“2 victims in the Texas shooting were members of the church security team. So much for church security.”
As I have been developing a research project on congregational security, a number of people sent me comments about or links to the story of the murder/counter-murder event (H/T Tactical Professor) at West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas at the end of December 2019.
This quote above is from a text message that was among the first personal responses I received. Don’t shit-talk the author. It was from my mom. What is significant here is how profoundly people’s pre-existing views influence their interpretation of events, especially where guns are concerned. Like a Rorschach Test, we learn more about the person interpreting the event (the inkblot equivalent) than we do about the event itself.

I think reasonable people of goodwill can disagree about the propriety of allowing guns in houses of worship — many houses of worship have been discussing this very question — but to suggest that a law allowing the carrying of guns in churches facilitated this church shooting seems profoundly wrong to me.
I was also struck by a Washington Post editorial on the Freeway Church of Christ shooting that concluded with a hyperbolic and false dichotomy: “Instead of turning churches and schools into armed camps, we should do a better job of keeping guns away from people who shouldn’t have them.”
First of all, nothing I have seen or heard about Freeway Church of Christ suggests its members felt their congregation was an “armed camp.” Second, why can’t there be armed church security AND doing a better job of keeping guns away from people who shouldn’t have them?
Like Rorschach’s inkblots, alas, people see what they want to see.


As a recovering academic, I can attest to the truth of your statements, David. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold a rational discussion, because the bedrock assumptions of the members of our American civic community are so divergent.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Responses are telling as to the premises, and philosophical principles, of the responder.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think one thing we see is how movies give us an image of how a trained good guy wouldn’t have had this happen to him. If a person was really a security, they wouldn’t have been shot. Of course, reality gives us a different image, that you can be the greatest trained SEAL and yet still get shot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] Professor David Yamane at Gun Culture 2.0 – Texas Church Murder/Counter-Murder as Rorschach Test. […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] Gun Culture 2.0: Texas Church Murder/Counter-Murder as Rorschach Test […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] Texas Church Murder/Counter-Murder as Rorschach Test […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
As an academician and clinical psychologist in a doctoral training program I certainly see this projection of existing attitudes on such situations. I also see the emerging futility in attempting to engage clinical scientists in a data-based rational discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] 6. Texas Church Murder/Counter-Murder as Rorschach Test. So much has happened in 2020 that it is hard to remember that this event took place at the very end of 2019. I am still taken by Claude Werner’s “murder/counter-murder” characterization. […]
LikeLike