Ego, credential flexing, and public contempt are damaging the culture of church security training and discouraging the volunteers who are trying to protect their congregations.
Try not to focus on the Facebook debate about weapon mounted lights. That is just an example of the overall problem.Try to focus on how we are interacting with each other to lift each other up. That part, iron sharpening iron, has been lacking. I’m not gonna lie, it has taken me by surprise that we aren’t lifting each other up.
Sounds like they need a better instructor. The comment "Are you willing to point your handgun at something you need a light to identify?" answer is 100% yes if I am searching for a threat. First, it's probably dark, hence the need and purpose for a light. Second, if it is the threat in that darkness, I am pretty sure the threat wont "give you a second" to put the light away and get you weapon out.
Its not like you use your weapon light to check closets and dark spaces in the normal course of a safety team members routine. That's why you have a handheld light like Tom said in the other comment, different usage scenarios.
Keith, I appreciate you putting this out and I think the underlying conversation about WML doctrine is worth having. But citing Mas Ayoob's guidance from what was likely a law enforcement newsletter written before most of today's shooters were born as the primary counter-argument to a modern WML is a rough look in 2026.
For the better part of twenty years, hundreds of thousands of service members ran WMLs in two combat theaters, operating in tight stacks and clearing rooms alongside their teammates at ranges where a muzzle covered a buddy was a routine geometrical fact of life. The doctrine wasn't 'never point your gun at anything you don't intend to destroy.' The doctrine was train constantly, trust your teammates, and operate at the level your collective competence earns. By any reasonable accounting, the WML didn't produce the friendly-fire catastrophe that older guidance predicts it should have.
That's not a knock on Mas Ayoob, who was writing for a different audience in a different era with different equipment. It's an acknowledgment that doctrine evolves and that a caveat written for the solo concealed carrier in 1987 isn't the final word on how a trained team should operate in 2026.
And that's really the crux of it: the question isn't whether a WML is categorically safe or unsafe. The question is whether your team trains together enough to build the trust and mutual competency to use their equipment at the level the situation demands. For church safety teams specifically, that means shared range time, force-on-force scenarios, and enough repetition that your people know how their teammates move, think, and react under stress. If you have that foundation, the WML becomes a tool. If you don't, you have bigger problems than the light on the end of the gun.
The debate is worth having. The Ayoob citation just isn't doing the work it used to.
Excellent article. The Scriptural reminders of the added accountability, responsibility as instructors should weigh heavily on our souls and reflect well in our teaching.
Great article! Servant leadership is excellent, and pride is ugly. For us who have been saved and are being saved by the grace of God, our hope of glory is Christ in us (Colossians 1:27). Yeah, shooting well is cool (and super fun). Sparring and rolling are awesome. Being able to lift a lot of weight is great. But nothing compares to knowing Christ. Thanks brother!
Valid points for both opinions...personally I carry both..and depending on the time of year weather job or the clothing etc etc..I may carry only one...depending on the edc at that time..whatever you do like you say all the time brother..TRAIN..PERIOD.. but don't discount or mock other people for things you don't understand! Spot on
Everyone,
Try not to focus on the Facebook debate about weapon mounted lights. That is just an example of the overall problem.Try to focus on how we are interacting with each other to lift each other up. That part, iron sharpening iron, has been lacking. I’m not gonna lie, it has taken me by surprise that we aren’t lifting each other up.
Actually, you should carry both a handheld & WML. 2 different usage scenarios!
Sounds like they need a better instructor. The comment "Are you willing to point your handgun at something you need a light to identify?" answer is 100% yes if I am searching for a threat. First, it's probably dark, hence the need and purpose for a light. Second, if it is the threat in that darkness, I am pretty sure the threat wont "give you a second" to put the light away and get you weapon out.
Its not like you use your weapon light to check closets and dark spaces in the normal course of a safety team members routine. That's why you have a handheld light like Tom said in the other comment, different usage scenarios.
BZ, @Keith Graves!! Great, GREAT advice and counsel for anyone who would be a teacher or instructor, anywhere.
Keith, I appreciate you putting this out and I think the underlying conversation about WML doctrine is worth having. But citing Mas Ayoob's guidance from what was likely a law enforcement newsletter written before most of today's shooters were born as the primary counter-argument to a modern WML is a rough look in 2026.
For the better part of twenty years, hundreds of thousands of service members ran WMLs in two combat theaters, operating in tight stacks and clearing rooms alongside their teammates at ranges where a muzzle covered a buddy was a routine geometrical fact of life. The doctrine wasn't 'never point your gun at anything you don't intend to destroy.' The doctrine was train constantly, trust your teammates, and operate at the level your collective competence earns. By any reasonable accounting, the WML didn't produce the friendly-fire catastrophe that older guidance predicts it should have.
That's not a knock on Mas Ayoob, who was writing for a different audience in a different era with different equipment. It's an acknowledgment that doctrine evolves and that a caveat written for the solo concealed carrier in 1987 isn't the final word on how a trained team should operate in 2026.
And that's really the crux of it: the question isn't whether a WML is categorically safe or unsafe. The question is whether your team trains together enough to build the trust and mutual competency to use their equipment at the level the situation demands. For church safety teams specifically, that means shared range time, force-on-force scenarios, and enough repetition that your people know how their teammates move, think, and react under stress. If you have that foundation, the WML becomes a tool. If you don't, you have bigger problems than the light on the end of the gun.
The debate is worth having. The Ayoob citation just isn't doing the work it used to.
Amen Mr. Graves! Thank you for this article!;
Excellent article. The Scriptural reminders of the added accountability, responsibility as instructors should weigh heavily on our souls and reflect well in our teaching.
Great article! Servant leadership is excellent, and pride is ugly. For us who have been saved and are being saved by the grace of God, our hope of glory is Christ in us (Colossians 1:27). Yeah, shooting well is cool (and super fun). Sparring and rolling are awesome. Being able to lift a lot of weight is great. But nothing compares to knowing Christ. Thanks brother!
Valid points for both opinions...personally I carry both..and depending on the time of year weather job or the clothing etc etc..I may carry only one...depending on the edc at that time..whatever you do like you say all the time brother..TRAIN..PERIOD.. but don't discount or mock other people for things you don't understand! Spot on