> I also agree with the poster who said this was most likely a test - to see how lax security really was.
Few churches have good security. There’s no need to test them (that one will just be more careful now). The same goes for many other events of moderate size. Even the ones that have guards can be attacked simply by shooting the guards first. You need concealed weapons — or very good exterior controls — to be effective against mass shootings.
Two points:
1. More and more churches are forced to have tighter security. In ours, the exits are manned by off duty police. Every usher now has security training. Churches are being targeted.
2. Terrorists do test runs all the time. The 911 hijackers did several. The Islamic terrorists do intelligence and test runs all the time to determine soft and softer target. This point is not even open to debate.