Active shooter events have been tracked by the FBI for over two decades. There are interesting results when those statistics are compared to other data. A new study states that civilian responses to these events are less adverse than police responses. The April 2025 study found that “armed citizens do not interfere with police, and in active shooter situations, they reduce deaths and injuries significantly more effectively than the police.”
Dr. John R. Lott, Jr. from the Crime Prevention Research Center and Dr. Carlisle E. Moody, Professor of Economics, Emeritus from College of William and Mary, aggregated the data. Their paper, “Do Armed Civilians Stop Active Shooters More Effectively Than Uniformed Police?” was released on April 3.
For a list of cases, Moody and Lott pulled from the “Active Shooter Incidents in the United States in 2023.” The Federal Bureau of Investigation published the report. In order to compare those incidents with civilian responses, they pulled data from “the Heritage Foundation, Defensive Gun Use Tracker, Gun Violence Archive, the American Rifleman, the Daily Signal, and Reddit that met the FBI’s definition of an active shooting.”
The report notes that there’s a complete list of “cases where civilians have stopped active shooting attacks,” which can be accessed at Crime Prevention Research Center’s webpage.
Once all the data was compiled, some initial findings were observed.
“The first takeaway is, assuming our count is complete, that armed citizens have stopped more active shooter incidents than the police have, although the difference is not significantly different from zero,” Lott and Moody noted. “Also, armed citizens do not appear to interfere with the police or blunder so badly as to get their weapon taken away by the shooter or kill the wrong person.”
Moreover, one of the more significant findings was that “according to police, armed citizens have stopped 57 active shooter events which otherwise were likely to have escalated into mass public shootings – where ‘many’ people risked being murdered.”
The rates at which citizens vs police affect the number of people killed during an active shooting event have a rather large chasm. The study noted that “armed citizens reduce [emphasis added] the number of people killed by 49 percent while the police increase [emphasis added] the number killed by 16 percent in comparison to the omitted class (shooters who are arrested later or stopped by unarmed citizens or stop of their own accord).”
Beyond casualty rates, instances of injury are also lower in the civilian response category: “Armed citizens reduce the number of people wounded in active shooter incidents by 41 percent while the police have no significant effect.”
Of the hypotheses presented in the paper, one stands out. The authors assert that “Armed citizens are not trained like police officers as to the correct response to an active shooter event.” Therefore, the question presented is if “they could make the situation worse by inserting themselves into the event[?]” Lott and Moody state that their “analysis soundly rejects that idea.”
This study by Lott and Moody has uncovered several important developments. Holistically, they found that a civilian response is more effective than uniformed police officers when it comes to stopping mass shooting events. That being said, the pair is quick to point out that the “result isn’t a criticism of law enforcement, it simply reflects the tactical realities they face.” They cite the high visibility of uniformed officers making them more of a target.
The work being done by Dr. John R. Lott, Jr. from the Crime Prevention Research Center and Dr. Carlisle E. Moody is significant. Whether or not their findings will take a more mainstream foothold when it comes to the narrative remains to be seen. Having these statistics cited in future Congressional hearings and by other bodies that shape policy will be refreshing. Lott has shown again, “More Guns, Less Crime.”
The report, “Do Armed Civilians Stop Active Shooters More Effectively Than Uniformed Police?” can be read in its entirety HERE.
Read the full article here
