FBI Acknowledges Life-Saving Potential of Armed Citizens

Armed Citizen
Armed Citizen

Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- Armed and unarmed citizens engaged the shooter in 10 incidents. They safely and successfully ended the shootings in eight of those incidents.

Their selfless actions likely saved many lives. The enhanced threat posed by active shooters and the swiftness with which active shooter incidents unfold support the importance of preparation by law enforcement officers and citizens alike.”

Those are the final lines in the conclusion of the FBI’s Active Shooter Incidents in the United States in 2016 and 2017.

The FBI defines an active shooter as one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area. Gang and drug-related shootings are excluded. “The active aspect of the definition inherently implies that both law enforcement personnel and citizens have the potential to affect the outcome of the event based upon their responses to the situation.”

Ten active shooters were confronted by citizens. In four incidents, the responding citizens were unarmed; these heroes include school staff, the shooter’s girlfriend, and a man who intentionally struck the shooter with his car. Six shooters were confronted by armed citizens. Four shooters were stopped by lawfully armed citizens. One citizen was wounded as he confronted the shooter. “In one incident, a citizen possessing a valid firearms permit exchanged gunfire with the shooter, causing the shooter to flee to another scene and continue shooting.” Unsurprisingly, it seems that these criminal cowards preferred targets incapable of defending themselves.

“Armed and unarmed citizens engaged the shooter in 10 incidents. They safely and successfully ended the shootings in eight of those incidents. Their selfless actions likely saved many lives. The enhanced threat posed by active shooters and the swiftness with which active shooter incidents unfold support the importance of preparation by law enforcement officers and citizens alike.”

Anti-gun politicians, celebrities, and organizations deride the idea that citizens can successfully defend themselves, their families, or those around them. They prefer that law-abiding gun owners be disarmed – a position they advocate from behind the safety of armed security. We’re fortunate to have real leaders who understand that Americans should be trusted to take responsibility for themselves, their families, and their communities, and that the quickest way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

The FBI’s latest report affirms that ability.

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

  • 18 thoughts on “FBI Acknowledges Life-Saving Potential of Armed Citizens

    1. To:One Still Patriiotic, I took that same oath in 1958 and still believe in it. I am still willing to support it. We are the silent majority who will defend this rate and special country. We know we are not perfect but we strive to get better. Who can top that?

    2. Citizens who engage with an armed adviisary, are accepting a risk from the Law Enforcement responding to the shooter and the shooter him/her self causing the confrontation. Risk is doubled for the citizen taking a proactive response to a threat from an armed attacker,understand that attempting to protect people from armed attack puts the
      armed citizens in double jeopardy. How ever sometimes that is your only option to save your own life and that of innocent people in your proximity.

      1. That has, for all intents and purposes, NEVER been a reported problem. If you have verifiable statistics that what you posit is so please present them now or admit that it’s just something you consider a “possibility”. Sorry, outliers don’t count.

      2. And what would you say to law enforcement officers not in uniform who confront an active shooter before uniformed officers arrive on the scene? That happens a lot.

      3. As scary as that sounds it is something to consider. WE need to be really good at threat assessment. I watched an interview with 2 different CCL holders that were present when Gabby Giffords was attacked. The thought that they would be mistaken for the attacker weighed in on their decision not to draw and intervene…. So now the questions get deeper, 1- was it an actual possibility that the shooter would have retargeted them, 2- would another carrier have targeted them as the possible bad guy shooter as opposed to the good guy, 3- did they not train to the point where they were confidant enough to engage? In the confusion of a horrible situation We can Monday Morning Quarterback til times end and every situation like this needs to be reviewed, critiqued and learned from, but when someone opens fire on a crowd of people our response needs to be swift, deliberate, accurate and above all RIGHT! We need to seek out as much training as we possibly can and be prepared always.

        1. The first thought that goes through my mind when I consider the possibility of engaging an active shooter, is just that first scenerio. What if the cops think I’m the shooter? I could be FUBAR’d real bad before the shooting stops. The #3 is kind of a no brainer for me. If somebody is killing other people, I’ll be a “BOY Scout” (sarc), and risk my life to stop the perp..

          1. @Sarthurk, You must prepare to win two fights: the gunfight and the court fight. First move to cover. Second, decide to evade or engage. Third, if engage, then prep the jury by creating witnesses that you are not the aggressor (e.g. Help help. Someone call the police). 4. Secure the scene, evidence, render first aid if possible, cooperate with police, but make no statements. You will need the evidence in court and the perp’s weapons have a way of disappearing. Rendering first aid negates the prosecution’s accusation that you intended to kill. Your lawyer will appreciate your not making any statements.

      4. Yeah and “When Seconds Count, the POPO are Minutes Away”. Most confrontations are over in 10 seconds or less. That leaves 4 min 50 seconds at best before POPO are even on the scene. You ain’t gonna be in anyone’s crosshair but the perps.

    3. quote:
      real leaders who understand that Americans should be trusted to take responsibility for themselves, their families, and their communities”

      Yeah..READ that Second Article of Ammendment again.
      What does it say about “the security of a free state”? WHO gets named as the party respondible to assure “the security of a free state”?
      Isn’t that “militia”? Well I then ask “what IS the militia?” QUite simply, THE PEOPLE, armed, trained, skilled, equipped, ready, to assure “the security of a free state”.

      So, yes, per our Constitution as ammended, THE PEOPLE”, who have the right to keep and bear arms, ARE indeed responsible for “the security of a free state”.

      Thus the correct wording above should read: real leaders who understand that Americans MUST be trusted, no, even charged, encouraged, required, to take responsibility for themselves, their familie,s and their communities.”

    4. This would appear to support the arithmetic progression theory; if more people who had engagements with mass shooting suspects were armed the percentage of successfully stopping the suspect would rise exponentially. The same theory would, necessarily, also be applied to armed intervention contributing to lower percentages of killed or wounded.

      Seems simple math should drive the anti-gun trolls scurrying but I’m sure we’ll hear from at least one.

    5. This statement needs to be read on the senate floor time after time for all the world to hear and the liberal anti gun people be made to hear the facts.

      1. @MB, This report… the truth of the matter… will have no impact on the Anti-Second Amendment Civil Rights crowd because their goal is people control and a socialist/communist government.

        1. Wild Bill, since we were sent to Korea and Vietnam to eradicate communists and their support base, how does it make any sense, show any patriotic defense of our country to allow them to walk amongst us and operate with impunity, correction, operate protected by the misguided laws and warping the Amendments to afford them the freedom to do so?? In 1972 I took an oath to defend this country, our Constitution, and it’s people from ALL ENEMIES, Foreign and Domestic. I don’t recall an expiration date on that oath. So why not declare open season on communists/socialists and take it to them?? It would take the cooperation of all vets, but the people would rally in support when they saw the thrust of the effort. Just a daydream, I guess.

    Leave a Comment 18 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *