 4 sons, and 4 daughters. Unknown if their spouses carry. Buuuutttt don't be surprised if they do!

__________________
When the chips are down, only hits count

Train as you fight, fight as you train.
Sig 220-45,Sig 225-9mm,Sig 226-.40,Bernelli M1,Bernelli Nova, SW 4340-.40
Glock 19,Llama Mini .45,U-238 WMD, (so the anti's say),and others

ccw9mm

I suppose that since there's a minuscule chance of any bad things happening at a church, that anyone carrying is living their lives by the gun, controlled by the gun.

Sure, in the sense of "unlimited" meaning the acknowledgment of everyone's right to self-defense.

Short answer: if you want to limit the ability of people to defend themselves in threatening situations, then you'll get what you get.

It's very simple. Nobody, not an LEO 5mi away or twenty rows of pews away, is going to be so vigorous or immediate in defense of me and mine than I. That can be said of most upstanding folks, at the instant something is blowing sideways. Give me a venue full of upstanding people able to act on their own behalf every time. Anything less is restricting the ability of some to defend themselves. Pick which ones those will be, since that's what will be achieved. Do it with your eyes wide open, instead of standing behind a silly rule. Pick the few without "chairs" when the "music stops."

Churches are no different than any other venue in any sense, but most specifically in that there are many innocents nearby.

In the sense that those others are members of the extended family, I believe that everyone's built-in morality meter will automatically adjust to accommodate the realities of a defensive situation with a high risk of harming nearby innocents. With the vast majority of people taking carrying seriously, this should be sufficient.

In a congregation of 500 in which every upstanding adult were armed, one or two murderous thugs wouldn't have long in this world if they dared negotiate with the lives of people there. Even in one where ten percent are, you'd have a reasonably solid chance of stopping a crime in progress against the people.

I am comfortable that the means would be self-adjusting, in this sense, that people's outraged sense of morality would be tempered by a reasonable protective concern for those around them ... resulting in simultaneous elimination of the threat and minimization of collateral damage.

There might well be such damage, sure. But, as was alluded to earlier, LEO's aren't necessarily going to be any more effective at defending a specific person than that specific person in defense of himself/herself.

Reality is, the "hurdles" we go through in order to be armed citizens helps to self-select exactly the sort of person that will tend to balance the twin goals of threat elimination and minimizing of collateral damage. In short, I think we could use more of them, up to and including the entire group of upstanding people present.

I see this all as concern over a non-issue, that it's self-adjusting and self-selecting for the type of person we want engaging in defense of themselves and others. Why? 'Cause nobody will have as much incentive to defend as people themselves. Current/former LEO's aren't the only ones capable of self-defense in tough situations, and restricting all others doesn't help those others nearly as much when the chips are down.

Said much more succinctly:
Yup.

Attached Images

Sept11_c540.jpg (95.6 KB, 49 views)

__________________
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Deal with evil through strength. Affirm the good in Man through trust.
NRA. GOA. OFF.

archer51

If your referring to Suzanna Gratia Hupp, she was not a CCW permitted person. At the time of the Luby massacre CC was not legal in TX. Her testimony was in part responsible for TX adopting CC.

kpw

I'm missing something here. What is the distinction between a church and any other crowded place? Why is it that some that teach, carry a badge or post a lot on a gun forum believe that they are somehow tactically superior to the man that might be carrying next to them. You might be, then again, ya might not. Point is, these days churches seem to be a target of nutcases. Should we impose limits there where we don't everywhere else because women and children are there? Doesn't make much sense to me. What about Chucky Cheese?

__________________
"In a republic this rule ought to be observed: that the majority should not have the predominant power." -
-- Marcus Tullius Cicero

ccw9mm

If anything, one would think that folks would worship the gift of life more vigorously in a house of God ... not less so. Particularly since families, women and children abound in such houses, and they are our future. Worth defending, that.

__________________
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Deal with evil through strength. Affirm the good in Man through trust.
NRA. GOA. OFF.

dairycreek

Do you want the BG to come into your church and take life without anybody being able to defend? Yes there are dangers such as the OP describes but to be unable to respond seems to be the greatest danger of all.

__________________
GOOD SHOOTING
ALWAYS PROTECT YOUR VISION AND HEARING
De gustibus non est disputandem

youngda9

Do we think the good guy can do more damage than the bad guy? The premise of the question is FUBAR.

__________________
Speak softly, and carry a big stick.