Posted on Jun 8, 2022
New FBI Report Shows Armed Citizens STOP Mass Shootings
1.29K
21
8
10
10
0
There were 61 active shooter incidents last year, the FBI report said. All but one of the killers were males, and ranged in age from 12 to 67 years. Of the “active shooter incidents” in 2021 four of those killers were stopped by armed private citizens. The Second Amendment Foundation says this is strong evidence the right to keep and bear arms is as important today as it was when the Constitution was ratified more than 200 years ago.
New FBI Report Shows Armed Citizens STOP Mass Shootings
Posted from ammoland.com
2nd Amendment
Constitution
Gun Control
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
6
6
0
The 2nd Amendment Foundation is finally taking action against Washington's AG for instigating the new magazine ban. I feel like my donations are now worthwhile.
(6)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
No it doesn't.
"Last year saw 61 active shooter incidents carried out by 61 distinct shooters – 60 male, 1 female. Shooters ranged in age from 12 to 67 years old. Fourteen were killed by law enforcement, while four shooters were killed by armed citizens. One shooter died in a car accident during pursuit by law enforcement and 11 shooters died by suicide. In total, 30 gunmen were apprehended by law enforcement, while one shooter remains at large. Just two of the 61 gunmen wore body armor during the incident."
Four out of 61 proves that armed citizens stop mass shootings? How did you or ammoland. com come to that conclusion? That's .06% stopped by an armed citizen. How is that showing armed citizens are successful? More of them died by suicide than were stopped by armed citizens. And the majority of the time they were apprehended by LE.
Also there was a 52.5% increase from 2020 - 2021 in active shooter incidents and a 96.8% increase since 2017.
From the study:
"In two incidents, citizens engaged the shooter. In one incident citizens sustained injuries. In one incident, seven employees exchanged multiple volleys of gunfire with the shooter, four of them during the final encounter resulting in the death of the shooter." --- So in one of those incidents of armed citizens shooting back, it took "multiple volleys of gunfire" with the shooter before someone actually hit the shooter. Meaning that those "armed citizens" obviously don't know how to shoot and probably have never trained to shoot in an active shooter situation ever.
Also: "Two people were killed (one customer and one employee)and two employees were wounded (one was shot in the arm, one was shot in the leg). The shooter was killed at the scene by armed employees. So not only did it take awhile for them to hit the shooter they injured OTHER PEOPLE in the area before they hit the shooter.
Please explain to me how armed citizens STOP mass shootings.
This is also what was said about citizen involvement:
2021 witnessed an increase in incidents where citizen involvement impacted the engagement. In
four incidents, 24 citizens confronted the shooter, thereby resulting in the incident ending.
• In one incident, two citizens confronted and tackled a shooter until law enforcement officers arrived.
• In one incident, a teacher disarmed and detained the shooter (a student) until law
enforcement arrived.
• In one incident, an armed citizen shot and killed a gunman who had just ambushed a law
enforcement officer.
• In one incident, an armed employee shot and killed the shooter (an employee terminated
earlier in the day).
You should actually read through the study. That article is not accurate. I don't know what they read but it wasn't this report.
"Last year saw 61 active shooter incidents carried out by 61 distinct shooters – 60 male, 1 female. Shooters ranged in age from 12 to 67 years old. Fourteen were killed by law enforcement, while four shooters were killed by armed citizens. One shooter died in a car accident during pursuit by law enforcement and 11 shooters died by suicide. In total, 30 gunmen were apprehended by law enforcement, while one shooter remains at large. Just two of the 61 gunmen wore body armor during the incident."
Four out of 61 proves that armed citizens stop mass shootings? How did you or ammoland. com come to that conclusion? That's .06% stopped by an armed citizen. How is that showing armed citizens are successful? More of them died by suicide than were stopped by armed citizens. And the majority of the time they were apprehended by LE.
Also there was a 52.5% increase from 2020 - 2021 in active shooter incidents and a 96.8% increase since 2017.
From the study:
"In two incidents, citizens engaged the shooter. In one incident citizens sustained injuries. In one incident, seven employees exchanged multiple volleys of gunfire with the shooter, four of them during the final encounter resulting in the death of the shooter." --- So in one of those incidents of armed citizens shooting back, it took "multiple volleys of gunfire" with the shooter before someone actually hit the shooter. Meaning that those "armed citizens" obviously don't know how to shoot and probably have never trained to shoot in an active shooter situation ever.
Also: "Two people were killed (one customer and one employee)and two employees were wounded (one was shot in the arm, one was shot in the leg). The shooter was killed at the scene by armed employees. So not only did it take awhile for them to hit the shooter they injured OTHER PEOPLE in the area before they hit the shooter.
Please explain to me how armed citizens STOP mass shootings.
This is also what was said about citizen involvement:
2021 witnessed an increase in incidents where citizen involvement impacted the engagement. In
four incidents, 24 citizens confronted the shooter, thereby resulting in the incident ending.
• In one incident, two citizens confronted and tackled a shooter until law enforcement officers arrived.
• In one incident, a teacher disarmed and detained the shooter (a student) until law
enforcement arrived.
• In one incident, an armed citizen shot and killed a gunman who had just ambushed a law
enforcement officer.
• In one incident, an armed employee shot and killed the shooter (an employee terminated
earlier in the day).
You should actually read through the study. That article is not accurate. I don't know what they read but it wasn't this report.
(1)
(0)
SFC Kelly Fuerhoff
Maj John Bell - My bad on that percentage but still - did you even read the report? I did. And this article is not representative of what that report says. At all.
Also less than 7% so over 93% of the time a "good guy with a gun" doesn't stop shit.
Also less than 7% so over 93% of the time a "good guy with a gun" doesn't stop shit.
(0)
(0)
SFC Kelly Fuerhoff
PO1 Jeff Chandler - You're a moron. You have proven that time and time again. Gun free zones are not targets for shooters. They absolutely don't choose something because it's a gun free zone.
Good guys with a gun is a MYTH. Cops have repeatedly said that armed citizens at a scene HINDER THEM and do not help them. How the fuck is a cop going to know who is a "good guy" with a gun and the "bad guy" when they roll up on a chaotic mass shooting event? Also I guarantee you that not one of you on here trains regularly in how to react to a mass shooter nor do the majority of gun owners.
You guys keep regurgitating the same bullshit over and over with no fact. This report does NOT support "good guys with guns." At all.
Good guys with a gun is a MYTH. Cops have repeatedly said that armed citizens at a scene HINDER THEM and do not help them. How the fuck is a cop going to know who is a "good guy" with a gun and the "bad guy" when they roll up on a chaotic mass shooting event? Also I guarantee you that not one of you on here trains regularly in how to react to a mass shooter nor do the majority of gun owners.
You guys keep regurgitating the same bullshit over and over with no fact. This report does NOT support "good guys with guns." At all.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
SFC Kelly Fuerhoff - Yes, I read the report. I was not responding to the report. I was responding to two of your comments,
1) "No it doesn't."
2) "Four out of 61 proves that armed citizens stop mass shootings? How did you or ammoland. com come to that conclusion? That's [6.56%] stopped by an armed citizen. How is that showing armed citizens are successful?"
From the report:
Citizen Engagement and Casualties
In two incidents, citizens engaged the shooter. In one incident citizens sustained injuries. In one incident, seven employees exchanged multiple volleys of gunfire with the shooter, four of them during the final encounter resulting in the death of the shooter.
Two people were killed (one customer and one employee) and two employees were wounded (one was shot in the arm and one in the leg). The shooter was killed at the scene by armed employees.
"So not only did it take awhile for them to hit the shooter they injured OTHER PEOPLE in the area before they hit the shooter." I read the incident summaries twice. I read the recap and conclusions twice. I might have missed it but I did not see anything that indicated armed citizens inflicted any wounds on by-standers. Can you refer me to the specific page in the report from which you are pulling that?
Officer involved shootings may not have the hit rate you suppose. So, it does not overly concern me that the armed citizens fired multiple shots. Over a wide variety of scenarios, light levels and distance, single law enforcement officers fired an average of 3.59 rounds per hit. As the number of officers involved goes up, so does the rounds per hit. With three officers involved, it climbs to 6.48 rounds per hit.
Once again, you have not addressed the uncollected statistic. If a "good guy with a gun" isn't even present, obviously that is a shooting that is irrelevant to the analysis. If they were only present for 4 shootings, they stopped 100% of the shooting where they were present.
https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/study-reveals-important-truths-hidden-in-the-details-of-officer-involved-shootings-qc6OkmZJzaJqGXTX/#:~:text=With%20LAC%20shootings%20involving%20only%20one%20officer%2C%20an,as%2045%20percent%20over%20single-officer%20shootings%2C%22%20Aveni%20says.
1) "No it doesn't."
2) "Four out of 61 proves that armed citizens stop mass shootings? How did you or ammoland. com come to that conclusion? That's [6.56%] stopped by an armed citizen. How is that showing armed citizens are successful?"
From the report:
Citizen Engagement and Casualties
In two incidents, citizens engaged the shooter. In one incident citizens sustained injuries. In one incident, seven employees exchanged multiple volleys of gunfire with the shooter, four of them during the final encounter resulting in the death of the shooter.
Two people were killed (one customer and one employee) and two employees were wounded (one was shot in the arm and one in the leg). The shooter was killed at the scene by armed employees.
"So not only did it take awhile for them to hit the shooter they injured OTHER PEOPLE in the area before they hit the shooter." I read the incident summaries twice. I read the recap and conclusions twice. I might have missed it but I did not see anything that indicated armed citizens inflicted any wounds on by-standers. Can you refer me to the specific page in the report from which you are pulling that?
Officer involved shootings may not have the hit rate you suppose. So, it does not overly concern me that the armed citizens fired multiple shots. Over a wide variety of scenarios, light levels and distance, single law enforcement officers fired an average of 3.59 rounds per hit. As the number of officers involved goes up, so does the rounds per hit. With three officers involved, it climbs to 6.48 rounds per hit.
Once again, you have not addressed the uncollected statistic. If a "good guy with a gun" isn't even present, obviously that is a shooting that is irrelevant to the analysis. If they were only present for 4 shootings, they stopped 100% of the shooting where they were present.
https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/study-reveals-important-truths-hidden-in-the-details-of-officer-involved-shootings-qc6OkmZJzaJqGXTX/#:~:text=With%20LAC%20shootings%20involving%20only%20one%20officer%2C%20an,as%2045%20percent%20over%20single-officer%20shootings%2C%22%20Aveni%20says.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
SFC Kelly Fuerhoff - You are correct. Shooters don't target gun free zones. Elected officials make the most likely shooters' targets gun free zones.
"Uh Oh, that school is a gun free zone. I think I'll go shoot up some other place" said no active shooter EVER.
"Uh Oh, that school is a gun free zone. I think I'll go shoot up some other place" said no active shooter EVER.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google