For years, Americans have been told that armed citizens rarely stop active shooters. The FBI’s own statistics have helped reinforce that narrative, with federal reports crediting armed civilians with stopping fewer than 4% of active-shooter incidents. But research from the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) paints a dramatically different picture.
According to the CPRC’s latest research, armed citizens stopped 36.6% of identified active-shooter incidents between 2014 and 2025, nearly ten times the percentage reflected in FBI reporting. The discrepancy raises serious questions about the federal government’s accounting of defensive gun use and the media’s reliance on those statistics.
In an October 23 article published by National Review, CPRC President Dr. John Lott challenged the FBI’s numbers and the resulting portrayal of armed civilian intervention as an exceptionally rare occurrence.
FBI Statistics Tell a Very Different Story
Between 2014 and 2025, the FBI identified 408 active-shooter incidents nationwide. Of those, the bureau credited armed citizens with stopping just 16 attacks, representing 3.9% of the total.
The CPRC conducted its own examination of incidents during the same period, identifying 615 active-shooter attacks, 225 of which were stopped by armed civilians. That produces a rate of 36.6%. During the most recent five years, the CPRC found that the percentage increased to 42.5%.
The organization also identified another 35 incidents in which armed citizens stopped attackers before they fired a shot. Those encounters were excluded from the calculations because the attacks never progressed to an actual shooting.
These aren’t simply competing interpretations of the same 408 incidents. The CPRC identified hundreds of additional cases that it argues satisfy the FBI’s definition of an active shooting, along with incidents the bureau allegedly misclassified.
The distinction matters because an active-shooter incident does not necessarily involve multiple fatalities. Under the FBI’s definition, an individual attempting to kill someone in a populated area can qualify, even if no one is struck by gunfire. The CPRC says it applied that same definition when compiling its research.
Armed Citizens Overlooked or Misclassified
The CPRC attributes the discrepancy primarily to two problems: incidents missing entirely from federal reports and cases in which armed civilians were incorrectly classified.
One example is the December 29, 2019, attack at the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas. When a gunman opened fire during a church service, armed congregant Jack Wilson fatally shot the attacker, ending the assault.
Rather than classifying the intervention as an armed civilian stopping an attack, the FBI identified Wilson as security personnel. According to the CPRC, Wilson was a volunteer church member, not a professional security guard.
A similar dispute surrounds the June 22, 2025, attack at CrossPointe Community Church in Wayne, Michigan, where armed volunteer church members confronted an attacker. The FBI again classified the intervention as involving security personnel rather than ordinary armed civilians.
The CPRC also identified incidents in which armed citizens confronted attackers and caused them to flee, only for the FBI to attribute the ultimate resolution to law enforcement because officers later apprehended the suspects.
These distinctions may sound technical, but they have real consequences. When an armed citizen stops an attack and the intervention is not counted, the resulting statistics fail to capture that defensive use of a firearm.
The FBI has acknowledged limitations in its reporting. When journalist John Stossel questioned the bureau about missing incidents in 2024, it explained that its data were intended to provide a baseline understanding rather than an exhaustive list of every active-shooter incident.
Lott argues that the problem extends beyond ordinary data-collection limitations, particularly because previously identified omissions have remained uncorrected.
Gun-Free Zones Change the Numbers Even More
Perhaps the most significant finding concerns locations where law-abiding Americans are legally permitted to carry firearms.
According to the CPRC, armed civilians stopped 52.9% of identified active-shooter incidents between 2014 and 2025 when the analysis was limited to places where citizens could legally carry guns.
During the most recent five-year period, that figure increased to 56.3%.
The distinction is critical. A law-abiding gun owner cannot be expected to intervene with a firearm in a location where carrying one is prohibited. Including those locations without accounting for the restrictions can obscure how frequently armed civilians intervene when they have the opportunity.
The CPRC’s findings do not establish that every gun-free zone would have experienced a different outcome had lawful carry been permitted. They do, however, demonstrate why carry restrictions matter when examining armed civilian intervention.
For Americans who take responsibility for their own safety, the practical issue is straightforward: A firearm carried lawfully for self-defense can also provide the means to stop an attacker before additional innocent lives are lost.
The Greenwood Mall Attack Wasn’t an Isolated Example
The July 17, 2022, attack at Greenwood Park Mall in Indiana remains one of the most recognizable examples of an armed citizen stopping a mass shooting.
When a gunman opened fire inside the mall, killing three people, 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken responded with his legally carried handgun. According to the CPRC, Dicken fired his first shot just 15 seconds after the attack began, engaging the attacker from approximately 40 yards.
Dicken’s actions received national attention, but much of the reporting characterized his intervention as an unusual exception.
The CPRC argues that cases like Greenwood are far less exceptional than FBI statistics suggest. Its research includes a publicly available list of incidents with links to underlying news reports, allowing readers to examine the cases themselves.
That documentation is important. The FBI and CPRC use different incident lists, and determining which cases qualify involves classification decisions. But those differences should be examined rather than ignored while one set of statistics is treated as definitive.
Americans Deserve Accurate Defensive Gun Use Statistics
The debate over armed citizens stopping mass shootings is about more than numbers. It concerns whether Americans are receiving an accurate picture of how firearms are used to protect innocent lives.
For years, reports describing armed civilian intervention as rare have relied on federal statistics that the CPRC says exclude numerous documented incidents. The organization has now identified 225 active-shooter attacks stopped by armed citizens between 2014 and 2025, compared with the 16 credited in FBI reporting.
That is a substantial discrepancy deserving public scrutiny, particularly when federal crime data influence discussions surrounding concealed carry, gun-free zones, and the Second Amendment.
Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. That right does not depend on demonstrating that armed citizens stop a particular percentage of attacks. But when the effectiveness of armed self-defense becomes part of the public debate, the evidence needs to be accurately represented.
The CPRC’s findings offer a powerful reminder that the actions of armed citizens cannot be measured solely by the incidents federal reports choose to count.
About Duncan Johnson:
Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy. Duncan is a regular contributor and editor-in-chief for AmmoLand News and is responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.
from https://ift.tt/8bfznUH
via IFTTT
