I gave a lecture last year at the ASIS Conference in Anaheim California on the topic of houses of worship and security.

Most talks I give these days are to Christian church staff and volunteers who are just starting, or want more information about how, to protect their church or ministry. But these folks at this conference were, for the most part, security professionals. They were there to learn the latest trends, technology, and matters relating to security.

I was surprised to see so many interested in this topic of church security because most of them in the room were like me; professionals who have spent their careers in law enforcement, intelligence, security, or public safety.

But they wanted to know about what is going on in churches in the U.S.

The one thing I said during the talk, which I have stated before in print, during interviews, and while lecturing, is that security is for the most part in its infancy when it comes to the church; one that I have not seen since I started in this field 30 years ago.

Last week's article about guns, security, and churches is a prime example...allow me explain.

When I started as a young police officer I remember working industrial areas around Chicago where businesses and factories were getting hit left and right with burglaries. Through windows, glass doors, and roofs, stealing things like safes, typewriters (and later computers), and anything else that could be pawned off to support a drug or alcohol habit.

During that time alarms were not the "norm", CCTV was almost non-existent, physical security was lacking, and it wasn't real difficult to find places to burglarize. There were a lot of "soft targets".

Sound familiar?

Back then the alarm companies had armed "runners" that would respond to a business's burglar alarm. These guys were armed private security, worked for the alarm company, and I guess the thought was they could probably get to the business faster than the police and stop the crime in progress?

After awhile you got to know the alarm personnel because you would respond with the same ones over and over again. There was this one really old "runner" who wore a revolver that had a barrel half way down his leg. While on an alarm call, he once told me and my partner "Let me go in first I get $50.00 if I shoot somebody!"

We assumed he was talking about a burglar, and we did let him go in first because we were afraid that $50.00 might apply to us as well!

And it wasn't just security personnel. During these times, it was not unusual for a cop to encounter a burglar coming out of a building, take his gun out and shoot, either a warning shot or at the offender; laws and procedures were different back then.

In one case a friend of mine, who was a new police officer, responded to a Post Office being burglarized. He told me the police surrounded the place and that as one of the burglars was climbing out a window he (my friend) heard a gunshot and then everyone started shooting, so he took his gun out and started shooting too. No one knows who fired that first shot, the police or the burglars, but the burglars gave up, no one was hurt, and the Postal Service had a lot of holes to patch up on their building.

We laughed at the time, but that is the way it was back then, like the "Wild West".

Flash-forward 30 years later and the difference in the way the police, security, and private businesses operate are amazing. These days I am astounded at the great strides physical, electronic, and procedural security has been integrated into our society.

Alarms, CCTV, card access, and security personnel are a regular sight in almost all private and public sectors, be it court buildings, schools, malls, corporations, airports, manufacturing, amusement parks, museums, etc. There is a partnership between police and private security, so much the lines becomes sometimes blurred as each group protects our society. There are professional associations, working groups, research, best practices, and training standards for private security.

But churches and security is still in that "what should we do?" stage.

This gun issue and security personnel is a prime example. There are no "best practices"; the laws are sketchy in many states as to how are "armed, volunteer, church security personnel" regulated, if at all. There is not a lot of experience with this topic, we don't have 30 years of learning and sometimes I really do feel like I am back in the "Wild West" phase of this business.

This is making insurance companies that insure churches very nervous.

Yet, when I mention that it might not be a good idea arming someone with just 8-hours of concealed carry training to act in an armed security capacity in a crowded church setting, you would think I just insulted their mother. Further, when I state that having many people bring their guns into church, with no coordinated effort, could turn into a disaster if something does happen and everyone starts pulling out their guns - wow, people get emotional.

But I am really not picking on churches, those who want to protect it, or people's skill with a firearm; the problem is training.

Thirty years ago, there was very little training even for police officers; it was a month or so in a training "academy", a month with a senior officer driving around, and then you were cut loose on your own. We fired our guns once a year to qualify (and the course was a bit of a joke) and it really wasn't unusual to take a shotgun from a police car and find gum wrappers and other junk tossed into the barrel.

Now most police academies are three or four months long and field training, once you are out of the academy, is about the same length. The new officers have multiple, trained, Field Training Officers (FTO's) after they leave the academy and the new officer is not cut loose on their own until they have passed many tests, practice exercises, and have street experience...usually almost a year's time.

Quite a difference from 30 years ago and no more "Wild West" days...standards, laws, and liability are too great.

The point is, it took decades to professionalize police and the field still has a long way to go as new challenges present themselves.

This is going to be the case with churches and security.

But if we don't have these dialogues now and start to shape what is best practices and acceptable to our congregations, church leadership, law enforcement, and insurance companies, there will never be any best practices for all other churches to measure themselves against.

Keep the dialogue going; it is part of the growing process and hopefully the end of the "Wild West" days are in sight.

In Christ,
Jeff Hawkins
Executive Director

Comments from last week's article:

"Once again, you and I seem to be on differing sides of the 'guns in church' debate. In your latest article, once again you make the case for 'more training', which I do agree with. Then you make this statement: "This vet would probably make a good security staff member in a church". Based on what evidence? That he is a vet? Or an Iraqi vet? I'm a vet also. I know that, unless he was a SpecOps soldier, he probably only had the most basic of training and a yearly re-qualification. Hardly the 'advanced training' you seem to call for. Mil, like LE, train for the lowest common denominator to be able to pass in most cases. I saw nothing in the article to indicate that he had any kind of advanced firearms training. Then you make the blanket statement that he would 'probably be good for church security'. We don't even know if the guy is a Christian or would even set foot inside a church. But, believe it or not, I do understand the point you are trying to make." S.M.

"I appreciate your common sense approach to this topic. I am a retired police officer (over 20 years) and a retired private security professional as well. I have developed an interest in some security consulting and especially church security. For the record, I am not in favor of armed church security personnel or members carrying weapons to church. You are right about police officers carrying weapons as a result of professional requirements and being in church for worship. I attended church for years and carried although most people probably didn't know it at the time, unless I was in uniform. Eight hours of training does not prepare one for using a weapon in the most critical moments. That is why p.o.'s have annual extended training in weapon use. Even then, I have known of bad decisions in the use of weapons in some of those moments. We also know that normally incidents of the nature we are considering are over in moments which only adds to the stress of the weapon carrier. I would encourage much dialogue before a decision is made about armed people during church activities." C.H.