Should churches change security in wake of recent events?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just to address the "No one's doing anything" comments.

On Friday, MA became the first state since the Las Vegas shootings to ban Bump Stocks. (They were already banned in CA.)

http://www.wbur.org/news/2017/11/03/gun-rights-group-veto-bump-stock-ban

Unfortunately, the fact MA "banned" them isn't going to stop them from existing, since anyone with basic machine tool skills and access to a $200 lathe can readily find online instructions on how to fabricate them. Nor is it going to prevent them getting into the wrong hands, some of whom may be in MA, because they will obtain them from out of state sources.
 
Maybe

california, new York, new jersey, connedticut, massachusettes, Illinois, oregon, Washington, Hawaii all have very good numbers when it comes to firearm death rate, maybe you were unaware

Firearm death rate is not the same as safest. You need to post your info because that most likely includes accidental and self inflicted death.
 
Logically, I understand what you are saying. But I truly don't think there was this much gun violence when I was growing up in the 80s. Do you think things are getting better, or worse? I just don't want to accept that "well, violence is a part of life" and move on. I think we've managed to improve our world in many ways over the last thousand years, isn't there something we can do?

Actually, the homicide rate in this country peaked in the 90's and is currently about half what it once was.

These random, mass murder situations do seem to be much, much more common though.
 
Actually, the homicide rate in this country peaked in the 90's and is currently about half what it once was.

These random, mass murder situations do seem to be much, much more common though.

Seems to be much more of an untreated mental health issue to me, but I'm certainly not a professional in any of this.
 

Maybe

california, new York, new jersey, connedticut, massachusettes, Illinois, oregon, Washington, Hawaii all have very good numbers when it comes to firearm death rate, maybe you were unaware
This guy breaks down your question pretty well (from 2015)

Everyone should watch imo:

He lists all sources here: https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/45566-youtube-the-truth-about-gun-control/

While he has since made more videos you can watch if interested, but I think that gives the gist of it
 
Last edited:
At least eight of the people killed were members of one family, according to a community leader.

Those relatives span three generations and include a woman who was about five months pregnant and three of her children. :sad1:
 
/
At least eight of the people killed were members of one family, according to a community leader.

Those relatives span three generations and include a woman who was about five months pregnant and three of her children. :sad1:

I just can't bare to watch and hear what this creature did. I have turned off the TV completely this morning.
Its too heartbreaking...........:sad::sad1: :sad2:
 
A place called CBS.


Really? They don't seem to be reporting this "news" currently. I'd sure love to see your link, since apparently you claim it as true news. I call FAKE, by someone with an agenda.

This nut job was a convicted domestic violence perpetrator. He's a violent white dude with a gun. Like the dude in Las Vegas. I'd say we better crack down on violent white dudes with guns.'

Just so you don't repeat other fake news, here's a bunch more fake news bits which have been circulating about this particular crime. Thanks for making sure what you post is true before doing so.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/talalansar...hurch-shooting?utm_term=.iu0QBvrE6#.nmd768bOZ
 
Because pretending this sort of evil doesn't exist is not the way to stop it from happening again. You have to look it in the eye, understand and then confront it.

But why post pictures of the innocent, ex-wife and present wife? They did nothing wrong and you have now put their pictures out there, linking them to the "sort of evil". They aren't evil, the shooter is.

I find this highly offensive, as well as your other post saying basically that since he has a beard he is Muslim.
 
Actually, the homicide rate in this country peaked in the 90's and is currently about half what it once was.

These random, mass murder situations do seem to be much, much more common though.
This was from a CNN article dated a month ago and it talks about the term modern history aspect..

"There are a few reasons why you're seeing that phrase. It has to do with how long we have been keeping track of gun violence statistics, how "mass shooting" is defined, and how we tend to regard past mass killings in our history."

Also from that article: "One of the biggest reasons, from a perspective of accuracy, is that tracking mass shooting events back through the decades is a difficult and incomplete task." A criminologist stated "there's no official data that can be traced back through our country's history, and modern databases must collect their information ex post facto, which makes for more room for missed incidents the farther back in time you go. It's a matter of ability to recover cases. Lots of newspapers weren't digitized, news archives aren't always maintained. There's no historical data."

The article talks about the definition being used as part of the equation as well as "These varying definitions not only make it more difficult to analyze past data they also make it difficult to convey an accurate picture to the public on how often mass shootings actually occur and what their nature is."

The article states: "While mass shootings have always been a part of US history, some of them far deadlier than any incident covered on a TV or newspaper, the real era of what we culturally consider to be a "mass shooting" started in 1949."

The article talks about "A significant portion of America wasn't alive in, say, the 1940s, so part of it is just a function of memory," he says. "The bigger part has to do with technology and media. When these things happened, maybe we saw some grainy film days later, but we certainly didn't hear it like we do now. There weren't satellite trucks that would rush to the scene of a mass shooting and carry images of carnage right into our living rooms, making it feel like it's happening just down the street."

The article also talks about how prior to the Aurora, CO movie theater shooting and the Sandy Hook school shootings in 2012 "There were school shootings and workplace violence, but there wasn't a lot of interest in the phrase or subject of mass killings until 2012, which saw a huge rise in the number of consultants and experts." Serial murderes was a focus on conversation a lot more prior to 2012.


So I guess my point is while making a statement of These random, mass murder situations do seem to be much, much more common though. might be what we want to say it may not be either completely factual nor as easy to say that due to multiple reasons.
 
There are no words. I have a hard time responding appropriately to yet another mass shooting.

We’ll never fix this problem until we understand the root cause. What is it about our culture? Can we even change our culture?

I was thinking about what can be done last night. Unfortunately, our 2 party system is a barrier for change. Until we can all get along and stop seeing each other as adversaries, gun laws will never change. And I’m not so sure guns law will even work if we can’t change our culture.

There are brilliant scientists who are non partisan in our country. We need to put politics aside and listen to what those experts are saying or we’ll never fix this.
 
He targeted the Church his ex in laws attended. His hatred for them and religion was his motive...allegedly.
 
Why do gun laws work in every other country then? To varying degrees of course. Or is it not the gun laws that is the defining difference?

They don't necessarily. You have to compare violent crimes per capita in each country with the varying laws. You cannot just compare gun crimes but all violent crimes. Other countries that have very strict laws may have more violent crime committed with knives or some other weapons. I haven't seen a map or chart that shows this but there are many articles on the internet.

This shooter was stopped by an armed citizen. So if he had gone into the church and did what he did, and there were no armed citizens--how many would he have killed? The only way stricter gun laws will work is if we can make darn sure the shooters aren't able to get guns and I don't think we can do that.



What I do think we have is a mental health problem. There has to be a happy medium between locking up anyone and everyone suspected of mental illness and not being able to get anyone the help they need. If family and friends report someone acting erratically, it shouldn't be so hard to get them seen by a mental health provider and in-patient at least until they are deemed safe to themselves and society.

Now, I have read a couple of articles that have corrected some things since the shooting. One, he was not dishonorably discharged, it was listed as a bad conduct discharge. I know nothing about the different levels of discharges but one article says this is not a felony (not that it is recognized that way in every state anyway) so would not have stopped him from getting a gun. He was discharged and served time due to an attack on his then wife-guessing that wasn't a felony either. Rather than spending time in jail maybe he should have been mentally evaluated then?

He was denied a gun permit in Texas, so doesn't seem that permits are necessarily the answer.



As far as the question in the OP. Well, its really up to the congregations in smaller churches like this one. They have to decide what they are willing to do. Our church is pretty much considered a "mega" church. There is no way the ushers can watch anyone new as there may be 50-100 new people on any given Sunday. Our sanctuary is very theater like and once the music starts (which is loud) its dark in there. Some of the things that have been done are that our ushers (really not ushers but volunteers each week) walk any late comers in and using a pen light, show them to a seat. We have a lot of police officers in our congregation and they have volunteered to take turns being in the hallway out front during services. There are 4 doors into the sanctuary and they close all but one once the service starts. The volunteer officer "greets" people at that door. But even this isn't fail safe. They can't lock the other doors and as our sanctuary is round at the back, there is a curve in the wall that makes it impossible to see every door. But, there are volunteers at the coffee shop out there and at the guest services desk so anyone coming in will be seen. Children and babies that are in their classrooms or in the nursery are all behind very secure, locked doors that lead into an entry way to another set of doors and then down a hall way, so that's a big relief at at least.

Churches are pretty much sitting targets but hopefully as many as possible will be able to come up with something that will keep the church safe but also keep them welcoming to anyone and everyone that truly wishes to attend.
 
Thing is, many of the mass shootings in the US are by lone males as are acts in other countries.

How in the heck are you able to profile everyone in any country to prevent an incident? Sure, some plots have been foiled. But can all mass terrorism acts realistically be eliminated?

Is there any way to ensure complete safety?

I think not.

This is a multi layered, very complicated problem. More to do with a person's mental health.

The guy in Texas had his gun illegally. Was dishonorably discharged from the US Airforce. Had domestic abuse charges.

Gun laws did nothing to prevent him from getting a gun. It was illegally gotten.

I refuse to live under a rock in fear.

And yes, the discussion is happening by our lawmakers and others in positions of influence in the US.

While I agree with you that this is multifaceted very complicated issue. A gun law might (thats a big might) have prevented this. HE knew he was not supposed to purchase firearms, that it was illegal. But from what I understand he could have went to a private seller, one who is not a licensed seller and they could have legally sold him his firearm because they are not obligated to do a background check. If the seller was unaware of this persons intentions and didn't know that he was dishonorably discharged, they would have been within their rights to sell this to him. If private unlicensed sellers had to do a background check this could have changed the story. I guess we will all have to wait and see where this gun came from.
http://lawcenter.giffords.org/private-sales-in-texas/
 
But why post pictures of the innocent, ex-wife and present wife? They did nothing wrong and you have now put their pictures out there, linking them to the "sort of evil". They aren't evil, the shooter is.

I find this highly offensive, as well as your other post saying basically that since he has a beard he is Muslim.


I agree with you. How the heck does a photo of his ex-wife help us look in the face of a monster and understand him. Despicable. It serves no purpose except to spread more nonsensical or fake news. Very useful. Not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.














Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top