Second Amendment Enabled Armed Citizen To Intervene In Texas, Says SAF

Second Amendment Hero
Second Amendment Hero
Second Amendment Foundation
Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA – -(Ammoland.com)- For the third time, a legally-armed private citizen has intervened in a church shooting, once again underscoring the importance of the right to keep and bear arms, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

Sunday’s tragic mass shooting might have been even worse, according to some officials, had not an armed “good Samaritan” fired at mass shooter Devin Patrick Kelley. It was that exchange of gunfire that caused the killer to flee Sutherland Springs with the armed citizen and another man in pursuit, eventually veering off the highway, where he apparently died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

“What happened Sunday in Sutherland Springs once again demonstrates that armed, law-abiding Americans will step forward when the need arises to defend their neighbors and their communities,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This is not the first time an armed citizen has engaged in a heroic act at a church.”

“In Tennessee on Sept. 24,” he recalled, “a gunman opened fire at the Burnette Chapel Church of Christ, only to be confronted by Robert Engle, who physically confronted the shooter and, despite being injured, continued the fight until the gunman accidentally shot himself. Engle then retrieved his own gun from his car and held the suspect for police.

“Back in 2007,” Gottlieb added, “a woman named Jeanne Assam shot a man who had entered the New Life Church in Colorado Springs after killing two teens outside. That killer subsequently took his own life.

“We stand in agreement with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton who told both MSNBC and Fox News early Monday that Kelley had already violated laws against murder, so another gun law would not prevent this from happening,” Gottlieb concluded.

“The courage of these individuals can never be over stated. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

  • 8 thoughts on “Second Amendment Enabled Armed Citizen To Intervene In Texas, Says SAF

    1. @GhostTX, thanks for your clarification. I gathered from other news reports that was the case but I didn’t know that at the time of writing this post. I didn’t know about the scuffle prior to the legalization of the carrying in church.

    2. @tomcat
      The TX conceal handgun law originally had churches off-limits. This was done so the CHL law could pass as anti-gunners was so against it in the first place. 2 years later, instead of striking the portion of the law the forbid carrying in church, language was added as an addendum so a person could carry in churches. You could say, it was “snuck” in.

    3. I heard on the Hannity show last night that the texas law on carrying in a church is worded so it appears to discourage people from bringing a gun into church. Therefore,no one was armed in the church. Texas should clarify the law so people will be comfortable carrying in church, if this is the case.

    4. I heard on the Hannity show last night that the texas law on carrying in a church is worded so it appears to discourage people from bringing a gun into church. Therefore,no one was armed in the church. Texas should clarify the law so people will be comfortable carrying in church.

    5. Interesting arguments that both wind up to the same conclusion, don’t interfear with our ability to defend our family’s from bad acts, whether from people or governments! Amen!!

    6. In an open letter to my elected representatives: Sen Pat Toomey, Sen. Robert Casey Jr. And US Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick.
      The time has come for our US Congress to get some real stuff done about these continued mass shootings. 1: Get rid of these GUN-Free Zones, all they do is present targets of opportunity of law abiding people of all races, preventing them from defending themselves. 2; Pass this 50 State concealed carry reciprocity act of 2017 (HR 38 AND S 446) this will allow concealed carry permit holders the ability to defend themselves and family( also innocent by-standers) from these random acts of terrorism ( and yes, the Texas shooting was pure and simply an act of Domestic terrorism) We law abiding people, refuse to be “victims” any longer We know more ‘Gun laws” will not prevent the next act of violence, but an armed citizen may prevent or reduce the casualties. To bad a church goer was not armed, may have saved a lot of lives.. just my thoughts on this. Everyone must contact their elected representatives, and press them on the above suggestions. IT Will SAVE LIVES

      1. Whoa hold on a minute there Gary. Agreed that an armed citizen may prevent or reduce the casualties as you put it. But to beg your Congress Critters to pass a law which would be Unconstitutional is crazy. Remember your right to carry is a natural right and exists independent of the Constitution (which does’t grant rights) or the Government (which doesn’t grant rights). So to ask the Federal Government to force their creators to accept certificates of permission from other States is giving FedGov power they do not posses. The proper approach to your Congress Critters would be, “Since you, upon being elected swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and our federal Constitution doesn’t delegate to the federal government any power over the Country at Large to restrict our arms. Accordingly, all pretended federal laws, regulations, orders, opinions, or treaties which purport to do so are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. They are also unconstitutional as in violation of the Second Amendment. and should be repealed.” CCW permits are a restriction upon our rights since we “need” Government’s permission to exercise our right, at that point it ceases to be a right and becomes a privilege granted by Government. “If the central government has the authority to tell a state it must accept permits from all the other states, then it also has the authority to tell a state it may not accept a concealed permit from any other states. If the central government can do these things it can set up a national concealed carry permit scheme and in essence bring into existence a national arms registry. That is exactly where this is headed.” Attorney Richard D. Fry

    Comments are closed.