So is the logic behind this that you just don’t even provide protection because it is not 100%. We truly have no way to say how few or how many attacks on others are prevented by the “fear” of there being someone in the home, church or store being armed. We do know that (and yes it is observation no stats) common sense and obsrevation of the places generally picked to rob or kill that they were not places known for having a policy that allows self-defense.
My family has been trained to hit the floor, look like a ball, stay out of sight, try not to make noise in case of an attack. Attack does not necessarly mean “gun” it could be from an animal while on a hike or camping. So should I do any less for the possibility of a problem in the part of town where our parish is?
No I am not extending the logic into the general public space to say we should not at least try to protect people such as important leaders from well established, plausible, credible and real dangers (even though CCW is proven to be highly ineffective at stopping actual deliberate attacks). I concur that it is a deterrent for such cases when a would-be assailant is of rational mind - but most who do such attacks are not rational and don’t often care or are in it for ideological reasons as martyers for a real or imagined cause.
All I am doing is applying the abysmal prevention statistic from the best and most trained to demonstrate how CCW is NOT going to prevent any of the already very few cases of shooters in church from killing or injuring their targets. I am a reasonable guy - very bottom line. It’s clear to me that its a very very rare case where anyone has the time to draw a CCW and stop a crime in process by a committed attacker. It can only stop the after effects - prevent him from fleeing (not always a good thing since fleeing removes the immediate danger to others) or preventing him from escalating to others (not usually what happens since its often murder-suicide or vengeance etc.).
Given the already very very rare incidents of shooting occasions inside of US Catholic Churches during services no one can say that this was because people know of CCW. Most Catholics I suspect are clueless that some others even have CCW and how many in public carry. I think as this topic expands though and people start to realize that some in the pews have guns there will be outrage and calls for it to be banned nationwide in all Catholic Churches. I could be wrong but I really think the overwhelming majority of Catholics would be offended to know some fellow parishioners are carrying guns around their families in mass and strongly disapprove.
There are plenty of able bodied men in most Catholic parishes (ushers, Knights of Columbus, ex vets etc.) who instinctively are “situationaly aware” of their environment and are quietly observing and looking for and anticipating problems. It’s a “man thing” - I do it all the time and I think most men do. We anticipate trouble and pre-play “what if” scenarios if somone were to accost a priest or defile the eucharist etc. Trust me - its in men’s psyche to be always prepared to be “men” and jump in to help stop a nut-case if once just happens to decide to put our family, friends and church in harms way.
It is frankly easy for a large crowd to overpower a lone gunman by rushing him from all sides and distracting as another close up on him. Sure - someone might get shot or be injured - but there are no guarantees in life nor have there ever been. What we are talking about here is the degree of civility we choose to live with in our society. Do we have or want a cowboy culture where everyone comes to church strapped on with open carry or do we try to have a more genteel culture where we don’t have to worry about everyone pulling out guns over the smallest provocation?
Don’t imagine that chivalry is dead. There are MANY men who will jump in to stop an assailant or distract/delay him even if we are unarmed. And quite a few men keep themselves fit and trained in hand to hand Marshall Arts (take downs and holding/grappling maneuvers) just for this reason. It is a duty and role of men to be protectors but deadly force is rarely needed in real life.
In all honesty I’d prefer to be in a church with a dozen athletic men with courage and self confidence who are scattered throughout the pews then with a dozen men & women with low self esteem or unspecific self-confidence sporting concealed weapons.
I see the kinds of people who often get concealed weapons at the gun shows. And there is most definately a fairly high incidence of “victim” mentality kinds (at least 20-30%) who one can tell just by looking that they are very insecure, physically weak/small, vulnerable physically and lack any degree of self-confidence. The gun for these kinds is a crutch to make them feel virile and lethal (sometimes used to restore self-esteem after suffering a prior humiliating encounter - I have talked to some). I really don’t want to be around these kinds of insecure CCW people in public - much less in church. Others of course are genuine patriots and citizen soldiers who see CCW as a civil duty in public. I put myself in this category but self-restrain to only venues where there is a real and plausible need to carry. I support this kind of individual fully in the public arena. But in church - the priest must and should be asked permission to carry and as a principal of openness and disclosure the congregation should also be informed that some may have CCW with explicit permission.
BF
