Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Why is it so hard... [View all]spin
(17,493 posts)47. For some reason many people can't seem to believe that bad things happen in churches ...
Perhaps they believe God protects churches. However...
Church Security Industry Springs Up Amid Attacks
By William Wan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
In one hand, he held a Bible. In the other, tucked inside his coat pocket, he gripped a .38 caliber revolver.
He had come to People's Community Baptist Church in Silver Spring looking for his estranged wife. And once she arrived and began arguing with him outside, the Bible would be forgotten. The gun would be raised. And in a matter of seconds, the congregation's sense of sanctuary would be shattered.
What happened that Sunday morning at People's Church was just one in a string of fatal shootings at houses of worship across the country. The most high-profile incidents -- a Kansas abortion doctor gunned down in May, an Illinois pastor shot mid-sermon in March, a Tennessee church attacked during a children's play in 2008 -- have begun to alter the way many churches operate.
Sanctuaries that once left their doors open all day now employ armed guards, off-duty police officers, surveillance cameras and even undercover plainclothes guards who mingle with the congregation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/29/AR2009092903766.html
While I agree that a person who carries a concealed firearm should have firearms safety training and education in the laws of his state that apply to concealed carry and the use of lethal force, I don't believe that carrying a firearm should require an individual to be an expert shooter. Most encounters which involve legitimate self defense will occur at extremely close range.
Self-Defense Accuracy
1/25/2011
***snip***
In most self-defense situations, an attacker is anywhere from point-blank range out to about 30 feet away. If attacked in your home, youll never shoot at a longer distance than the length of your largest room.
In that type of situation, you will not have time to line up your sights, take a deep breath, let half of it out and squeeze the trigger. In many ways, self-defense shooting is similar to shotgunning in that it is flash shooting. You lock your eyes on the target as you line up the gun and pull the trigger until you stop the attack.
This type of shooting does not lend itself to pretty groups on paper, but thats not the point. The point of self-defense shooting is protecting life and limb. All you have to be able to do is consistently hit a 1-foot square representing center-of-mass on a target at a variety of ranges out to about 30 feet. That is self-defense accuracy.
http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/self-defense-accuracy/
Expert pistol shooters can shoot small groups at ranges of 25 yards to 50 yards and sometimes well beyond. It would be hard to explain why you had a good reason to fear for your life from an attacker who was 30 feet from you in an urban area.
I do believe that if you carry a concealed firearm it is an excellent idea to practice your shooting skills on a regular basis. While I enjoy target shooting with handguns, I always end my practice with some self defense shooting at close range. Much of such practice involves shooting without using the sights on the firearm which some call "point shooting". I also practice shooting while only holding the weapon with a strong hand and my offhand.
I don't believe that the Second Amendment was designed only to "help people defend themselves from their government."
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
***snip***
Experience in America prior to the U.S. Constitution
In no particular order, early American settlers viewed the right to arms and/or the right to bear arms and/or state militias as important for one or more of these purposes:[25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]
deterring tyrannical government;
repelling invasion;
suppressing insurrection;
facilitating a natural right of self-defense;
participating in law enforcement;
enabling the people to organize a militia system.
Which of these considerations they thought were most important, which of these considerations they were most alarmed about, and the extent to which each of these considerations ultimately found expression in the Second Amendment is disputed. Some of these purposes were explicitly mentioned in early state constitutions; for example, the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776 asserted that, "the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state".[33]
***snip***
Although there is little doubt that the writers of the Second Amendment were heavily influenced by the English Bill of Rights, it is a matter of interpretation as to whether they were intent on preserving the power to regulate arms to the states over the federal government (as the English Parliament had reserved for itself against the monarch) or whether it was intent on creating a new right akin to the right of others written into the Constitution (as the Supreme Court recently decided). Some in the U.S. have preferred the "rights" argument arguing that the English Bill of Rights had granted a right. The need to have arms for self-defence was not really in question. Peoples all around the world since time immemorial had armed themselves for the protection of themselves and others, and as organized nations began to appear these arrangements had been extended to the protection of the state.[23] Without a regular army and police force (which in England was not established until 1829), it had been the duty of certain men to keep watch and ward at night and to confront and capture suspicious persons. Every subject had an obligation to protect the king's peace and assist in the suppression of riots.[24]emphasis added
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
You have every right to support banning all firearms. Unfortunately unless a wizard appears who has invented a magic spell that will make all firearms disappear, your hope of achieving that goal in our nation at this time or in the year future are extremely slim.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
132 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
that is fine for you. you are a part of a WE but, to deny that YOU have no need for a gun
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#30
wow. lol. so, are you suggesting i insist my hubby get rid of guns or i walk?
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#33
Whining? No, I am settling things like adults. The peer group, is just as important as JURY.
WingDinger
Apr 2012
#124
well, that is good to know that you think that way. seems a lot around here don't.
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#127
you really have no idea how snarky was your own thought process. I respect you being honest
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#18
omg.... because i have never felt the need for a gun, and expressed why others may feel as i,
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#20
I am just trying to get you to realize that part of your NOT needing a gun is the fact that
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#32
i do NOT want them. they have NEVER been used. i went over a decade living by myself without them
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#35
we play the odds in ALL things. yes, the odds are so very low, that i will continue
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#14
I am sure you and your husband have reduced your odds for being violated in your home.
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#21
ok. i guess what you are saying is if a woman is married, she does not get to have an opinion
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#50
Actually, I am trying to articulate a philosophy that has been on my mind for a while now and,
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#108
i kinda get what you are saying in this post and find it more interesting than the OP
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#114
I have been trying to make a cohesive statement and a cogent OP for the Feminist group
Tuesday Afternoon
Apr 2012
#117
and btw.... the 18 yrs we have been married, he has never needed the gun, either. nt
seabeyond
Apr 2012
#29
Well there is a good idea. Perhaps only people trained and certified should be permitted to
Warren Stupidity
Apr 2012
#91
re: "Perhaps only people trained and certified should be permitted to carry...
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Apr 2012
#132
"The bulk of consumer demand including politics is emotionally driven."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Apr 2012
#56
I agree with seabeyond, that many people can't fathom being in a situation where it's needed.
gateley
Apr 2012
#7
That is a good option (and suggestion). Unfortunately, it's not good enough for most into guns.
Hoyt
Apr 2012
#27
That's very thoughtful of you, thanks! I like the idea of a strobe and alarm a LOT!
gateley
Apr 2012
#74
Yes -- I took a class when I was thinking about getting a gun after this incident, and
gateley
Apr 2012
#99
I have no problem with people (responsible, non-Zimmerman people) carrying guns. I just
gateley
Apr 2012
#76
The very next day I called the police and asked "how do I get a gun, and where can I learn to use it
gateley
Apr 2012
#98
For some reason many people can't seem to believe that bad things happen in churches ...
spin
Apr 2012
#47
Sure it's valid for SD in a small percentage of situations. But why arm millions of citizens on the
Hoyt
Apr 2012
#23
re: "I think most who carry are just Zimmermans waiting for the "perfect storm.""
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Apr 2012
#63
re: "...your friends may be the gods of carriers, but all are not."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Apr 2012
#75