Washington — The FBI has been monitoring active shooter incidents since 2000, focusing on cases where individuals attempt to kill people in public spaces, excluding situations related to robberies or gang violence. These incidents range from a single missed shot aimed at a human target to mass shootings. Despite this data collection, no comprehensive studies have been undertaken by either the FBI or academic institutions to assess how effectively police respond to such attacks.
Active shooter events are varied and complex, yet studies that have been conducted primarily focus on mass public shootings where at least four people are murdered. These analyses generally concentrate on the prevalence of such attacks in areas allowing permitted concealed handguns or in relation to other gun control laws. However, examinations of the broader set of active shooting cases or evaluations of police effectiveness in thwarting such attacks remain unexplored.
While civilians with concealed weapon permits are more numerous and can sometimes intervene without being noticed, they generally do not receive the same level of training as law enforcement officers. This disparity suggests that police might be more effective in managing these crises on average. Nevertheless, civilians do present certain advantages. Beyond their sheer numbers—21.5 million Americans held concealed handgun permits in 2024—they don’t wear uniforms, which allows them to act without becoming immediate targets for attackers.
Police officers face many tactical disadvantages precisely because they are easily identifiable by their uniforms, which can make them primary targets in active shooting situations. Attackers might wait for an officer to leave an area or preemptively strike against them. Conversely, civilians legally carrying concealed weapons can potentially disrupt shooters before they are even noticed, blending discreetly into public spaces.
In 2020, there were approximately 671,000 full-time sworn law enforcement officers, but with only a third likely on duty at any given time, this represents less than 0.1% of the U.S. population. This stark difference in numbers indicates a gap in immediate response capability, highlighting the strategic disadvantage uniformed officers face due to their visibility and limited presence.
Research shows that the presence of armed citizens could significantly enhance public safety. Despite their lack of professional training in responding to these volatile situations, the data suggest that armed civilians often manage to mitigate the effects of active shooter incidents more successfully than police. This is not a critique of law enforcement but rather an indication of the practical difficulties they encounter, including being seen as threats and having slower response times compared to civilians who are already at the scene.
These findings are supported by other studies indicating that the majority of mass public shootings happen in gun-free zones, suggesting that such areas might inadvertently invite more danger. The analysis discussed here dismisses the theory that armed civilians could exacerbate active shooter situations; instead, it supports the view that their involvement tends to reduce casualties.
In conclusion, while the debate on gun control and public safety continues, evidence suggests that under certain conditions, legally armed citizens can play a critical role in mitigating the impacts of active shooter incidents. This challenges the notion that only law enforcement can effectively handle such extreme situations and points to a nuanced approach in considering policies for public safety and gun rights.