CHURCH SECURITY TODAY: Sheep, Shepherds, Wolves and Sheepdogs

CHURCH SECURITY TODAY: Sheep, Shepherds, Wolves and Sheepdogs

For quite a few years we and others have offered church security consulting and training. Anyone following the news realizes that the frequency of these events has increased.

First of all, churches are widely considered to be “gun-free” zones, and indeed, in some states, they are by law. This, of course, is foolish. It is just as foolish to put a sign in your front yard “bragging” that you have no guns. You invite attacks, and prohibit the only real solution — good guys/gals with guns.

Secondly, the security concept you employ is very important. In other words, do you hire off-duty police, uniformed or plain clothes? A security agency? Paid church staff? Church volunteers? Any combination of the above?

There are pros and cons to each. For high visibility and expense, uniformed off-duty police are available in every jurisdiction. Just know that with police you will get a police-type response, which is not always desirable. That response will get you trained cops in a shorter period of time — one or more immediately and the force in 6-9 minutes.

You can hire a security company to provide licensed and minimally trained uniformed officers, but know that there will likely be no plan, and the primary role is as a visible deterrent. If something happens, there will be no coordination with each other much less with armed congregants.

Where budgets allow, paid church staff is very good idea, assuming a standard of training. In most jurisdictions a church can hire employees and not need to register as a security agency. Of course they need to be armed. What do you expect unarmed people to do when faced with a mass murderer?

Many churches can only afford to work with volunteers from their congregation. This can work fine, as they know the church and people best. The temptation is that there is no one available to provide professional firearms training, tactics, or the observation skills needed for this type of response. This stuff isn’t covered in the carry permit classes.

You cannot say that one solution is right for every situation. Different churches have different needs and tolerances for security presence. Some may feel a high benefit comes through visibility of security. Others will agree that the undercover component is generally more desirable as it puts back the element of surprise on the attacker. Some congregants will feel more secure knowing there is security; others will feel the church must not be secure or there would be no need to hire security. As a result some churches try to keep it a secret, which makes training all the important personnel difficult (and in actuality, unlikely).

What is universal is that the discussion needs to occur. The church is responsible for the protection of the flock. In those churches where the leaders have bodyguards but the congregation is left on their own, shame on you. You are not a shepherd.

We know who the sheep are; we will know the wolves sooner than desired… but do you have sheepdogs? These are the people who will run to the aid of the flock and engage the wolf (based on the prearranged protocol) as we have seen in a few cases. This avoids what we have seen a lot of — wolves having their way with the sheep in silly “gun-free” churches.

But what about all the congregants who have permits and carry? A bunch of untrained, overzealous people with guns but no strategy to carry it out is NOT a security plan. It is a disaster waiting to happen. These people need to be part of the plan but generally not as primary engagers of the wolf.

So, now what? Call a professional consultant who understands the peculiarities of church security. Call somebody who can train your people. Most of all, call a sheepdog. This is where most churches will start, and let it grow from there.

https://www.facebook.com/Command.Performance.Firearms/