TexasCHLforum.com

Howdy,

I'm sorry this is a long post . I've been on this forum for a while, but I'm not sure I've ever posted. I attended a training meeting for the new volunteer security team that is being established at my church. We currently serve as greeters and I was very interested in how the team would be implemented, since it effects me. The individual heading up the team means very well and is passionate about keeping worshipers safe. It was very obvious from the beginning that he was very proud of his plan for the team. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone else was consulted and it was clear from the start that he was not a firearm enthusiast, familiar with the caliber of individuals who hold CHLs and carry regularly, nor with laws in the State of Texas. The slides were very generic and not at all tailored to the church or specific to legal requirements in Texas. Based on the questions from the audience, it appears there were quite a few who were very knowledgeable. When questioned, he told people to contact the elders if they didn't like his plan. I think this was just his pride, but that can cause reckless decisions. When asked how other churches implemented security teams, he simply said that in his 20+ year of ministry only one other church he knew of even had a security plan. He stated that everyone that would be carrying needed to carry on an empty chamber. That he would be requesting the elders approve 30.06 signs after the team was established. And that he was ordering shirts that said security, so everyone knew who they were.

I was one of many I'm sure that emailed the elders. I strongly suggested that they consult a professional with experience in church security teams when developing the plan and that they reach out to other churches in the area who have successfully implemented security teams. I also debunked the wild west shootout lie regarding 30.06 (he actually said that right after he said he was pro-2A ). And told them they really needed legal advance since it was clear that he was not aware of the laws and could not have volunteer security teams in shirts that say security.

So my real reason for writing this, we could use a lot of prayer. Also, with the incredible amount of knowledge on this forum, I'm sure others attend churches that have successfully implemented security teams without recklessly creating mass shooting zones by disarming CHLs. If anyone would be willing to provide a contact that can provide some information on how your team was implemented that I could pass on, or even to meet with myself and the elders and the security team leader, I would be very grateful. You can PM me and I'll send you my contact info. I'm on the east side of Dallas.

Thanks

Wow. Sounds like someone was put in charge who is well meaning, but totally ignorant about what he is doing.

RossA wrote:Wow. Sounds like someone was put in charge who is well meaning, but totally ignorant about what he is doing.

Agreed. I'd talk to the elders and tell them that the guy in charge of this (while meaning well) has absolutely no clue what he's doing and that you think you should get some professionals in or at least people who are more knowledgeable to set up the security detail.

Contact Mac Mackenzie at Critical Defense Group in Greenville. He is phenomenal!:

https://www.criticaldefensegroup.com/

I sent you a PM. You have identified the three biggest problems already: no specific plan based on your site and no guidance, wearing “Security” Shirts, and any signs indicating that your church is a victim-rich environment with empty chambers being the unforgivable sin. Your guy needs to step down and let someone with a clue step in.

AJSully421 wrote:I sent you a PM. You have identified the three biggest problems already: no specific plan based on your site and no guidance, wearing “Security” Shirts, and any signs indicating that your church is a victim-rich environment with empty chambers being the unforgivable sin. Your guy needs to step down and let someone with a clue step in.

You are correct that as a volunteer security group, you can have nothing saying security on it. All of our security team wear ID cards on lanyards that show us as ushers. There are also others not on the security team that are also ushers and have no idea about the team. Our team was hand picked by the elders from those that they know and trust. Most of us have been shooting with some of the elders so they are aware of our familiarity with firearms. Our church does have an .07 sign but no .06 sign nor will they as long as our pastor and current board remains. We have all been to the seminars and a couple of our members are LEO's as well.
All of our board members wear ear pieces with 2 way radio's as well as a couple of select ST members.

Biggest thing is get some formal training even if it's only classroom training to become more aware of what you can and cannot do.

I've found a lot of info here, http://www.sbc.net/churchresources/chur ... curity.asp

As others have already indicated, the fellow taking the lead for your security group may have good intentions but little idea about effective security measures. Our church recently established a security committee comprised of a few individuals with former law enforcement experience and other folks like me that are simply interested in doing what we can for our fellow congregants. Two of us on the committee are Elders. It is always good to consider input from a number of different perspectives, and so far I think our little group has done some good things without going off half-cocked, so to speak.

So far, the ideas from the committee that have been implemented have stressed low-key, low-observable activities -- partly to placate those in the congregation that are aghast at the idea that a church should ever need any form of security measures (or that anyone would ever consider bringing firearms to church), and partly to ensure liberty of our congregants to carry concealed if they so choose. To date, we haven't even put up 30.07 signs, but have a policy that open carry is not encouraged and those doing so will be verbally informed of the need to either conceal or leave. To a man, our committee favors anyone carrying concealed that wants to. There is a lot of ground we haven't covered yet, and some that may never really be covered, but we do not intend to try to make the church into a fortress since we all strongly feel that our church should be a welcoming place rather than a foreboding one.

In addition to procedures implemented, we want to hold some seminars/workshops/classes to enhance individual security for our congregants, but so far we don't have any specific items on the calendar. Since some of us on the committee having teaching experience and credentials in areas including firearms safety, LTC, NRA's Refuse to be a Victim and First Aid / Basic Life Saving, I expect we'll begin working to get some classes on the calendar in the next few months. After all, if we can promote individual awareness and safety we are promoting safety of our church at the same time.

I understand the need but what does the church's insurance say about setting up security forces? I see tremendous liability problems in these situations once it is an organized church sponsored security force. I am not against it but I wonder about the legal issues and whether an attorney has been consulted. Real police if there is a suit are covered by the police force (taxpayer). Church though? Individuals in that security force? Who pays the legal bills if there is a shooting? There is another post running now about a woman who killed a BG that was trying to kill a cop. She is now being sued in civil court. Tough decisions. I wish that there was some kind of good samaritan law to protect the good guys.

You also to take into consideration that after Sutherland Springs, the Dallas Diocese decided to take down signs to avoid portraying themselves as a "defense free zone" to potential predators.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2017/11/06/dioc ... -measures/

Great advice in the above comments. Your church can choose to go with being licensed or volunteer (with the new law) but there are requirements for both that must be followed. Obviously licensed has a lot more requirements like insurance, training, uniforms and whether you go with an existing security company or form your own or with a Letter of Authority (LOA).

I have been on our church security team since it was started in 2009. We started out licensed with another company, then LOA, then decided to become fully licensed on our own. We want to keep that even with the change in the law. That lets us have uniforms (Level III Security) and Personal Protection Officer (Level IV).

There is going to be a Sheepdog Seminar for churches in Hurst June 30th: http://www.sheepdogsafetytraining.com/f ... t-june-30/. This seminar is designed more for making churches aware of the need for thinking about safety and security. There are also vendors who will try to sell you services and products and books etc. - some very good, some not. But it is good source of information especially for churches just looking into it for the first time. The last one I went to was about two or three years ago and they did address specific legal requirements - though that has now changed. So I'm sure they will address those changes in the law.

Finally, from what you shared, I would be very concerned with the plan the gentleman presented. As others stated there are so many things wrong about what he is recommending.

Thank you so much for all the advice. I've reached out again to the elders and I will pray that it goes well.

Thanks

Security, especially in a volunteer setting, is a team effort. The guy in charge sounds more like a dictator than a team leader. A dictator whose ego won't allow himself admit to any faults is dangerous. I would quietly back away from this guy. sometimes poor misinformed security is worse than no organized security at all.

Liberty wrote:Security, especially in a volunteer setting, is a team effort. The guy in charge sounds more like a dictator than a team leader. A dictator whose ego won't allow himself admit to any faults is dangerous. I would quietly back away from this guy. sometimes poor misinformed security is worse than no organized security at all.

Chas.

rotor wrote:I understand the need but what does the church's insurance say about setting up security forces? I see tremendous liability problems in these situations once it is an organized church sponsored security force. I am not against it but I wonder about the legal issues and whether an attorney has been consulted. Real police if there is a suit are covered by the police force (taxpayer). Church though? Individuals in that security force? Who pays the legal bills if there is a shooting? There is another post running now about a woman who killed a BG that was trying to kill a cop. She is now being sued in civil court. Tough decisions. I wish that there was some kind of good samaritan law to protect the good guys.

Insurance and legal liability are always issues. But only to those who have survived a shooting. The first goal is to survive. Everything else is secondary.