The numbers are applicable to areas that are NOT gun free zones, since those zones disarm legal gun owners -- hence no chance of stopping shootings without breaking the law.

Legal gun owners are also less likely to shoot/kill bystanders than Cops.

There have been zero reports of legal gun owners interfering with Cops or being mistakenly shot themselves by law enforcement as some love to argue will happen after Cops arrive and see a good guy with a gun.

The stats in the study were taken directly from FBI reports of mass shootings or what would have been a mass shooting had someone not stopped it.

Good to know.  I could have used this info when senstitive places was being passed. The retail Merchants Association said that CCW holders could be shot by cops.  Same person said that the training we need to take to pass isnt' good enough cause it can't duplicate a real situation. The anti 2a are the professional goal post movers.

Good to know.  I could have used this info when senstitive places was being passed. The retail Merchants Association said that CCW holders could be shot by cops.  Same person said that the training we need to take to pass isnt' good enough cause it can't duplicate a real situation. The anti 2a are the professional goal post movers.

The study appears to have been posted last July.  So, the info has been available for about 9 months.

https://crimeresearch.org/2024/07/massive-errors-in-fbis-active-shooting-reports-from-2014-2023-regarding-cases-where-civilians-stop-attacks-instead-of-4-the-correct-number-is-at-least-35-excluding-gun-free-zones-it-avera/

A big problem with these types of reported data from government agencies is they often present the information in such a way as to make the data conform to the narrative they are trying to promote.

Delve into the numbers, then look at how Lott's study rearranges the information or filters out certain datasets to come to what I see as more common sense conclusions.  Simply taking the FBI numbers at face value assumes any conclusions are obvious.  That's far from true.

The study appears to have been posted last July.  So, the info has been available for about 9 months.

https://crimeresearch.org/2024/07/massive-errors-in-fbis-active-shooting-reports-from-2014-2023-regarding-cases-where-civilians-stop-attacks-instead-of-4-the-correct-number-is-at-least-35-excluding-gun-free-zones-it-avera/

A big problem with these types of reported data from government agencies is they often present the information in such a way as to make the data conform to the narrative they are trying to promote.

Delve into the numbers, then look at how Lott's study rearranges the information or filters out certain datasets to come to what I see as more common sense conclusions.  Simply taking the FBI numbers at face value assumes any conclusions are obvious.  That's far from true.

It was released too late. So I just used CDC/FBI stats on legal gun usage for self defense. This was before it was removed from their websites.

It was released too late. So I just used CDC/FBI stats on legal gun usage for self defense. This was before it was removed from their websites.

Timing is ....

It was released too late. So I just used CDC/FBI stats on legal gun usage for self defense. This was before it was removed from their websites.

.... everything,