Armed Citizens Save Lives: The Data is In

Disclaimer: This article is not intended as a criticism of law enforcement. We have deep respect and appreciation for the brave men and women who put their lives on the line every day to protect our communities. The data presented highlights the unique tactical challenges officers face—such as delayed response times and being easily identifiable targets—compared to armed civilians already present during an incident. Our goal is to advocate for a safer society through a broader understanding of all effective means of protection.

The Numbers Are In

In a world where seconds matter, who’s best positioned to stop the unthinkable?

You might assume it’s the police—and they certainly play a vital role in public safety—but groundbreaking research reveals something surprising: armed citizens are often more effective at stopping active shooters than uniformed law enforcement.

A new study: Do Armed Civilians Stop Active Shooters More Effectively Than Uniformed Police?, by the Crime Prevention Research Center (John R. Lott, Jr.) and researchers from the College of William and Mary (Carlisle E. Moody) dove deep into over 500 active shooter incidents between 2014 and 2023. The results were eye-opening—and potentially life-saving.

The Numbers Don’t Lie

Here’s what the study found:

• Armed citizens stopped more active shooter events (34.96%) than police (30.86%).

• When armed citizens intervened, the number of people killed dropped by 49%.

• The number of people wounded dropped by 41% when a civilian stopped the shooter.

• Total casualties were reduced by 44% in events where armed citizens took action compared to police response.

These aren't just abstract percentages—they represent lives saved, families kept whole, and communities spared devastation.

Why the Advantage?

It comes down to timing and visibility. Police are highly trained professionals, but they usually arrive after the shooting has started. Meanwhile, an armed citizen who’s already on the scene can respond instantly—without giving away their presence. In contrast, a shooter can easily spot a uniformed officer, often targeting them first or waiting for them to leave before beginning their attack.

Safety Matters

Some worry that civilian intervention could cause chaos or make things worse. The data shows otherwise:

• Armed citizens rarely shoot the wrong person (only 0.6% of incidents), and never killed the wrong person in the entire data set.

• In comparison, police officers were 10 times more likely to mistakenly shoot someone they shouldn't have.

• Armed civilians are far less likely to be killed during these events. Only 1% of armed citizens were killed while intervening—compared to 16.5% of police officers.

Real-World Examples

At an Indianapolis mall in 2022, a gunman opened fire in a food court. Within seconds, a 22-year-old armed shopper ended the attack, saving countless lives. The shooter had already fired 24 shots, but the rapid response prevented a massacre.

In another case at a Florida nightclub, an enraged patron began shooting into a crowd. A concealed carry permit holder stopped him before anyone inside was killed.

These are real people—not law enforcement officers, not military veterans—just everyday Americans who were prepared to defend themselves and others.

Policy Implications

The study also found that states with constitutional carry laws—where adults can legally carry a firearm without a permit—had 16.7% fewer fatalities in active shooter events. More trained, law-abiding citizens carrying responsibly in public means more chances to stop a tragedy before it spreads.

My Final Thoughts

This isn't an argument against police—far from it. It’s a reminder that law enforcement can't be everywhere, all the time. When trained, responsible gun owners are present, they can—and do—save lives.

So the next time someone asks, “Why would anyone need to carry a gun in public?”—you can answer with confidence:

Because lives depend on it.

Remember, we don't carry to take a life. We carry to defend a life!