Gun Laws And 2a
FBI Persists in Underreporting Armed Citizen Defensive Gun Use
FBI Persists in Underreporting Armed Citizen Defensive Gun Use
📅
✍️By ZRIntel Editorial Team📍Washington, D.C.
Three years ago, Dr. John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), writing for RealClearInvestigations, described how the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was vastly undercounting, “by an order of more than three the number of instances in which armed citizens” had thwarted attacks in public places. Out of 252 “active shooter incidents” the FBI identified in 2014 to 2021, it stated that only 11 were stopped by an armed citizen; in contrast, an analysis by the CPRC using the same definition identified 281 active shooter incidents in the same period, with 41 being stopped by an armed citizen.
Broken down into percentages, the FBI’s data indicated 4.4% of active shooters were impeded by armed citizens, while the CPRC found it to be the much more compelling 14.6%. (The CPRC also found many cases where civilians intervened before the suspects fired their weapons, but which weren’t included in the count because they did not fit the FBI “active shooter incident” criteria.) This glaring disparity raises significant questions about the accuracy of crime statistics and underscores the impact these figures have on public perception and policy.
At the time that article appeared, the discrepancies between the FBI's statistics and the CPRC's findings were attributed to misclassified shootings, where armed civilians' contributions were inaccurately credited to security professionals, and overlooked incidents due to inadequate tracking protocols. Despite calls for correction, the FBI has continued its trend of underreporting, leading to an increasingly inaccurate portrayal of armed citizen roles in active shooter scenarios.
Lott’s follow-up article published this month points out that between 2022 to 2024, the FBI has reported just three new incidents of armed civilians stopping active shooters and none recently. In stark contrast, the CPRC has documented 78 such cases over the same period. This inconsistency is troubling, especially as it reflects on the value placed on armed citizens in public safety discussions. Lott asserts that the FBI's report for the Biden administration for the years 2023 and 2024 contains even more alarming inaccuracies, claiming that armed civilians stopped none of the 72 active shooting cases it identified—contradicted by CPRC's findings that 45 were indeed stopped by armed citizens.
Lott’s report reiterates the significance of proper data collection, as the FBI's reliance on fragmented media reports leads to an incomplete understanding of how effectively armed civilians can mitigate threats. This information has vital implications: it informs media narratives, legislative debates, and ultimately public opinion surrounding the Second Amendment and concealed carry rights.
Indeed, gun control proponents frequently cite reported statistics from the FBI to suggest that armed individuals' interventions are rare and pose more risks than benefits to public safety. Organizations like Brady United have pointed to reports suggesting that the presence of firearms in civilian hands increases public danger, despite evidence that armed civilians can frequently intervene effectively in active shooting situations.
To further illustrate this point, Lott's CPRC study shows that lawfully armed civilians were more effective overall than police in stopping active shooter incidents, having intervened successfully in 51.5% of cases, compared to 44.6% for law enforcement. Such statistics challenge long-held beliefs and promote a need for a reassessment of policy grounded in more thorough and accurate data collection.
As the H.R. 38, the “Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025,” gains momentum as a priority for the NRA, addressing these discrepancies becomes imperative. This legislation aims to create a consistent legal framework for concealed carry across state lines, underscoring the importance of acknowledging the role of law-abiding citizens in enhancing public safety. The expressed concerns from 24 state Attorneys General affirm the idea that concealed carry rights are not just constitutional but can indeed contribute positively to safety outcomes when properly recognized in both statistics and policy frameworks.
Ultimately, the disparity between the FBI's reported numbers and findings from credible sources like the CPRC emphasizes the critical need for reliable data in shaping firearms policy and the public's understanding of concealed carry benefits. To serve the public meaningfully, agencies like the FBI must diligently revisit their methodologies and correct ongoing inaccuracies that misrepresent the role of armed citizens. As this topic continues to evolve, it is vital for advocates and policymakers to ground their arguments in accurate, reliable data that reflect the true dynamics of armed citizen intervention.
The ongoing discrepancies in FBI data regarding armed citizen defensive actions highlight significant challenges within law enforcement reporting and gun safety discourse. The evidence suggests that lawfully armed civilians can enhance public safety, contradicting long-standing narratives used by gun control advocates. As more data emerges, it is critical for organizations and policymakers to utilize accurate statistics to inform future legislation and grassroots advocacy efforts. The implications of H.R. 38 and similar measures rest upon public understanding shaped by this data, underscoring the importance of revisiting and refining reporting practices for a more reliable assessment of armed citizen interventions.