Featured Conceal Carry in Church?

And how are you going to feel about the church members you kill or maim in attempting to shoot the gunman?

You are a "In my weapons I trust" man, all the way.

 

And as you so kindly pointed out anyone with an IQ larger than their hat size will realize that you are not going to be trying to shoot as a stationary target with stationary non-targets around him/her. There will be pandemonium with people moving all around. The likelihood of hitting an innocent person would be very high.

The list you give is a good one. But to follow those rules will require time and in this situation you do not have time. Additionally by the time you are ready to shoot it is highly probable that men in the church will be struggling to subdue the man. You will not be shooting on a firing range in this situation. It will be dynamic, not stationary.

A pastor or another person with a pistol is very likely to hit an innocent person.

Could you live with that?

By the way I grew up with rifles and shotguns and hunted often when I was young, so I do know something of what I am talking about.


[/QUOTE]

 

That is an impressive set of qualifications that few have. I do believe basically Texas and Kentucky treat firearms the same. I do not think there is any specific law in Kentucky prohibiting concealed carry in a church. Local congregations I do believe have the right to ban concealed carry within their buildings. That to me is the key to solving the problem of those who are bothered by the presence of firearms. If you are in a church that practices this, and it is wrong to you, find another church. Local churches are autonomous.

What bothers me much more than state to state laws is the federal government's control over firearms. It is like the marriage issue going on with the Supreme Court now, could a law passed by Congress or a ruling by the Supreme Court wipe out all state concealed carry laws at some point in the future like being forced to accept same sex marriage by states at some point in the future?

 

You have hit the nail on the head. One should be able to find a church that meets their spiritual needs as well as their personal convictions without more laws.
We should have learned something from the left, they don't quit. They ask for a mile and get an inch in court or from Washington, then they come back again and again and over 20 years or so they have much more than they ask for. We on the right seem to give up and roll over and play dead, except on abortion, we do a lot of talk on it and we are getting the slightest movement, that is what the left has been doing for my entire lifetime.

 

CTB, that was an idiotic post. Please forgive my bluntness, but it's the truth, and you need to hear it. And here's why it was idiotic: Mr. Cassidy provided his credentials before providing the list, and you conveniently ignored the credentials.

His credentials point out that he's trained for just such situations. You, on the other hand, have not; so you absolutely do not know what you're talking about.

I myself spent my first 9 years in the military as a security specialist; 3 of those teaching others to be security specialists. Not only did I routinely fire on a firing range, but I also ran hundreds of potential security specialists through a Firearms Training Simulator, allowing them to "practice" for split-second decisions in just such situations. Each time they fired, they had to justify their decision--just as if they were explaining it in a court of law.

I fully believe Tom Cassidy would have no problem in such situations as you described, and has the training and experience that he'll hit what he's aiming at; whereas, your identification of your own experience leads me to believe you would be part of, if not exacerbating, the pandemonium.

Yes, I'm being harsh today. Tomorrow, or even later today, I'll probably delete my post and ask forgiveness. Till then, I ask you to actually read people's posts, and intelligently respond.

 

No problem Don. I will defend your right to your opinion whether you agree with me or not.

It is dangerous to make assumptions. You and others do not know what my background is, what training I have had or not had or what situations I have or have not faced. And, no, for a lot of reasons, I will not go into them. [Very gently said.]

Sounds like good training. However accidents do happen and mistake are made. I believe there is a high probability of collateral damage in the situation being discussed.

I hope we never find out if I would help or hinder the situation. If I were nearby I would physical attack the man/woman attempting to subdue them. I have thought about this for sometime and believe that I would act.

Intelligent replies are in the eye of the reader.

No one has replied to my question. Could you live with the fact that, even with the best of intentions in a situation, you killed or maimed for life an innocent church member?

Another question I have wondered about since this thread began is for those who so strongly feel a firearm is needed in worship. The question is:

If God called you to a place or country that you considered dangerous, but where you could not take your weapon, would you go?

 

So assuming Crabby's logic, we should not allow police officers to carry guns either, because they shoot people by accident also.

Don't think that just because the police are trained in the use of firearms that they are less likely to kill an innocent person. A University of Chicago Study revealed that in 1993 approximately 700,000 police killed 330 innocent individuals, while approximately 250,000,000 private citizens only killed 30 innocent people. Do the math. That's a per capita rate for the police, of almost 4000 times higher than the population in general. OK, that is a little misleading. Let's just include the 80,000,000 gun owning citizens. Now the police are down to only a 1200 times higher accidental shooting rate than the gun-owning population in general.


That still sounds high. So let's look at it in a different light. According to a study by Newsweek magazine, only 2% of civilian shootings involve an innocent person being shot (not killed). The error rate for police is 11%. What this means is that you are more than 5 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen. But, when you consider that citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as do police every year, it means that, per capita, you are more than 11 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen. That is as low as I can get that number.


From http://actionamerica.org/guns/guns1.shtml

 

There's a high probability of collateral damage just crossing the street.

You would physically attack, but not if you had a gun. That sounds to me like you're talking out both sides of your mouth.

If it saved other lives - yes.

The reciprocal of that question--and please feel free to answer--is, if you had a gun and an opportunity to keep someone from being killed and you didn't use the gun because of your principles, could you live with the fact that one or more people died as a result?

Yes.

 

Mex, you are totally illogical here. Completely different subject.

And the individual policeman has to live with that fact. It probably does not bother some and it probably bothers others greatly.

Would it bother you if you killed an innocent person in the situation being discussed?

 

I'm illogical??? :laugh:

Certainly I would be bothered if I were to kill an innocent person, just as a police officer would be, I hope.

 

Always carry. Never tell. If people do that, where and in a manner which is legal, there are no issues. In my church, I bet that there are several carrying at any given service. But no one tells, so I don't know.

It is a non issue.

 

Thank God that I don't go to a freedom hating church which limits 2nd amendment rights.

 

So, your 2nd amendment rights are more important to you then Gods admonition: "Thou shalt not kill"?

 

To interpret that passage that way is to do violence to the context.

 

Please, when you learn how to not use text proofs get back with me. In the meantime you are free to go to the church of your choice because others died to give you the right to do so.

 

Absolutely.

 

And there you have it.