Guns and worship.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Should churches have gun carrying security?

  • Yes security should be present and armed.

    Votes: 9 64.3%
  • No,security should not be visible and armed.

    Votes: 3 21.4%
  • Other,I’ll explain.

    Votes: 2 14.3%

  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .

Oncefallen

Idiot in Chief
Staff member
Jan 15, 2011
4,819
322
83
#41
Virginia has no statewide law on loaded rifles in a vehicle. It's usually regulated with the hunting laws by localities.
California (where Zeroturbulence lives) prohibits loaded firearms in vehicles (other than handguns for those few with a CCW). You can't even have an unmarried handgun and loaded magazine in the passenger compartment unless one of the two is in a locked case.

Colorado (where I live) permits loaded rifles as long as they are visible
 

Lynx

Senior Member
Aug 13, 2014
12,628
323
83
#42
As times change, churches (if their leadership has any wisdom) must change their approach to things such as safety.

Thirty or forty years ago running backgrounds on persons working in children's ministry would have been unheard of whereas today not running backgrounds opens a church up to major liability if something were to happen.

The church that I attend albeit we don't have armed security there are always a couple of ushers walking the building during services and during services only the front entrance is unlocked to remove the possibility of someone sneaking in through a side entrance (both relatively new policies).
Sounds familiar. I have noticed the back entrance is no longer unlocked as a matter of course during service. The only two entrances are the ones that are easily seen from one single point in front of the sanctuary. This also is a recent development.

Did your expert advise us or did we advise you? =^.^=
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
4,997
362
83
#43
Why not just go with out-in-the-open, instead of concealed? (I've always thought concealing weapons rather defeats half the point of carrying a weapon.)
I can see the benefits in both types of carry... open carry, everyone knows there are armed people there. The disadvantage is that it could/would make you the first target in the event of a shooter.

Concealed? Bad guys are not sure if there are armed people there, or not. Do I risk it? In the event of a psycho intent on shooting everyone, that is sort of a moot point, but in a store, or restaurant, it could work as a deterrent.

Concealed also helps in the sense that people with a fear of any kind of weapon won't be upset.

There are people at my work that get wide-eyed when I open my pocket knife.... "what do you need that WEAPON for?".....

I usually reply, "it's not a weapon, it's a tool, and I need it for what you see me doing right now, cutting open this box"....
 
Last edited:

shittim

Senior Member
Dec 16, 2016
880
45
28
#44
For too long we have passed our responsibilities to others by throwing money and something and expecting others to take care of us, we ought be as responsible for the safety of ourselves and our church family as we are for walking out the faith we have.
"and then in that day, you will need a sword".
best wishes
 

Depleted

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
22,166
480
83
Philly, PA, USA
#45
A lot of states that have provision for licensed concealed carry prohibit open carry. Even here in Colorado which is an open carry state some municipalities (Denver) prohibit open carry.
A gun tells me two things about a person:
1. I carry a gun.
2. I'm not afraid to use it.

The first one tells me if I should or shouldn't mess with the person. (Granted, I'm opposed to going around shooting people, robbing them, or mugging them in the first place, but I figure even criminals have the same concept of not messing with that person.) The whole concept of concealing firearms baffles me. Don't we want to tell criminals "this is NOT a good place to operate?"

If the idiots go into a church (or a park, or on a street corner) and see 1-3 people in a group with a gun strapped on, aren't they more likely to walk away? And isn't that what we want in the first place? It says, "Sure, feel free to stay an idiot, but understand we have our limits and a way of enforcing them, so it's now time for you to decide how much of an idiot do you really want to be?"

I'm not the kind of person to carry any weapon, because I already have the experience to know, under no circumstance would I ever use one, (and don't think that makes me a pacifist. I will, and did, aim to put the person in the hospital for three months, I just can't go as far as shooting them
:eek:), but "concealed weapon" is an oxymoron. We want to know who is and who isn't carrying. And, I'm sure the idiots would be stupid enough to openly carry too, so, at least cops know what they're up against before it's too late.

Half the battle is knowing what we're up against. Walk into a church, (or park or street corner) with the intent to kill others, and notice three people are carrying, and poof! Suddenly idiot wakes up long enough to go for Plan B.

"Political legislators." Obviously another oxymoron, since politicians don't think, so shouldn't be making laws. We need people who aren't career politicians to make laws. That way every single law isn't based on "will this get me reelected?"
 

Depleted

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
22,166
480
83
Philly, PA, USA
#46
As times change, churches (if their leadership has any wisdom) must change their approach to things such as safety.

Thirty or forty years ago running backgrounds on persons working in children's ministry would have been unheard of whereas today not running backgrounds opens a church up to major liability if something were to happen.

The church that I attend albeit we don't have armed security there are always a couple of ushers walking the building during services and during services only the front entrance is unlocked to remove the possibility of someone sneaking in through a side entrance (both relatively new policies).
Seems to me common sense would work today, as it would have worked 40 years ago, or 1000 years ago. Get to know the people who want to watch the little ones during service before saying yes.

Of course, we have had our fair share of people who seemed like they were the perfect family only to find out the husband is abusing the others or the husband and wife are abusing the kids, but the information all came out to the light of the day within two years. True fellowship shows everyone's stripes in time. The quickest way to get to know people is to sup with them... more than once, and in different settings. Abusers don't like people coming to their house. (And, truthfully, neither do we, but everyone knows why.)

I think there is something to say for using common sense, instead of being forced into it by "political legislators'" sense.
 

Depleted

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
22,166
480
83
Philly, PA, USA
#47
As times change, churches (if their leadership has any wisdom) must change their approach to things such as safety.

Thirty or forty years ago running backgrounds on persons working in children's ministry would have been unheard of whereas today not running backgrounds opens a church up to major liability if something were to happen.

The church that I attend albeit we don't have armed security there are always a couple of ushers walking the building during services and during services only the front entrance is unlocked to remove the possibility of someone sneaking in through a side entrance (both relatively new policies).
Side issue: I remember news stories about groups of people being killed in a fire because "only one door was unlocked."
 

Depleted

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
22,166
480
83
Philly, PA, USA
#48
I can see the benefits in both types of carry... open carry, everyone knows there are armed people there. The disadvantage is that it could/would make you the first target in the event of a shooter.

Concealed? Bad guys are not sure if there are armed people there, or not. Do I risk it? In the event of a psycho intent on shooting everyone, that is sort of a moot point, but in a store, or restaurant, it could work as a deterrent.

Concealed also helps in the sense that people with a fear of any kind of weapon won't be upset.

There are people at my work that get wide-eyed when I open my pocket knife.... "what do you need that WEAPON for?".....

I usually reply, "it's not a weapon, it's a tool, and I need it for what you see me doing right now, cutting open this box"....
In college, I had two roommates engaged to each other, so, yeah, one male roommate. Male roommate (and good friend) was a cop so always had a gun on him or near him. It gave me the willies, often, but I dealt with it.

If everyone has to hide what they're doing because I get the willies, then tarantulas, pugs, vomit, and grinding your teeth would all have to be hidden from me. (No idea why pugs, in particular, give me the willies. lol) 150 years ago, no one thought twice about someone carrying. (Well, maybe they did, but only when they were considering doing something criminal.) We can get back to that.

As for putting a target on yourself? Well, yeah! That would definitely be something to consider when choosing to buy the gun. Wasn't it? The possibility of shooting yourself accidentally too, should be considered, too. (Had a boss hiding a hole in the ceiling above his desk because he decided to clean his loaded gun there. :rolleyes: Wasn't like anyone was fooled with the duct tape on the ceiling, especially since other gun owners could smell what happened. lol)

Personally, if I were a gun toter type, I'd consider it like Sharks and Minnows. Someone is going to be shot, but maybe not me. And, ultimately, I still think it is less likely the idiot will start shooting at all. A gun is for defense, not offense. And the one who wants to be offensive doesn't want to need to be defensive. Even crazy people usually have self-preservation in mind. They may want to end the spree with suicide, but they do want it to be their choice at the time.

In Texas, as well as Carolina, I would think the idiot would have walked away once he saw other guns in the same room. They were counting on the concept that Christians would never carry guns into church. To me, it's a good lesson in not stereotyping people.
 

LanaHH

Junior Member
Mar 15, 2017
3
0
0
#49
I am against guns. I think all world should forbid hunting and carrying weapons around.
 
Dec 9, 2011
9,987
238
63
60
#50
Sounds familiar. I have noticed the back entrance is no longer unlocked as a matter of course during service. The only two entrances are the ones that are easily seen from one single point in front of the sanctuary. This also is a recent development.
:confused:Maybe having the backdoors locked Is a fire code violation,IDK.
 

Depleted

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2015
22,166
480
83
Philly, PA, USA
#51
I am against guns. I think all world should forbid hunting and carrying weapons around.
I grew up on game. When I was married, still had a hankering for it. The problem was it cost two-hours wages for a pound of venison and one-hour wages for one single rabbit at market. Worse yet, they were tamed so didn't have the same flavor.

Just because you're against it doesn't mean no one should have guns.

I'm from the US. The whole purpose of having guns is because we know at any given time we can end up with a despot as leader. And we're not the kind of people to put up with that. It's the government we're worried about, and if they do push too far, we don't want to face them with pitchforks and shish kabobs. We are free and plan to remain so.
 

shittim

Senior Member
Dec 16, 2016
880
45
28
#52
Americans are citizens, people from other places who are "subjects" cannot comprehend the difference.
 

Oncefallen

Idiot in Chief
Staff member
Jan 15, 2011
4,819
322
83
#53
Side issue: I remember news stories about groups of people being killed in a fire because "only one door was unlocked."

Any commercial property (including churches) has to have what is known as panic hardware (more commonly known as crash bars) on all exits. It allows for a door to be secured (some don't even have a knob or handle on the outside for doors that are intended only for emergency exit) without it being impassable from the inside.



1200px-Panic_bar.jpg

Older buildings may not have this type of hardware if they were built prior to codes being revised.
 

Dude653

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2011
7,865
81
0
#54
The pastor of my church mentioned that he was considering having the deacons get carry permits
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
4,997
362
83
#55
The pastor of my church mentioned that he was considering having the deacons get carry permits

I don't think that "requiring" deacons to get their LTC is a good thing. It should be a personal choice, freely made, after much thought and prayer.

I have no problem with elders "encouraging" members who have their LTC to consider carrying at the assembly.
 

Lynx

Senior Member
Aug 13, 2014
12,628
323
83
#56
I'm not sure what is considered an official "deacon" at my church - we have three guys as a church board, but I don't know about deacons - but I hope I'm not a deacon. I can't shoot worth beans.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
4,997
362
83
#58
consider the 410 revolvers.
or, if you truly want to get better at it.... take some minimal instruction on trigger control/sight alignment, then practice.... a LOT.

It can be learned.