One day after Sunday’s (March 
church shooting that left an Illinois pastor dead, church security consultant Marc Brooks fielded calls from eight congregations eager to get firearms into the hands of worship staff or volunteers.
Those churches will first need to pass Brooks’ state-certified test to carry a concealed weapon. But keeping a congregation safe from violent outbursts doesn’t always have to involve guns in the sanctuary, he said.
“If you need firearms training, then we do that,” says Brooks, a deputy sheriff and chief instructor for Protective Services Training & Consultants in Thornton, Colo. But sometimes church security “doesn’t require a firearm. It just requires that you’re alert and that you’re in shape and that you’re able to protect your pastor.”
Church security issues have become a fresh cause of concern in the wake of several deadly incidents, including Sunday’s at First Baptist Church of Maryville, Ill. In recent months:
– A man stunned a group of tourists in February when he fatally shot himself at the foot of a cross at the Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, Calif.
– In November, a gunman allegedly killed his estranged wife, and a worshipper who rushed to her aid, at a church in Clifton, N.J.
– Last July, a man with an apparent grudge against liberals opened fire inside a Knoxville, Tenn., Unitarian Universalist congregation, killing two and wounding six.
These events, plus others from recent years, have churches large and small wondering what, if anything, they can and should do to ensure safe environments. It can be a tough question to answer, not just because of limited resources but also because most congregations strive to be welcoming, especially to strangers.
“There can be a tension between being an open, inviting church and being a secure one,” says Eric Spacek, senior risk manager for GuideOne Insurance, which insures about 40,000 congregations. “It’s a challenge that most churches are struggling with.”
Recent data on church violence is scarce because agencies generally don’t track violent crime by venue, but crime experts estimate that it remains extremely rare, even as it generates big headlines.
Carnegie Mellon University criminologist Jacqueline Cohen suspects church violence might even be less prevalent today than in generations past, in part because criminals have more alternatives if they’re seeking an audience or a reliable place to locate their victims.
Church violence appears to be increasing, Cohen says, because a shooting in church “distinguishes it from other murders, and it makes people afraid to be in a place where they otherwise feel safe, and those are the dynamics that (lead to widespread coverage) in the media.”
Even so, churches are concerned by incidents that capture attention, and a cottage industry has cropped up in recent years to advise them on security issues.
Experts recommend churches begin their security efforts by learning to spot their vulnerabilities. That means conferring with a security consultant or local law enforcement, according to Rick Anderson, founder of Church Security Solutions in Salem, Ore.
From there, Anderson suggests assembling a team to look for “pre-incident indicators,” such as a stranger who appears nervous, avoids eye contact and cuts casual conversation short. Attention to the unordinary, coupled with strategic placement of team members around the sanctuary, can help reduce the risk of an incident by making it harder to pull off.
But such lessons aren’t always easy to learn when churchgoers strive to be accommodating in a house of worship. “If somebody looks at us crossways or we get an uneasy feeling, we tend to forgive them and go on about our business,” Anderson says. “We actually suppress our gut check, (but) we shouldn’t dismiss cues that in our gut tell us something is not right.”
Other consultants say thinking through worst-case scenarios can go a long way toward preventing them. Chuck Paris, a church security consultant in McLean, Va., encourages congregations to do exercises that simulate a terrorist attack. For some churches, just having a few unarmed people trained in tactics to protect their pastors may be sufficient, Paris said.
For churches considering whether to have an armed presence, the issues get more complex. Anderson generally encourages congregations to enlist armed members who are law enforcement officers with access to firearms and emergency training. Having a uniformed security presence, he said, can be “a great deterrent.”
Others, however, aren’t so sure.
Christopher Ferguson, a psychologist with a specialty in violent criminal behavior at Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas, says would-be gunmen who feel victimized and want to extract high-profile revenge aren’t going to worry about running afoul of a uniformed officer.
“Most of these shooters aren’t intending to get away. They’re intending to die,” Ferguson said. “If a person thinks he’s going to die, (a uniformed officer) probably isn’t going to act as a deterrent in most of these cases because the shooter is suicidal.”
Spacek, from the GuideOne insurance company, recommends that churches consult with local police to determine an appropriate level of security. He noted that most church claims for violent crime are related to domestic disputes that spill over into the church.
In church, “the existence of a weapon can provide some additional security to deter certain acts or protect individuals,” Spacek said in an e-mail, adding that it doesn’t come without cost. “It can also increase the liability exposure for the organization.”
By G. Jeffrey MacDonald
Religion News Service
Copyright 2009 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
posted March 10, 2009 at 7:48 pm
As was mentioned in the article, church violence stands out as it doesn’t happen often. Found it interesting that the thought by Cohen was that it probably happens even less than in the past. Violence in any location is unacceptabe, but since a religious building is supposed to be “safe”, it makes it appear worse then other locations where violence takes place.
posted March 10, 2009 at 7:49 pm
At the UU fellowship I attended there were always greeters at the door. Now you have to wonder whether to put the friskers before or after the greeters.
posted March 10, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Maybe if churches didn’t teach hate and bigotry, violent incidents like this wouldn’t *happen* in the first place.
posted March 10, 2009 at 8:16 pm
It’s only been in the last few years that violence inside Churches has started that I remember. Although there may have been more in the south with Black churches that never got much press in years gone by. We have security all over public places, shopping centers, dept. stores, and we should seriously consider them in Churches, too. You can’t figure who might be mentally sick, because it doesn’t show. It would help like nnmns said to have doormen, not women, at the doors, of course this last man had a book in which he said Sunday was death sunday, so if a man were to have stopped him at the door or before he walked down the aisle, he would have shot him first. It will be interesting to hear why he chose this minister and this church to attack, and the authorities should make it known for the publics proection.
wmdkitty, your comment made me think this is one more reason why people might stay away from church. If you all haven’t read it yet, go into CNN.com and read what Jack Cafferty had to say about religion in America, and he put a question to his readers, they answered in a big way of why they think organized religion is failing in the USA. Many comments, you’ll find them interesting.
posted March 10, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Thanks for pointing to Cafferty Henrietta. That article is here and the comments are indeed interesting!
posted March 10, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Sure, I want church to be a safe and nurturing environment. But there is a part of me that believes that “church” should never be safe. It should be where there is pain and suffering. This is not the kind of danger that I think I had in mind.
Nonetheless, if we have to rely on guns, then the gun becomes our “god”. If we have to rely on metal detectors, pat downs, or any other “security” measure, then those become experiences of our “god”.
I did notice a theme – all of he deaths were by gun fire. Once again, our phalic excuse for a self-defense device turns on us. We need to wake up and accept that we are shooting ourselves. This rationalization for and addiction to firearms is going to undermine society and any sense of real and lasting security. I do not and will not own a gun. If ever I do, then my faith is lost, my hope is lost, and I have surrendered completely to evil.
posted March 11, 2009 at 10:00 am
“I do not and will not own a gun. If ever I do, then my faith is lost, my hope is lost, and I have surrendered completely to evil.”
But I’m sure you’ve got no problem relying on the police to protect you, right? Unless you’re out in the streets demonstrating for the abolition of our police and military, your faith already seems hopelessly lost, my friend.
posted March 11, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Nnmns thanks for putting the article here so we could reach it again. Today it had over 800 comments! I didn’t have time to finish last night.
posted March 11, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Our church (250 members)implemented security measures shortly after the Arvada CO and Colo Springs CO shootings 12-07. To date we have 2 members out of a twelve member safety and security (SAS) team who are licensed to carry a handgun, and will add more. We have 6 radio-equipped persons (including nursery workers) on duty for 3 services each week who patrol the halls and parking lots. These members double as greeters at the main entrances looking for anything out of the ordinary. After the services start we lock all entrances but are near each door to open the door for latecomers and greet them. There are 2 team members who sit in the front pews on either side of the Pastor for just such an occurrence as the Marysville IL shooting.
All SAS Team members are trained in First Aid, CPR and Automatic External Defibrillator (AED). We have also installed new alarm systems and cameras, including “panic buttons” for the office staff. This is also to protect our staff during the week. We view our efforts as both a ministry and protection. The world we live in is changing and not for the better. Until the Lord comes we are to do his work and cannot so if we are constantly in fear. Many of our members make a point of thanking us for being there every week. I truly believe this puts our membership at ease for worship.
posted March 11, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Nate,
I am not sure what your comment means. I do support the police and I am assured that they are far more able to handle security than am I. I simply choose not to have a gun of my own or to rely on my ability to know how and when to use one. My faith and hope is in God and not Smith & Wesson or any other arms manufacturer.
posted March 11, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Bjdenver, thanks for sharing how your church has handled the problem. Some good ideas there.
posted March 11, 2009 at 9:10 pm
The Methodist church I used to attend and all the UU churches I have attended always had “greeters” at the doors, but no one with guns was around. I certainly hope none of them ever have a reason to start “arming” themselves.
posted March 12, 2009 at 12:03 am
Please, would everyone let any visitors to our church know that none of the Deacons, trustees, door holders, or greeters are packing heat. We prefer people feel genuinely welcomed.
posted March 12, 2009 at 12:58 am
“My faith and hope is in God and not Smith & Wesson or any other arms manufacturer.”
Except when those manufacturers are providing their products to the police who protect you, right? What’s all this about not having faith in guns unless you’re going to denounce the need for police protection as well? Outsourcing your faith in weapons doesn’t somehow make you better than those who prefer to take matters into their own hands.
posted March 12, 2009 at 7:40 am
Geez Nate, did you get out of bed on the wrong side? Have a bad meeting with your major prof?
posted March 12, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Nate does have a point though. The same people we see in shopping centers probably go to Church, too. In this mix of people there may be mentally unbalanced people, or crimminally minded people. I feel safe when I see Security walking their beat in the stores. You can’t see their guns, and the average person wouldn’t even know that they are security. I worked in a large upscale dept. store in CA, so I know what to look for.
posted March 13, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Nate,
Plain and simple – I believe that properly trained and authorized armed security is appropriate. Guns everywhere, in the hands of anyone with enough dollars but insufficient sense is dangerous beyond belief. Clear? I hope so.
posted March 18, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Interesting points on a tough topic. How do we strike the balance between being overly paranoid, but assured we are safe while worshiping?
It’s not like this is the first shooting or violent act…this is one of many.
What we are witnessing is human nature. People will give up everything for the feeling of safety and security (whether they are or are not is irrelevant, it is the perception).
I’m not sure I like the idea of just anyone carrying a gun. Though most CCW permit holders are extremely serious people who understand the ramifications of using a firearm in self defense, and they take a lot of training to become more proficient. I do not begrudge the man or woman who take the idea of security and take personal responsibility for it.
The police understand they will not be there quickly enough when a violent crisis hits, and that most of these incidents are solved by a spontaneous hero.
posted March 22, 2009 at 11:46 am
I love the conversation here. I am in criminal justice and am now taking a class on security. We had to read an article about a church shooting and then devise a plan of pretection. I appreciate all the helpful information, and the wonderful conversation.
posted March 22, 2009 at 11:57 am
Human nature is to be reactive, instead we need to learn to be proactive. Let’s not be so nieve that we think, “it will never happen at my church”, because it may. As the Nation evolves, whether it be for better or for worse, we need to change our thoughts on security. Communicate, be aware, be safe. Trust a Security professional, due your homework, but most of all….DUE SOMETHING NOW!
http://www.secure-church.com
posted April 12, 2009 at 12:56 pm
My Dad was a Minister for many years. Before that he was a Bishop, and before that a Deacon. Our church was open to all, as I suppose, God intended. I guess you could call that “back in the day.”
God has see all of this before. Why it goes all the way back to Cain, and Able.
I have provided measures for security concerns for years, here and abroad. After all of these years I have come to understand these four things in full.
Number 1 what was, number 2 what is, number 3 what can be.
The biggest is number 4. True power is not limited to money, politics, physical strength, nor weapons. True power belongs to the person, or people that have the ability to control the moment.
You can’t change what was, but learn from it. What you do with what is, has everything to do with, what can be.
Open the security matters up to all of your members. With a security professional as a guide. Look at the past, look at the way things are now, and prepare for the future. Proper planning, involving all of your members (that will help), will result in solutions, lending the ability of power to control the moment, should that moment arise.
There is much more than violence that any organization faces these days. Proper planning for financial, and natual desasters, as well as violence, will help what is, and set a goal for what could be.
You can not chain, and lock God’s house.