Regarding the mass murder in the Texas church, President Trump was correct:
it was a good thing that somebody had a gun.
Somebody outside the church had a rifle. He knew how to use it. It will not
cost $1 million for the local authorities to try and convict the murderer.
There will be no life imprisonment without possibility of parole, and no
overturning of that sentence by a parole board. The murderer was transferred to
the Supreme Court. I am certain that he has been tried, convicted, and
sentenced. There will be no appeal. There will be no parole.
Nevertheless. . . .
If every man in that church had been packing, fewer people would have died.
If every woman in that church had been packing, even fewer would have died.
It is common for most churches to have a greeter at the door. My church has
two greeters at the door. If both of them were visibly packing a pistol next
Sunday, I would feel relieved. Two greeters, two pistols. This would be
consistent with what Jesus taught:
And he said unto them, When I sent you
without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said,
Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take
it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment,
and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be
accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things
concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords.
And he said unto them, It is enough (Luke 22:35-38).
I would prefer new greeters. The replacements would be at least six feet
two and weigh at least 220 pounds.
I know, I know: this would be regarded as radical. But at some point, if
things continue as they have so far, this will not be considered radical.
There was a time in the American West when this was common. A good book on
this is Ross Phares' book, Bible in Pocket, Gun in Hand: The Story of
Frontier Religion (1971).
I suppose I'm getting ahead of the market. But if there are another 40 or
50 massacres in fundamentalist churches, attitudes may change.
Packing won't ever be acceptable in theologically liberal churches. What
they sow, they will reap. A policy of "no active resistance here" is
not a good way to avoid terrorism. There is a fundamental strategy of crime
prevention: make it more difficult for the criminal to commit his crime against
you than somebody else. This is an application of the most fundamental law of
economics: when the price increases, less is demanded.
I believe that it is a good policy for Bible-believing churches to adopt an
at-the-door policy that visibly announces to terrorists: "You should visit
a liberal church."
"PEACE, PEACE, WHEN THERE IS NO PEACE"
A church is supposed to be a place of peace. Everybody agrees on that. A
nation should also be a place of peace. Most people agree on that. But only
pacifists believe that the state should be disarmed.
Why does anybody believe that the church should be disarmed? Why should the
state have a monopoly on armed defense against criminals? Why don't we believe
in citizens' arrest? We used to. We don't anymore. Why does any God-fearing
person not believe that it is legitimate for people to be armed?
In liberal political circles, the gun-abolition outlook of browbeaten
Western Europe is common. Liberals want to make Americans as fearful about the
state, and as unquestioning regarding state intervention in their lives, as
citizens are in Western Europe. This outlook does not predominate in the United
States with respect to political theory, but it is predominant in practice.
Most people believe in the principle of the Second Amendment in the United
States, but most people are rarely armed. Most people really believe that the
state can defend them against terrorists. Americans have surrendered their
liberty to the federal government since 2011 on this basis. That is why the
massacre in Texas took place.
If we talk the talk, we should walk the walk. If we believe in an armed
citizenry, we ought to be armed citizens. We should practice what we preach,
but it is difficult for us to break with culture. Our culture is schizophrenic
with respect to the general principle of an armed citizenry versus the actual
arming of citizens.
Americans have always been armed. This goes back to the era of the American
Revolution. The one American historian who wrote a book saying that this was
not true during the American Revolution, and which won the most prestigious
award in American academic history, the Bancroft prize, was a fraud. The
author faked his evidence. He was fired by Emory University. The
Bancroft prize was revoked, which was the first time this had ever happened. He
sucked in the tenured academics, who had egg on their collective faces. He did
not suck in non-university scholars who believed in the Second Amendment, and
who smelled a rat when they read his book. They caught him red-handed. He
initially had academic defenders, but they soon disappeared.
Being armed is an old American tradition. It needs to be revived.
THE THEOLOGY OF SELF-DEFENSE
My father was in the FBI. When he became a Christian, he grew concerned
about whether he should ever shoot a criminal who threaten violence. His
pastor, who was the first Northern Presbyterian pastor ever to be defrocked for
orthodoxy -- without a trial (1933) -- had a ready reply: "Shoot him. He's
going to hell anyway."
When somebody threatens violence against you, it is legitimate to transfer
his case to a superior venue. Turn him over to a superior judge.
Remember this rule: there will be no plea bargaining on judgment day.
CONCLUSION
What is my opinion about .357, .45, or Glock?
I believe in diversity. I believe in freedom of choice. I believe in the
division of labor and specialization.
Nevertheless, I'm old school. I favor the .45 ACP: cocked and locked. I was
trained by Col. Jeff Cooper. He and I were classmates in graduate school. He
taught me the standard of handgunning: two in the chest, one in the head, three
seconds.
I believe that people should receive training in gun safety. Whenever you
think "gun safety," think this: two in the chest, one in the head,
three seconds.
What is safe for you is dangerous for your assailant.