It is hard to get a gun in New York. It is especially hard for a man with a history of mental illness to buy one legally. It is easier to get a gun in Texas. The number of people who are comfortable with guns in Texas makes it easier and more imperative for a church to prepare itself to stop an attack by creating a protective task force.
Could you claim that the tougher gun laws in New York led to the use of a knife instead of a gun, a weapon more easily defended against, but can still kill? Could you claim that in a state where gun ownership is widespread a protecting task force that trains (as was the case for this church) for the eventuality is the exact definition of having a “good guy with a gun?”
Me. I prefer New York’s approach. It is no guarantee. We know that an attack on a synagogue using guns is possible, even in New York. In the synagogue I belong to, we added a surcharge for additional security. We have the privilege of hiring people to protect us rather than arming ourselves. If our country was, like Australia, a place where firearms were rare, were used only for sport or for hunting, we might not need the additional security. Even if guns have become more rare in New York, that is far from the case for the country as a whole. The additional fee for security I pay at my synagogue is a tax I pay to live in a country where it is easy for Texans to purchase guns.