By suzanne downing 
Summary from Crime Prevention Research Center: Massive errors in FBI’s Active Shooting Reports from 2014-2024 regarding cases where civilians stop attacks: Instead of 3.7%, the correct number is at least 36%. Excluding gun-free zones, it averaged over 52.5%. In 2024, it was 62.5%.
A new analysis by the Crime Prevention Research Center challenges the FBI’s statistics on how often armed civilians stop active shooters, concluding that such defensive interventions are far more common than the FBI reports indicate.
The FBI defines an active shooter as one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a public place, excluding incidents involving gang violence or crimes such as robbery.
Using that same definition, the CPRC reviewed data from 2014 through 2024 and found that armed citizens stopped 202 of 561 active shooter incidents, about 36% of the total.
By contrast, the FBI’s official data list only 14 cases, or about 3.7%, where armed citizens intervened to stop an attacker.
The CPRC report, published at CrimeResearch.org, attributes the wide discrepancy to misclassified cases and overlooked incidents. In several examples, the FBI acknowledged that citizens with valid gun permits confronted shooters, causing them to flee, but did not count these events as being “stopped by armed citizens” because police later made the arrest. In other cases, civilians were incorrectly labeled as security guards.
One notable example is the 2019 attack at the West Freeway Church of Christ in Texas, where parishioner Jack Wilson fatally shot a gunman seconds after the attack began. Although Wilson was a volunteer church member, not a professional guard, the FBI classified the case as being stopped by a “security officer.”
The report also identified 42 additional active shooting incidents where armed civilians likely prevented mass public shootings that were entirely missing from the FBI’s count. In total, CPRC researchers say the FBI overlooked 145 incidents between 2014 and 2024 that met its own definition of an active shooter event.
According to the CPRC, the trend of successful armed citizen interventions has increased sharply in recent years, with 47.8% of active shooting attacks stopped by civilians in 2024, compared to 17.4% in 2014. In areas where firearms were legally permitted, citizens halted 52.5% of attacks.
The group argues that this pattern suggests the danger of so-called “gun-free zones,” where law-abiding citizens are not allowed to carry firearms. “The numbers indicate that if we didn’t have gun-free zones, we would have more people stopping these attacks,” the report states.
Much of the national media coverage of armed civilian interventions, the CPRC says, relies heavily on the FBI’s narrower data set. Following the 2022 Greenwood Park Mall shooting in Indiana, when 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken fatally shot a gunman who had already killed three people, outlets including Reuters, CNN, and The Washington Post described Dicken’s actions as a “rare” instance of a bystander stopping a mass shooter.
But the CPRC’s broader analysis indicates that such cases are not rare, only rarely publicized.
The group also examined concerns often raised by gun control advocates and media commentators that armed civilians could pose additional risks in active shooter situations. According to the CPRC, there is no documented case of a permit holder accidentally shooting an innocent bystander while stopping a mass attack, and only one known instance, in Colorado in 2021, where police mistakenly shot a citizen who had stopped a gunman.
Polling data cited in the report also suggest that many Americans support the presence of armed citizens as a deterrent. A Trafalgar Group survey conducted in July 2022 found that 42% of voters identified “armed citizens” as the most effective means of protection during a mass shooting, compared with 25% who named local police and 10% who chose federal agents.
Similarly, a YouGov poll conducted in May 2022 found that 51% of respondents supported allowing school staff to carry concealed handguns, compared with 37% opposed.
The CPRC concludes that while law enforcement remains critical in responding to violent attacks, the role of armed citizens is a vital — and underreported — factor in saving lives.
The link to the report is here.
Suzanne Downing
Who would be surprised that the FBI cooked their books on this?
There are several groups that support and promote our 2A rights. While the NRA humiliated itself under Wayne L’s leadership, they place tremendous emphasis on gun training, gun safety, and education on firearms, hunting, shooting sports, and all things gun-related. They also lobby for your rights in front on Congress, judges, and the court of public opinion.
By all appearances, the NRA has cleaned up its act. That said, even if you can’t try them for a one year membership, consider supporting one of the other 2A orgs out. Honestly, one year reading American Rifleman will lead you to a lifetime membership!
Well. Duh!
How much taxpayer money did government waste researching the obvious.
In the time it takes police within minutes to respond a shooter could eliminate a large group of victims when he could been stopped by armed private citizens before a shot is fired or after one shot is fired.
Gun-Free Zones = Criminal-Safe Zones
Normal people don’t want to live in a society filled with guns.
Misclassified and overlooked or purposefully suppressed? Given the discrepancy on just a few of the cases listed above it’s hard to believe they were overlooked.