Listed To This Article: Play in new window | Download | Embed
You can also subscribe via Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | RSS | More
Recent research from the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) provides compelling evidence that legally armed civilians play a crucial role in stopping active shooter incidents. The study addresses common concerns raised by critics—such as the risks of mistaken identity, bystander injuries, and interference with law enforcement—and finds little evidence to support these fears.
Armed Citizens vs. Law Enforcement in Active Shooter Situations
According to the CPRC’s extensive database, from 2014 to 2024, at least 157 active shooter incidents were successfully stopped by legally armed civilians. In many of these cases, the intervention occurred before police arrived, potentially saving lives that might have otherwise been lost.
When comparing response times, the study suggests that armed civilians frequently stop attacks within seconds to minutes, while law enforcement may take significantly longer to arrive, depending on location and circumstances. This reinforces the idea that in many cases, a legally armed citizen is the first and best line of defense.
Key Concerns About Armed Civilian Intervention
Despite the effectiveness of armed citizens in stopping mass shootings, some critics argue that civilian involvement could lead to unintended harm. The CPRC report specifically analyzed several of these concerns:
1. Do Armed Civilians Accidentally Shoot Bystanders?
One of the most persistent fears is that a well-intentioned civilian might hit an innocent bystander. However, the CPRC found no documented cases where an armed civilian, acting to stop an active shooter, unintentionally shot a bystander. This suggests that responsible gun owners who intervene in these high-stress situations generally demonstrate disciplined firearm use.
2. Do Armed Citizens Interfere with Police?
Another major argument against civilian intervention is that law enforcement officers might mistake an armed citizen for the shooter. The CPRC found zero cases where police officers mistakenly shot a civilian who had stopped an active shooter. Additionally, the study found no evidence that an armed citizen prevented police from effectively doing their job.
3. Do Armed Citizens Have Their Guns Taken and Used Against Them?
Opponents of civilian intervention sometimes claim that an armed citizen might lose control of their weapon, allowing the attacker to turn it against them. However, the CPRC study did not find any cases where this occurred. In most instances, armed citizens were able to engage the shooter with controlled accuracy, ending the threat quickly.
Notable Cases of Armed Citizens Stopping Active Shooters
The CPRC’s database contains numerous examples of successful interventions by legally armed civilians. Here are a few key incidents:
- Greenwood, Indiana (2022) – An armed citizen, Elisjsha Dicken, stopped an active shooter at the Greenwood Park Mall within 15 seconds of the attack starting, using his concealed handgun to neutralize the threat. Law enforcement officials praised his quick actions, which prevented further casualties.
- Houston, Texas (2017) – A concealed carrier stopped a shooter at a bar after the suspect opened fire on patrons. The armed citizen drew his firearm and fired, ending the attack before police arrived.
- Rockledge, Florida (2017) – A concealed carry permit holder stopped an armed suspect in a workplace shooting, preventing what could have been a mass casualty event.
These cases highlight how law-abiding gun owners have successfully intervened to protect innocent lives.
Underreporting by the Media
One of the most significant findings in the CPRC study is the media’s tendency to underreport instances where armed citizens stop active shooters. While high-profile mass shootings dominate headlines, stories about successful civilian interventions often receive minimal coverage.
The CPRC study suggests that the FBI’s data on active shooter incidents undercounts cases where armed citizens stop attackers. Their research indicates that armed citizens stopped at least 34.4% of active shooter incidents from 2014-2024, compared to the FBI’s much lower estimate.
What This Means for Concealed Carriers
The CPRC’s findings reinforce the importance of responsible concealed carry and self-defense training. Given the study’s evidence that legally armed citizens can effectively stop active threats without causing additional harm, those who choose to carry should ensure they are well-trained and prepared to act decisively if necessary.
While law enforcement officers do their best to respond quickly, the reality is that when seconds count, an armed citizen may be the only line of defense between life and death. This study serves as a reminder of the critical role law-abiding gun owners play in enhancing public safety.
For more details, you can view the full CPRC report and case database here.
