New security measures for church events


Fether
 Share

Recommended Posts

I for one am disappointed in the decision not to allow fire arms, I am one that feels comfortable knowing that I’m in a room where 10% of the people have guns.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, a mass of people in the conference center with guns would could easily turn into a disaster. 

Edited by Fether
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fether said:

I for one am disappointed in the decision not to allow fire arms, I am one that feels comfortable knowing that I’m in a room where 10% of the people have guns.

Guns have no place in a religious building. But, just so you feel safer, know that Security officers are armed. If a bad guy started shooting and then other patrons started shooting how would the security and police know who a bad guy is? Also, turning the building into a shooting gallery is hardly a good idea. Leave your guns at home or don't come, those are your choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Guns have no place in a religious building. But, just so you feel safer, know that Security officers are armed

As is always the arguement

But I do agree with you for the most part. If 10% of the conference center all pulled out guns, it would turn into a disaster.

Edited by Fether
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the Saratoga Springs shooting, a counselor in my bishopric really wanted to discuss whether it made sense to discourage concealed carry in our buliding. I had to dig up all sorts of FBI resources, religious security guidelines, and other materials to demonstrate that the vast majority of violence that happens in houses of worship is related to civil disputes. The attacker almost always knows and is targeting the victim. 

The likelihood of a mass shooting event is in the realm of one in a billion on any given week. Less if you exclude politically motivated shootings. But the probability of a shooting related to a civil dispute is a couple orders of magnitude higher. Statistically speaking, a policy permitting concealed carry within houses of worship could have an expected value for injuries and deaths greater than the expected value resulting from the improbable mass shooting.

While I understand the worry of being unarmed that you speak of, all signs indicate that a pervasively armed untrained* populace is far more dangerous the its citizenry than an unarmed one.

 

* I do not count basic concealed carry as training here, as it does not really teach decision making under pressure in any way similar to what police and military experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Guns have no place in a religious building.

I disagree with this.  I know what the Church Statement says.  I still disagree with it.

19 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

But, just so you feel safer, know that Security officers are armed. If a bad guy started shooting and then other patrons started shooting how would the security and police know who a bad guy is? Also, turning the building into a shooting gallery is hardly a good idea. Leave your guns at home or don't come, those are your choices.

I find the bolded part to be a decent argument.  But in a weekly ward meeting, we know each other.  We know who the new people are.  We know who the bad guys are.

If I were the bishop, I'd ask for anyone who is carrying concealed in church to come let me know.  Then I'd ask for a meeting with all those who are carrying to discuss training and security measures.  If there is a LEO or (combat trained) former military, I'd ask him to head up the group to be the informal security for the ward.  If there were none, I'd ask if anyone has had combat training from a reputable training facility.  If not, then I'd pay out of my own pocket to consult a professional security person and discuss what might be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

After the Saratoga Springs shooting, a counselor in my bishopric really wanted to discuss whether it made sense to discourage concealed carry in our buliding. I had to dig up all sorts of FBI resources, religious security guidelines, and other materials to demonstrate that the vast majority of violence that happens in houses of worship is related to civil disputes. The attacker almost always knows and is targeting the victim. 

The likelihood of a mass shooting event is in the realm of one in a billion on any given week. Less if you exclude politically motivated shootings. But the probability of a shooting related to a civil dispute is a couple orders of magnitude higher. Statistically speaking, a policy permitting concealed carry within houses of worship could have an expected value for injuries and deaths greater than the expected value resulting from the improbable mass shooting.

While I understand the worry of being unarmed that you speak of, all signs indicate that a pervasively armed untrained* populace is far more dangerous the its citizenry than an unarmed one.

 

* I do not count basic concealed carry as training here, as it does not really teach decision making under pressure in any way similar to what police and military experience.

My only fear is to be in a situation where only the criminals have the guns. In the conference center this isn’t a huge issue as there are security guards, but I would much rather have 3 untrained trained armed citizens in a room with an assailant than only an assailant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

While I understand the worry of being unarmed that you speak of, all signs indicate that a pervasively armed untrained* populace is far more dangerous the its citizenry than an unarmed one.

* I do not count basic concealed carry as training here, as it does not really teach decision making under pressure in any way similar to what police and military experience.

I can see this as being a valid concern.  I don't know what the statistics are (you're the statistician, can you find any) but I wouldn't be surprised if it were completely true.  My question about this is: What would you consider proper training if you've never had LEO or military experience?  If nothing (readily available tot he public and is affordable) is adequate training, then you're actually advocating for removing the 2nd amendment.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

I can see this as being a valid concern.  I don't know what the statistics are, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were completely true.  My question about this is: What would you consider proper training if you've never had LEO or military experience?  If nothing (readily available tot he public and is affordable) is adequate training, then you're actually advocating for removing the 2nd amendment.

Yeah, it's a really tricky spot. I don't have a good solution for you. 

All I can say is I'd like to have better data, better research, and better evaluation of risk. (Humans are terrible at evaluating risk, as it turns out. Fether's reaction to this news is a good illustration of that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

They aren't allowed in any of the meeting houses either:

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/selected-church-policies/21.2?lang=eng&_r=1#21.2.4

There is an exception when required for law enforcement officers. 

Wording is everything.

Quote

 21.2.4  Firearms

Churches are dedicated for the worship of God and as havens from the cares and concerns of the world. The carrying of lethal weapons, concealed or otherwise, within their walls is inappropriate except as required by officers of the law.

Multiple people from different wards in three states I know of have all told me that someone spoke with their bishop about concealed carry in their wards.  The bishop was fine with them.

HOWEVER, I believe that the Church has taken measures to satisfy the requirements of the State of Utah to prohibit carry within the walls of the churches.  That same action is not sufficient in other states. Texas, for example, requires a bit more to prohibit carry at church.  And the Church has made no efforts to tell the leadership in the many states to "perform whatever measures are required" to legally prohibit the same in their buildings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I'm currently attending my (second) citizens police academy thrown by our local cops.  Here is what the cops have had to say.  These are anecdotes from one or two experienced folks, not to be taken as universally true in all situations.

- Homicide Sgt with 20 years experience - We do around 20-40 homicides every year.  He can't remember a single time a homicide was caused by a CCP holder (that wasn't justified self defense). 
- Chief of police - Some folks feel safer knowing that 10% of Colorado Springs residents have permits, some feel less safe.  He believes it is possible an armed resident may someday save one of his people's lives.  He worries about untrained unprepared people making things worse.
- PIO - the force is required to have 2 hours of range time every 3 months.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

So, I'm currently attending my (second) citizens police academy thrown by our local cops.  Here is what the cops have had to say.  These are anecdotes from one or two experienced folks, not to be taken as universally true in all situations.

- Homicide Sgt with 20 years experience - We do around 20-40 homicides every year.  He can't remember a single time a homicide was caused by a CCP holder (that wasn't justified self defense). 
- Chief of police - Some folks feel safer knowing that 10% of Colorado Springs residents have permits, some feel less safe.  He believes it is possible an armed resident may someday save one of his people's lives.  He worries about untrained unprepared people making things worse.
- PIO - the force is required to have 2 hours of range time every 3 months.  

I'm going to ask my local P.D. to see if they would be willing to sponsor a citizen's police academy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laws vary by state to state, sometimes county to county or even city by city.  Here in Colorado, it's a private property rights thing.  If I've got a permit and you've got a church or a business or something, you can "ban guns" on your premises.  Here's what that looks like:

- If you see someone has a gun, you ask the guy to leave. 
- If dood won't leave, you call the cops and they ask the guy to leave. 
- If dood still won't leave, they arrest him for trespassing. 

When thinking about laws being broken, these tend to be laws:
- Having a gun when prohibited by law (as in released felons)
- Behaving menacingly, threatening deadly force, etc
- Resisting arrest

I don't think there's any sort of crime like "having a gun somewhere you shouldn't".    It's just that the property owner gets to kick out who they want kicked out.

(Standard disclaimer about how I'm not a lawyer, just some random guy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm going to ask my local P.D. to see if they would be willing to sponsor a citizen's police academy.

They are incredibly informative, and often fun and engaging.  Some parts can be quite weighty and emotional experiences (like the crimes against children presentation, and sex crimes presentation)

If they offer a chance to get tazed, let me know - I'll come up and volunteer you!

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

They are incredibly informative, and often fun and engaging.  Some parts can be quite weighty and emotional experiences (like the crimes against children presentation, and sex crimes presentation)

If they offer a chance to get tazed, let me know - I'll come up and volunteer you!

No thank you.  I've already experienced that.  It's not pleasant, let me tell you.  It's TAZING.  In fact, tazing is taxing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

That was YOU? You bring a taser, I'll give you the  Chicago treatment.

Chicago treatment? If I were you, I'd be more worried about the Florida treatment. @zil hasn't fed the alligators in the moat for several months. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share