Recent data from the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) indicates that civilians have stopped more active murderers than police officers.
The CPRC reviewed 515 active murderer incidents from 2014 to 2023 and found that armed civilians intervened in 180 of them. In locations where concealed carry was legally allowed, permit holders intervened in 158 of 307 cases. The study concluded that civilians stopped 51.5% of active shootings in non-gun-free zones, whereas police officers, in these same areas, stopped 44.6% of active murderers.
These findings challenge common perceptions about who is most effective in preventing these attacks. The FBI defines an active shooting as an event in which an individual attempts to kill people in a public place, excluding incidents tied to robberies or gang violence.
The study revealed that civilians not only stopped more active shooters in areas where firearms were permitted but also did so with fewer errors and casualties. In just one case—0.56% of instances—an armed civilian accidentally shot a bystander, whereas police officers mistakenly shot the wrong person in four cases, or a rate of 1.14%.
Civilians stopping active shooters were rarely killed, with permit holders losing their lives in just two instances or 1.1% of cases. By contrast, police officers attempting to stop an active shooter were killed at a 7.7% rate, with 27 officers losing their lives. Officers were also wounded in 28.6% of cases, whereas civilians who intervened were injured at a slightly lower rate of 24.4%.
A key factor in these outcomes is visibility. Police officers, identifiable by their uniforms, often become immediate targets, while armed civilians can engage a murderer before being detected. Another likely reason for the difference is that police officers have to deal with hostage situations and other scenarios in which an armed civilian would necessarily need to get out of the way of law enforcement.
Most incredibly, the CPRC study found that in 58 cases, a civilian intervention directly prevented what could have been a mass public shooting. Additionally, there were no cases in which an armed civilian interfered with a police response. In only one instance did a permit holder have their firearm taken away.
Clearly, the data indicates that armed civilians play a significant role in stopping active-murderer situations, particularly in places where concealed carry is permitted. While no response is perfect, the findings indicate that responsible gun owners often act decisively and effectively in life-threatening situations, sometimes before police can arrive.
The anti-gun lobby, Hollywood and much of the mainstream media often downplay or ignore findings such as these because they contradict the prevailing narrative that stricter gun control is the only path to public safety. Acknowledging that armed civilians can and do stop active shooters undoes the argument that firearms in the hands of ordinary citizens pose a greater risk than benefit.
Additionally, the portrayal of guns in entertainment and news media frequently emphasizes chaos and violence rather than lawful self-defense, which reinforces the perception that civilian gun ownership leads to more harm than good.
But the numbers don’t lie. This latest release of data affirms a frequently overlooked truth: lawful gun owners can and do save lives. Far from being vigilantes, law-abiding armed citizens act responsibly in critical moments when immediate action is needed.
