Regarding 'Gun Free' churches, I have some concerns. Setting up their own trained security is one thing. They determine who is entitled to carry and who is adequately trained. But allowing anyone or everyone to carry? That would suggest that the shooter would be able to enter with no problem carrying.
I understand, but think about it, the shooter is going to enter the building anyway, he doesn't care about getting permission. He obviously wasn't supposed to be there armed in the first place, but he was anyway. Criminals like that don't abide by gun laws. They break them. In fact, they frequently pick gun-free zones to avoid being interrupted.
Also a Church shouldn't become a 'shooting' gallery or gun range. Shooting in any crowded location presents a danger. Does anyone else agree with this?
Again, whether a church becomes a shooting range has nothing to do with whether it is a gun-free zone, and they are going to continue being shooting galleries because the shooter doesn't need or want anyone's permission.
Last Sunday in Texas, for example, how many more people would have died if someone hadn't stood up (in this case the security guard)? And they were ready for him! Moreover, not every church has the money to afford security personnel. Furthermore, this doesn't happen only in churches, and police can rarely help avoid shootings. They arrive after the fact.
Let's take a worst case-scenario. A law abiding gun owner is in a church and sees a man starting to shoot (remember, there's no security already eyeballing the subject in this scenario). He intervenes and let's say the shooter killed two people (probably more because no one is ready for him) and the concealed carry permit holder accidently shoots and kills a third while stopping the bad guy. Remember, the killer on Sunday was actively setting out to kill people, so on average I think it's reasonable to assume he's going to kill more people than someone who accidentally misses and hits someone else. And like I mentioned, in this case last week, someone was already monitoring him. Chances are if that wasn't the case many more would have perished.
So in this hypothetical, we have two to three dead minimum (depending on whether the concealed carrier makes a major mistake and how much longer it takes him to react not having prior knowledge of the suspicious man). If that concealed carry permit holder wasn't there, how many more people could the shooter take down before he's stopped? 3? 6? A dozen? Two dozen? This guy could have an AR-15 or an AR-15 pistol, for example. Even if he didn't, a 17-round magazine and reloads can do a lot of damage especially at a church where unsuspecting people are facing forward and have no easy way to vacate the building quickly enough to get out of harm's way.
There is no good outcome in situations like this. All we can do is limit the losses, and we're always going to have a greater chance of that with armed citizens. In fact, if most people in society were always armed, these people would probably be too afraid to commit mass shootings anyway. Remember, most of the time these people take their own lives as soon as someone starts shooting back.
