Church of Latter Day Saints Says Its Properties Are Still ‘Gun-Free Zones’

The Mormon faith isn’t innately hostile to gun ownership or the Second Amendment. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does, however, ban firearms on its properties unless they’re being carried by law enforcement. After last month’s attack on a church service in Michigan, some members of the LDS faith were hopeful that church leaders would revisit that policy, while others said they were simply going to ignore it.

Men need to comfort their families and protect them,” one user wrote on Instagram, “by whatever means necessary.”

Another simply shared a verse from the faith’s signature scripture, the Book of Mormon — “And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed.”

Still other social media users have asserted that they have already been attending church armed in defiance of the policy — and intend to continue doing so.

Well, those hoping that LDS leadership would rethink their rules making temples and chapels ‘”gun-free zones” are going to be disappointed, because the church is keeping the ban in place. 

In the wake of the Sept. 28 tragedy, conservative pockets of social media erupted with criticism from self-identified members arguing that this policy made worshippers more vulnerable to attack.

If church officials heard that feedback, they sidestepped it in the Oct. 9 communication issued by the Church Security Department.

The document encourages readers to regularly review the Church Security Resources page on the Utah-based faith’s site. Those resources include a handout with instructions to run and hide if possible in the case of an active shooter, and to fight back only as a last resort — standard advice within the security community.

The Salt Lake Tribune spoke to Stanford professor and gun control advocate John Donohue about the LDS policy, and as you can imagine, he’s all in favor. 

People tend to misplace their firearm, leaving it in a bathroom or not realizing when it falls from a pocket. A loose gun, especially in an environment where children run loose through the hallways, is a “concern.” Tellingly, he said, schools that permit teachers to carry invariably see their insurance rates increase.

“That’s not to say that in any one particular case things might turn out well,” he conceded. “But there does seem to be this general trade-off on balance” that the fewer guns present, the better for everyone.

I think it’s telling that Donohue cites increased insurance rates instead of any specific incident where armed parishioners or members of volunteer church security teams have caused problems. And if the anti-gun professor believes that the fewer guns there are the better, then of course he’s going to support churches and houses of worship establishing “no guns allowed” policies. 

The problem, though, is that violent murderers and those intent on causing harm to worshipers aren’t going to be stopped by a sign. in the attack in Michigan, the first officers to respond showed up about two minutes after 911 dispatchers informed local police of the attack. That’s pretty quick, all things considered, but two minutes is still plenty of time for a cold-blooded murderer to carry out their killing spree. We’ll never know if more lives could have been saved if the church had a team of parishioners serving as armed security, or if there were one or more concealed carry licensees in the pews, but we do know that the faster an active assailant is met with an armed response, the better. 

There’s at lease one LDS member who’s hoping to convince leadership to reverse course on their gun-free zones. Jan Durham is a Mormon who lives in Virginia, and has started an online petition encouraging the church to “prayerfully reconsider this policy,” and allow “responsible, law-abiding members… to carry concealed weapons while attending worship services and activities.”

I’m not a member of the LDS faith, but to me Durham’s proposal makes a lot of sense. A “gun-free zone” offers no defense or protection against violence. Instead, it gives murderers the upper hand and a target-rich environment… at least until law enforcement arrives on the scene of their crime.