What responsibility does a church have to prevent a shooting or attack?

Following a violent incident, a church may face lawsuits from victims or their families. These lawsuits often stem from the financial burdens associated with the loss of loved ones and the healthcare expenses of the victims. Legal action may be necessary to recover compensation through the church’s insurance policies or may be perceived as the only viable means of seeking redress.

A central issue in such lawsuits is the foreseeability of the violent event, which determines whether the church had a duty to take preventive measures. Typically, a church is considered one of the least likely places for violence, particularly shootings. However, the foreseeability of an event can be influenced by several factors, including prior criminal activity within the church or its immediate vicinity. The recency and similarity of such activities to the incident in question, as well as the extent of the church leaders’ awareness of these threats, are critical considerations. Additionally, the church may have a heightened obligation to provide security if it possesses specific knowledge of threats posed by the individual who perpetrated the attack. ¹ 

Readily available information on deadly force incidents against faith-based organizations² bolsters the duty of care expectation.   The OSHA duty of care doctrine, often referred to as the General Duty Clause, is a fundamental component of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act). It mandates that employers provide a workplace free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees

There have been several instances where churches faced lawsuits for not adequately protecting their members or employees from violent acts. Here are a few notable examples:

1. First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs: After the tragic mass shooting in 2017, victims’ families sued the church, alleging that it failed to provide adequate security measures to protect its congregation.
2. West Freeway Church of Christ: In 2019, a shooting occurred during a service, leading to lawsuits against the church for not having sufficient security protocols in place.
3. Charleston Church Shooting: The families of the victims of the 2015 shooting at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church sued the church, claiming it did not take necessary steps to protect its members despite previous threats.
4. St. Alphonsus Catholic Church: In 2018, a lawsuit was filed against the church after a parishioner was attacked in the parking lot. The plaintiff argued that the church failed to provide adequate security measures despite previous incidents in the area.
5. Congregation Beth Israel: Following a violent incident in 2019, the synagogue faced a lawsuit alleging that it did not implement sufficient security protocols to protect its members during services.
6. Church of the Highlands: In 2020, a former employee sued the church, claiming that it did not take appropriate steps to protect staff from a known threat, leading to a violent altercation.

These cases often hinge on the concepts of negligence and foreseeability, where plaintiffs argue that the faith-based organization should have anticipated the risk of violence and taken appropriate measures to prevent it.

Sources
 ¹ Church Law Center The Law and Church Security Concerns – Church Law Center
 ² Deadly Force Study – Faith Based Security Network (fbsnamerica.com)