Image 01 Image 03

Gunman Kills Two at a Texas Church, Is Killed by Armed Churchgoers

Gunman Kills Two at a Texas Church, Is Killed by Armed Churchgoers

Gov. Greg Abbott: “I am grateful for the church members who acted quickly to take down the shooter and help prevent further loss of life”

A gunman opened fire at a church near Fort Worth, Texas and managed to kill two people before armed churchgoers intervened and doubtlessly saved many more lives.  The gunman was killed at the scene.

USA Today reports:

A man pulled out a shotgun inside a North Texas church on Sunday and opened fire, killing two people, authorities said. It could have been far worse.

Two congregants, both volunteer members of the church’s security team, drew their weapons and confronted the gunman, fatally shooting him and saving an “untold number of lives” at West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, a town of about 17,000 people near Fort Worth.

Their actions, described as “heroic” by the Texas Department of Public Safety, brought a quick end to an attack that remained under investigation on Sunday night. Authorities have not provided information about a possible motive.

Officials have not released the names of the victims or the gunman, whom FBI Special Agent in Charge Matthew DeSarno said had roots in the area but is “relatively transient.”

“This team responded quickly and within six seconds, the shooting was over. Two of the parishioners who were volunteers of the security force drew their weapons and took out the killer immediately, saving untold number of lives,” said Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who also hailed the state’s gun laws.

“We lost two great men today,” Britt Farmer, the church’s senior minister said, “but it could have been a lot worse.”

While USA Today does not include Farmer’s full statement, the Wall Street Journal does.

Britt Farmer, the church’s senior minister, said the volunteers had contained the incident.

“We lost two great men today, but it could have been a lot worse and I am thankful that our government has allowed us the opportunity to protect ourselves,” he said.

. . . . Under Texas law, weapons are allowed into places of worship unless there is signage posted stating otherwise.

Tarrant County Sheriff Bill Waybourn said that “today, evil walked boldly among us. But let me remind you, good people raised up and stopped it before it got worse.”

Texas governor Greg Abbott issued a statement in which he expressed his gratitude to the heroic parishioners who “acted quickly to take down the shooter and help prevent further loss of life.”

Watch the report:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Would any place call itself police free?

If this happened in NY, CA, among other lefty places, this would have resulted in multiple deaths, and predicably the left would have called for even more gun control.

But it happened where there are responsible people who were armed, thereby preventing what would have been worse.

The difference is clear.

We must stop electing Democrats. Our lives depend on that.

    What I find very disturbing is this statement by Britt Farmer:
    I am thankful that our government has allowed us the opportunity to protect ourselves,”
    This is a really absurd statement. The Constitution did not nor does the government “allow” us our God Given Rights it merely enumerates important ones. It is the government that has denied these rights in some places. Citizens do not need the permission of government to enjoy the our Rights. We have been led down a path (mostly by Dimocrats) to believe the government is in control. We have given away our Rights and it is the responsibility of every American to take them back.

Given the chance, every single Democratic Presidential candidate (and most of their Congress members as well) would deny citizens the right to defend themselves in this manner.

“Gun Free Zones” are a monumentally stupid idea and they should be eradicated.

I wasn’t born in Texas, but I got here as fast as I could. God, I love this state and the people in it.

    Milwaukee in reply to Paul. | December 30, 2019 at 2:17 pm

    Right on!

    “I wasn’t born in Texas, but I got here as fast as I could. God, I love this state and the people in it.”

    That, and the quote “You may all go to hell and I will go to Texas.”
    Davy Crockett

    4fun in reply to Paul. | December 30, 2019 at 8:57 pm

    We need to make the politicians pay for their own security other than line of Presidential succession.
    Governors, big city mayors that think gun control laws are great can lead the way by giving up their drivers and security personnel.
    None of them have state secrets or their finger on the nuclear button so why should taxpayers pay for their security.
    And because they hate guns, they can buy their own pepper spray if they want to feel safe.

How to deal with a bad guy with a gun? Have a good guy with a gun, or multiple thereof.

This is not a story that fits the Democrat Media’s narrative on gun control. Democrats do not liked armed citizens defending themselves from evil.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to dystopia. | December 30, 2019 at 1:37 pm

    Liberal media will no doubt paint the low life shooter as being murdered and those who put him down as murderers.

      Nah they are painting him as a Trump supporter because he’s white. Doesn’t matter that he was an armed criminal and the color of his skin in no way indicates he was a ‘right wing Trump supporter’ but yeah that’s what they are putting all over Gov. Abbot’s twitter feed. Not that they know anything about him, other than the color of his skin.

      The head of security, who took the shot and killed the shooter, is however a Trump supporter. It states that on his website. He’s running for an office of some sort, a local one in the area so he has a website.

        puhiawa in reply to kyrrat. | December 30, 2019 at 8:54 pm

        Looks like he is a Bernie Boy. Was planning on destroying a refinery they think. That is why the left went silent.

I really hope someone asks Joe Biden publicly if he still thinks the law that permitted those parishoners to concealed carry is “irrational”, like he said when it was announced.
Of course knowing him he’ll try and spin it to somehow blame the law for letting the shooter in in the first place.

Thank you, God, for providing the tools that we might defend ourselves from those who would do us harm.

    drednicolson in reply to GWB. | December 30, 2019 at 3:33 pm

    A verse from the Psalms (paraphrased):

    “Praise the Lord, Who trains my hands to war, and my fingers to fight.”

      Luke 22:36 “He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
      I think by implication Jesus is saying that being able to protect yourself (family & community) with a quality (at the time) weapon is more important than any goods you may have. It is your DUTY to be able to defend yourself & those around you who are defenseless. It means to me that you should have state of the art weapons commiserate with the potential threat.

Very good that members had guns- too bad, one of them was the first murdered.

Watch the video a few times. Maybe save your life.

Killers aren’t playing and they aren’t going to give you time to get up to speed.

The first innocent man killed wasn’t the closest to the murderer, the first man murdered appears to be the closest with a gun, and he took a second, a half a second, too long to fire.

Perhaps if he had more artfully hidden he was pulling out his weapon, he would have had more time before he was shot. Maybe it was hopeless. But he didn’t and the murderer shot him first.

Thank God for his bravery. It gave another man time to react, aim, and save the rest of the parishioners.

5 armed parishioners in this very integrated church of blacks, Hispanics and whites. 3 of the armed parishioners were white men, one was a black, and one was an elderly grandmother who opted for a bench rest position and hence was not initially counted. Now that is how America should operate. Like this church. All for one, one for all.

amatuerwrangler | December 30, 2019 at 2:30 pm

For those who do not already realize it, take note that the whole thing was over in about the time it takes for the operator to say, “911 Emergency. What is your emergency?”

Keep this in mind when you are told you don’t need a gun, that you should call the police when something happens. When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to amatuerwrangler. | December 30, 2019 at 3:07 pm

    Hear! Hear!

    inspectorudy in reply to amatuerwrangler. | December 30, 2019 at 3:45 pm

    That is the same as the old ad about rape. You have three options, a condom, a cell phone and a gun. The first prevents an unwanted child but you will be raped. The second is the cops who are 20 minutes away and will only come to file a report. The third is the only choice that will do any good.

This incident shows the importance of multiple armed defenders, and shows why putting one or two armed officers in schools is not sufficient. Teachers, parents, maintenance people, bus drivers, landscapers, and anyone else otherwise allowed to carry in public should be allowed to carry on school grounds.

If any of these people intends harm, laws against carrying the weapons to do so will not stop them. They are not deterred by the much higher criminal punishments for murder so of course they won’t be deterred by the much lighter punishments for carrying in a prohibited place.

Laws against carrying in schools only disarms the would be defenders. Bill Clinton’s “gun free” defender-free schools act has enabled the murder of hundreds of children. Stop it!

Notice that the highly trained Wilson was unable to stop the murderer until the two defenders nearest the shooter had already been shot and were out of the fight. That means that if he had been in their place he would have shot too. It isn’t just his training that made the difference but also the number of defenders.

Awesome that the congregation at West Freeway Church of Christ had several more defenders at the ready as well. Every place they go is safer because of it.

    The man who shot the assassin was a retired police officer. He specifically said, when interviewed, that he withheld fire for a second or two, to allow parishioners to clear his line of fire. He also landed a head shot from approximately 50 feet away. Most carriers would not have been capable of that. The same is true of schools. While two armed security officers per school is far two few to provide adequate security, allowing untrained people to carry firearms in schools. Churches and non-educational public buildings should be open to armed citizens.

      amatuerwrangler in reply to Mac45. | December 30, 2019 at 8:47 pm

      Mac– Everyone is untrained until they are trained. Marksmanship and firearms handling is not inherent in our species. It is learned through training, and retained through practice. I’ve been involved in such training, both as recipient and trainer, in both the Army and the police worlds. Training most likely similar to that received by the shooter you mentioned.

      For those not aware, there is a vast gap between the number of rounds fired by police and those that actually strike the intended target, in my experience. I’m happy this current shooter hit his mark as he did, but don’t bet the ranch on it being a regular thing. Or that the next one called to intervene will do the same.

        Most civilian carriers, in the US, have no tactical firearms training at all. In most state it is not required. In Florida, a CWFL can be obtained upon firing one round after attending a very short course largely restricted to self defense law and firearm safety. The civilian carry population is largely untrained, but still carrying deadly weapons. This is fine, as long as people know their limitations. LEOs are horribly undertrained. Statistically, only about 20-30% of police rounds, fired during police involved shootings, actually hit the target. And, this at distances of, usually, 30 feet or less. LEOs receive considerably more firearms training than your average civilian carrier. So, where do those other 70-80% of the rounds fired go? Where we do not want them to go, is into innocents bystanders. Now, in a church, government building or mall, the bystanders are mainly adults. In schools the bystanders are mainly young children. In a shooting situation in a church, mall, courthouse, etc, civilian casualties, from police fire are deemed acceptable to the community and the media. But, let an errant LE round find itself embedded in a child’s brain and the community and the media will crucify the LEO. The same is true of civilian defenders. And, that is why you do not want untrained, armed people roaming around inside a school.

        Now, the defender at the church did everything right. He waited until he had a clear shot on the aggressor. He took a head shot, which was guaranteed to instantly incapacitate the shooter. And, he managed to land it from 50 feet in a high stress situation. In this case, training paid off. One shot, at 50′, one deadly threat neutralized. Training, training, training. It always comes back to the same thing.

          The Constitution makes no such combat or other training requirement. I don’t disagree that training, preparedness, and the like are not helpful, but I do disagree with the implication that only formally (at the level of military or police) trained Americans should be permitted to carry. That’s a ridiculous burden to place on a God-given right.

          We need to, as Andrew Branca accurately argues, know the law and be as prepared as possible, but this push for all Americans to be paramilitary is . . . well, counter-Constitutional. Would it be best if every person who carries be trained in every possible scenario? Maybe, but is that an argument against legal concealed or open carry? No way. This line of argument limits our Constitutional rights by buying into the left’s “guns are scary” and should only be carried by the military and other trained professionals (i.e. LEO’s). That dog won’t hunt.

          Mac45 in reply to Mac45. | December 31, 2019 at 2:47 pm

          You have to read what I write, not translate it through your own biases.

          Nowhere did I say that civilians should be required to pass any tests to carry a defensive firearm. However, if one chooses to do so, one assumes a responsibility to the other members of society to use that instrument in such a manner that it will not KILL them. In the case of driving a car, operating an airplane or carrying a firearm, this requires training. And, most firearms carriers, in the US, are either untrained or under-trained. This includes most LEOs. What I was arguing is that people should be aware of their limits, if they intend to use a firearm in public. And, when you find yourself in a situation where you have to use a firearm in self defense in public, it is too late to call time-out and run off to take a course in tactical shooting.

          Now, we have facilities which can be considered sensitive. These are areas where most people do not need personal weaponry, security should be provided by the facility, and are usually limited too jails, prisons and schools. So, only authorized personnel should be armed, with firearms, while in these facilities AND, the security of these facilities is the responsibility of the agency in charge of that facility.

          Public venues, such as public streets, churches, public buildings, even private venues which have an open invitation for the public to enter and make use of the facilities, should have no government restrictions on carry of defensive firearms.

          The bottom line is that a firearms carrier has an obligation, to rest of society to have sufficient training and ability to use that weapon without injuring or killing innocent members of the community. If not, well, they ARE legally responsible for where their bullets end up.

      Many people who are not professionally trained are accurate shots, they have done target practice or are hunters. No one who has not been in some sort of combat is “trained” to take the life of another human. That does not mean that we should stand around defenseless.

        kyrrat in reply to DM. | December 31, 2019 at 2:11 pm

        In the case of the congregants who were volunteer security all of them had been trained, to a degree possible, by the head of the team (the one who took the shot). He had a gun range and trained all of them at that range. You might notice that all those who moved to the gunman were moving in a defensive stance. The lone female member of the team used a pew top as a steady stance prior to moving with the rest of the team.

I remember this discussion a few years ago on a gun forum and it was very interesting. One thing that has to be addressed is the responsibility of any armed citizen to know what their responsibility is when they carry. What would happen if one of the congregation had shot another? What is your liability if you lose your gun? If there had been multiple shooters, bad guys, and not easily identified how would anyone know who was who? As bad as this situation was it was still pretty clear who the bad guy was. What would it be like in a darkened room with loud music? What about drinking and carrying? For me, there is no problem with being armed in churches or schools but other areas can prove problematic for a CWC. It appears that the FBI finally produced a good guy!

My daughter lives a few blocks away from this church, awful

She has a license to carry

Her daughters Mother’s Day Out has Security

This is the world we love in and I hate it

I never had to worry about this growing up… it’s monstrous

If I had my way, no one in the world would have guns, citizens or governments

    txvet2 in reply to gonzotx. | December 30, 2019 at 5:40 pm

    That’s no different than saying you wish nobody had nuclear weapons. They exist and wishing otherwise is useless. The problem isn’t guns, it’s the gunman. We’ve spent the last century letting the left destroy our civilization. Wishing won’t make it stop.

    inspectorudy in reply to gonzotx. | December 31, 2019 at 12:03 am

    what about size and strength? If a big guy asks for your money or your wife what would you do? That is why Colt named their guns the “Great Equalizer”. If there were no guns then size and strength would be the only force. Throw in gangs of the aforementioned and you have hell on Earth. Guns are tools. When you need a tool to stop violence what would you choose?

    tom_swift in reply to gonzotx. | December 31, 2019 at 3:21 am

    If I had my way, no one in the world would have guns

    The last time the world had no guns was the mid-Middle Ages—not an era noted for tranquility.

Did you year about the blonde who tried to commit a mass shooting in California but drove to Texas by accident?

When asked why I carry, I tell folks that aren’t armed depend upon law breakers to not break the law for their security.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | December 30, 2019 at 5:57 pm

The DEM Hate Party keeps pushing their hate….

Just look at the falsehoods Salon dot com published.

Dean Cain Slams Website Claiming Hallmark Christmas Movies Are ‘Fascist Propaganda’: ‘It’s Ridiculous, Insane’

The American left is killing more American Christians and Jews than all muslim nations combined.

This is war.

The second amendment in action.

kudos to the defenders–will not critique their actions as was not there–had they not intervened, the death toll would have been much greater, no disputing–a lesson for us all–it is foolish to imagine we can ” wish away ” the actions of these sick bastards(regardless of their particular weapon)–and to delude ourselves with the ” it can’t happen here, to me ” mantra is to literally risk our lives(and those of our loved ones)–it CAN happen and, given the direction/intent of the dems/leftists/fascists, it will likely continue–we must be prepared–six seconds in a church–if you want to imagine something, how about the alternate outcomes if none of our countrymen had acted to defend one another?