Gun Control 2022 (IV) - Gun Rights, Control, & Government

[Grinning Dragon]

First Houston, now Utica, NY. Well played Kem, well played.
Well Played: Man Uses $200 3D Printer To Earn $21,000 At New York Gun ‘Buyback’

A man named “Kem” reportedly used a 3D printer to manufacture “firearms” to turn in at a Utica, New York gun buyback. New York Attorney General Letitia James wanted “unwanted” guns and paid up to $250 each for the guns.

What Letitia James no doubt planned on was buying plastic blasters. Mr. Kem printed and gave them 110 “unwanted” firearms and they gave him 42 $500 gift cards for a total of $21,000. That’s a good day’s work, if ATF doesn’t crack down on Mr. Kem for unlawful manufacture of firearms.

It’s not the first instance of a brave individual printing guns on their 3D printer and turning them in at a “buybacks.” In Houston, the government changed the rules after one man nicked them $3,100. But this one, at $21,000, seems to set a new standard and sets a high bar to others to surpass....

[Gun Manufacturers]

First Houston, now Utica, NY. Well played Kem, well played.
Well Played: Man Uses $200 3D Printer To Earn $21,000 At New York Gun ‘Buyback’

A man named “Kem” reportedly used a 3D printer to manufacture “firearms” to turn in at a Utica, New York gun buyback. New York Attorney General Letitia James wanted “unwanted” guns and paid up to $250 each for the guns.

What Letitia James no doubt planned on was buying plastic blasters. Mr. Kem printed and gave them 110 “unwanted” firearms and they gave him 42 $500 gift cards for a total of $21,000. That’s a good day’s work, if ATF doesn’t crack down on Mr. Kem for unlawful manufacture of firearms.

It’s not the first instance of a brave individual printing guns on their 3D printer and turning them in at a “buybacks.” In Houston, the government changed the rules after one man nicked them $3,100. But this one, at $21,000, seems to set a new standard and sets a high bar to others to surpass....

How much do you want to bet that she's going to try to go after this person for what they did.

[American Legionaries]

First Houston, now Utica, NY. Well played Kem, well played.
Well Played: Man Uses $200 3D Printer To Earn $21,000 At New York Gun ‘Buyback’

How much do you want to bet that she's going to try to go after this person for what they did.

It's Letita James, I don't think she'd want to let something this awesome go unpunished.

[Pax Nerdvana]

First Houston, now Utica, NY. Well played Kem, well played.
Well Played: Man Uses $200 3D Printer To Earn $21,000 At New York Gun ‘Buyback’

A man named “Kem” reportedly used a 3D printer to manufacture “firearms” to turn in at a Utica, New York gun buyback. New York Attorney General Letitia James wanted “unwanted” guns and paid up to $250 each for the guns.

What Letitia James no doubt planned on was buying plastic blasters. Mr. Kem printed and gave them 110 “unwanted” firearms and they gave him 42 $500 gift cards for a total of $21,000. That’s a good day’s work, if ATF doesn’t crack down on Mr. Kem for unlawful manufacture of firearms.

It’s not the first instance of a brave individual printing guns on their 3D printer and turning them in at a “buybacks.” In Houston, the government changed the rules after one man nicked them $3,100. But this one, at $21,000, seems to set a new standard and sets a high bar to others to surpass....

Absolute legend.

[Saiwania]

I have doubts that the $20,000+ of 3D printed guns were necessarily profitable. What about the cost of materials and labor to put the parts together? It might've only taken time if they could do it on their own, but that has it's own opportunity costs. Your time is more valuable than money usually, if it is more finite.

The 3D printers aren't magic, it can get you parts but you need to put it together by hand or according to blueprints. The parts you can print will only be as good as your materials used and how good the printer is at manipulating the consumables for the end result.

[Big Jim P]

I have doubts that the $20,000+ of 3D printed guns were necessarily profitable. What about the cost of materials and labor to put the parts together? It might've only taken time if they could do it on their own, but that has it's own opportunity costs. Your time is more valuable than money usually, if it is more finite.

The 3D printers aren't magic, it can get you parts but you need to put it together by hand or according to blueprints. The parts you can print will only be as good as your materials used and how good the printer is at manipulating the consumables for the end result.

The parts don't need to be of particularly high quality. Hell, in a lot of "buybacks" the guns don't even need to be functional.

[American Legionaries]

I have doubts that the $20,000+ of 3D printed guns were necessarily profitable. What about the cost of materials and labor to put the parts together? It might've only taken time if they could do it on their own, but that has it's own opportunity costs. Your time is more valuable than money usually, if it is more finite.

The 3D printers aren't magic, it can get you parts but you need to put it together by hand or according to blueprints. The parts you can print will only be as good as your materials used and how good the printer is at manipulating the consumables for the end result.

You do realize that a single piece of plastic without any moving components can be a firearm, right?

[Gun Manufacturers]

I have doubts that the $20,000+ of 3D printed guns were necessarily profitable. What about the cost of materials and labor to put the parts together? It might've only taken time if they could do it on their own, but that has it's own opportunity costs. Your time is more valuable than money usually, if it is more finite.

The 3D printers aren't magic, it can get you parts but you need to put it together by hand or according to blueprints. The parts you can print will only be as good as your materials used and how good the printer is at manipulating the consumables for the end result.

Why this person did it may not have been motivated SOLEY to make money, but as a sign of protest against a state that is very anti-gun.

[American Legionaries]

I have doubts that the $20,000+ of 3D printed guns were necessarily profitable. What about the cost of materials and labor to put the parts together? It might've only taken time if they could do it on their own, but that has it's own opportunity costs. Your time is more valuable than money usually, if it is more finite.

The 3D printers aren't magic, it can get you parts but you need to put it together by hand or according to blueprints. The parts you can print will only be as good as your materials used and how good the printer is at manipulating the consumables for the end result.

Why this person did it may not have been motivated SOLEY to make money, but as a sign of protest against a state that is very anti-gun.

Also this, I don't need to make money to accomplish something if I have made certain that oppressive scum lost money.

[Sordhau]

I have doubts that the $20,000+ of 3D printed guns were necessarily profitable. What about the cost of materials and labor to put the parts together? It might've only taken time if they could do it on their own, but that has it's own opportunity costs. Your time is more valuable than money usually, if it is more finite.

The 3D printers aren't magic, it can get you parts but you need to put it together by hand or according to blueprints. The parts you can print will only be as good as your materials used and how good the printer is at manipulating the consumables for the end result.

The parts don't need to be of particularly high quality. Hell, in a lot of "buybacks" the guns don't even need to be functional.

>be me
>walk into buyback
>present a vintage Brown Bess
>the barrel is clogged with rust
>the trigger broken off
>it's literally snapped in half
>still get money for it

Problem, gun grabbers?

[The Two Jerseys]

The parts don't need to be of particularly high quality. Hell, in a lot of "buybacks" the guns don't even need to be functional.

>be me
>walk into buyback
>present a vintage Brown Bess
>the barrel is clogged with rust
>the trigger broken off
>it's literally snapped in half
>still get money for it

Problem, gun grabbers?

Walk into buyback with matchlock you built out of pipe and a 2x4 from Home Depot

[Hurtful Thoughts]

>be me
>walk into buyback
>present a vintage Brown Bess
>the barrel is clogged with rust
>the trigger broken off
>it's literally snapped in half
>still get money for it

Problem, gun grabbers?

Walk into buyback with matchlock you built out of pipe and a 2x4 from Home Depot

PVC gyrojet gun.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

>be me
>walk into buyback
>present a vintage Brown Bess
>the barrel is clogged with rust
>the trigger broken off
>it's literally snapped in half
>still get money for it

Problem, gun grabbers?

Walk into buyback with matchlock you built out of pipe and a 2x4 from Home Depot

Matchlock PVC/PTE gyrojet gun.

Literally just an empty water bottle.

[Greater Cesnica]

Danielle Smith is set to become Premier of Alberta tomorrow. As part of her agenda she intends to significantly liberalize gun laws in Alberta. This means that standard-capacity magazines, suppressors, and AR-15s may become legal once more.

[Sordhau]

Danielle Smith is set to become Premier of Alberta tomorrow. As part of her agenda she intends to significantly liberalize gun laws in Alberta. This means that standard-capacity magazines, suppressors, and AR-15s may become legal once more.

Based.

Always liked the name Danielle.

[Grinning Dragon]

Judge blocks calling Times Square ‘gun-free zone’ via temporary restraining order on NY gun law

A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday against parts of New York state’s latest gun control law which prohibits gun owners with concealed carry permits from carrying in so-called “sensitive places,” including Times Square.

In an email to American Military News, the Second Amendment advocacy group Gun Owners of America (GOA) said it, along with the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), secured the restraining order in federal court. The decision comes after GOA and GOF refiled a lawsuit against New York State.

The restraining order will take effect next week...

A bit more Breaking: Judge Rules New NY Gun Laws Are Unconstitutional, Blocks Enforcement

Suddaby took issue with the state’s new background check requirements. Four of the six provisions struck down related to tough requirements for an application or renewal of a license for concealed carry.

He rejected the provision that an applicant must have evidence to demonstrate they have “good moral character,” an attempt by the state to block guns from people with bad intent. Suddaby reversed the burden of proof, ruling that it’s up to the licensing agency to prove the applicant does not have good moral character.

Suddaby also ruled that the state cannot require applicants to have an in-person meeting with the licensing officer, disclose the names and contact information of all adults residing in their home or provide a list of all current and former social media accounts from the past three years.

Suddaby also reduced the new law’s broad bans on guns in public and private spaces.

He ruled that presumptive gun bans can only be enforced in government administrative buildings, polling places, public areas restricted to general access for special events through permits, or any public or private educational facilities.

The wording in his decision clarifies that while guns will remain banned from any place of worship or religious observations, individuals who are tasked with security are permitted to carry firearms.

New York’s law also required gun owners to have explicit permission to carry guns on private property. Suddaby has previously revealed he disagreed with the constitutionality of this presumptive ban.

“The State of New York is now making a decision for private property owners that they are perfectly able to make for themselves,” Suddaby wrote in his decision.

That provision was all but completely rejected by his decision. Suddaby ruled guns should be presumed to be permitted in public spaces unless an explicit ban is issued by that private property owner. The owner of a house or business can ban guns.

Judge just took a hatchet to NY blatant unconstitutional bullshit law.

[Holy Bazadaco]

Judge blocks calling Times Square ‘gun-free zone’ via temporary restraining order on NY gun law

A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday against parts of New York state’s latest gun control law which prohibits gun owners with concealed carry permits from carrying in so-called “sensitive places,” including Times Square.

In an email to American Military News, the Second Amendment advocacy group Gun Owners of America (GOA) said it, along with the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), secured the restraining order in federal court. The decision comes after GOA and GOF refiled a lawsuit against New York State.

The restraining order will take effect next week...

A bit more Breaking: Judge Rules New NY Gun Laws Are Unconstitutional, Blocks Enforcement

Suddaby took issue with the state’s new background check requirements. Four of the six provisions struck down related to tough requirements for an application or renewal of a license for concealed carry.

He rejected the provision that an applicant must have evidence to demonstrate they have “good moral character,” an attempt by the state to block guns from people with bad intent. Suddaby reversed the burden of proof, ruling that it’s up to the licensing agency to prove the applicant does not have good moral character.

Suddaby also ruled that the state cannot require applicants to have an in-person meeting with the licensing officer, disclose the names and contact information of all adults residing in their home or provide a list of all current and former social media accounts from the past three years.

Suddaby also reduced the new law’s broad bans on guns in public and private spaces.

He ruled that presumptive gun bans can only be enforced in government administrative buildings, polling places, public areas restricted to general access for special events through permits, or any public or private educational facilities.

The wording in his decision clarifies that while guns will remain banned from any place of worship or religious observations, individuals who are tasked with security are permitted to carry firearms.

New York’s law also required gun owners to have explicit permission to carry guns on private property. Suddaby has previously revealed he disagreed with the constitutionality of this presumptive ban.

“The State of New York is now making a decision for private property owners that they are perfectly able to make for themselves,” Suddaby wrote in his decision.

That provision was all but completely rejected by his decision. Suddaby ruled guns should be presumed to be permitted in public spaces unless an explicit ban is issued by that private property owner. The owner of a house or business can ban guns.

Judge just took a hatchet to NY blatant unconstitutional bullshit law.

What an absolute legend

[Gun Manufacturers]

Judge blocks calling Times Square ‘gun-free zone’ via temporary restraining order on NY gun law

A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday against parts of New York state’s latest gun control law which prohibits gun owners with concealed carry permits from carrying in so-called “sensitive places,” including Times Square.

In an email to American Military News, the Second Amendment advocacy group Gun Owners of America (GOA) said it, along with the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), secured the restraining order in federal court. The decision comes after GOA and GOF refiled a lawsuit against New York State.

The restraining order will take effect next week...

A bit more Breaking: Judge Rules New NY Gun Laws Are Unconstitutional, Blocks Enforcement

Suddaby took issue with the state’s new background check requirements. Four of the six provisions struck down related to tough requirements for an application or renewal of a license for concealed carry.

He rejected the provision that an applicant must have evidence to demonstrate they have “good moral character,” an attempt by the state to block guns from people with bad intent. Suddaby reversed the burden of proof, ruling that it’s up to the licensing agency to prove the applicant does not have good moral character.

Suddaby also ruled that the state cannot require applicants to have an in-person meeting with the licensing officer, disclose the names and contact information of all adults residing in their home or provide a list of all current and former social media accounts from the past three years.

Suddaby also reduced the new law’s broad bans on guns in public and private spaces.

He ruled that presumptive gun bans can only be enforced in government administrative buildings, polling places, public areas restricted to general access for special events through permits, or any public or private educational facilities.

The wording in his decision clarifies that while guns will remain banned from any place of worship or religious observations, individuals who are tasked with security are permitted to carry firearms.

New York’s law also required gun owners to have explicit permission to carry guns on private property. Suddaby has previously revealed he disagreed with the constitutionality of this presumptive ban.

“The State of New York is now making a decision for private property owners that they are perfectly able to make for themselves,” Suddaby wrote in his decision.

That provision was all but completely rejected by his decision. Suddaby ruled guns should be presumed to be permitted in public spaces unless an explicit ban is issued by that private property owner. The owner of a house or business can ban guns.

Judge just took a hatchet to NY blatant unconstitutional bullshit law.

As well he should have. The CCIA was a big middle finger from NY state to the Supreme Court's Bruen decision.

[Diopolis]

I mean realistically it could have come from the US, though not necessarily *originated* from the US and obviously not sold by legitimate businesses. Plenty of gunrunners trying to get America's many many firearms out of the country under the radar I'm sure. Plus, y'know, the CIA doing what they do best: support terrorism.

I'm not denying that a small fraction of firearms get smuggled into mexico (fast and furious anyone?).
Argentina has Bersa, Brazil has Taurus, then there is of course the arms that are sold to south american govts / military branches either through the US, Russia, China, etc. So if those arms are getting into the hands of crims and cartels, thats hardly the fault of US firearm laws and the firearm manufacturers or russia, or china, etc.
Brazil has probably the largest underground armorer shops in south america that spits out copy popular firearms, anything from single shot to full auto, which IMO, would be a safe bet the same exists in mexico.

Hasn't it been basically confirmed that the mexican government regularly sells weapons to cartels, too?

[Grinning Dragon]

I'm not denying that a small fraction of firearms get smuggled into mexico (fast and furious anyone?).
Argentina has Bersa, Brazil has Taurus, then there is of course the arms that are sold to south american govts / military branches either through the US, Russia, China, etc. So if those arms are getting into the hands of crims and cartels, thats hardly the fault of US firearm laws and the firearm manufacturers or russia, or china, etc.
Brazil has probably the largest underground armorer shops in south america that spits out copy popular firearms, anything from single shot to full auto, which IMO, would be a safe bet the same exists in mexico.

Hasn't it been basically confirmed that the mexican government regularly sells weapons to cartels, too?

That or the cartels have their peeps in key govt positions to make that happen.
TBH, it's gets old in the blaming of US firearm manufacturers for the ills that plague other countries, using this logic then, perhaps the US should sue the mexican govt for all of the fetanyl deaths in the US since that shit comes through or from mexico.

[Grinning Dragon]

Massive errors in FBI’s Active Shooting Reports regarding cases where civilians stop attacks

Instead of 4.4%, the correct number is at least 34.4%. In 2021, it is at least 49.1%. Excluding gun-free zones, it averaged over 50%.

...The FBI reports that armed citizens only stopped 11 of the 252 active shooter incidents it identified for the period 2014-2021. The FBI defines active shooter incidents as those in which an individual actively kills or attempts to kill people in a populated, public area. But it does not include those it deems related to other criminal activity, such as a robbery or fighting over drug turf.

An analysis by my organization identified a total of 360 active shooter incidents during that period and found that an armed citizen stopped 124. A previous report looked at only instances when armed civilians stopped what likely would have been mass public shootings. There were another 24 cases that we didn’t include where armed civilians stopped armed attacks, but the suspect didn’t fire his gun. Those cases are excluded from our calculations, though it could be argued that a civilian also stopped what likely could have been an active shooting event.

The FBI reported that armed citizens thwarted 4.4% of active shooter incidents, while the CPRC found 34.4%.

Two factors explain this discrepancy – one, misclassified shootings; and two, overlooked incidents. Regarding the former, the CPRC determined that the FBI reports had misclassified five shootings: In two incidents, the Bureau notes in its detailed write-up that citizens possessing valid firearms permits confronted the shooters and caused them to flee the scene. However, the FBI did not list these cases as being stopped by armed citizens because police later apprehended the attackers. In two other incidents, the FBI misidentified armed civilians as armed security personnel. Finally, the FBI failed to mention citizen engagement in one incident.

For example, the Bureau’s report about the Dec. 29, 2019 attack on the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas, that left two men dead does not list this as an incident of “civic engagement.” Instead, the FBI lists this attack as being stopped by a security guard. A parishioner, who had volunteered to provide security during worship, fatally shot the perpetrator. That man, Jack Wilson, told Dr. John Lott that he was not a security professional. He said that 19 to 20 members of the congregation were armed that day, and they didn’t even keep track of who was carrying a concealed weapon.

As for the second factor — overlooked cases — the FBI, more significantly, missed 25 incidents identified by CPRC where what would likely have been a mass public shooting was thwarted by armed civilians. There were another 83 active shooting incidents that they missed.

There is no reason to think that the news media covers all the cases where civilians stopped attacks. And the farther back in time we go, the more cases we are likely to miss. The next table illustrates this bias. Using the 2014 to 2021 data clearly shows that 49.1% of active shooting attacks were stopped in 2021, 45.1% in 2020, and a declining percentage the farther back in time that we go. That pattern is consistent with us having a more difficult time finding cases that occurred farther in the past...

I myself wouldn't say errors, I'd say the under-counting is done intentionally. So it doesn't surprise me that the stasi fbi would do this.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Massive errors in FBI’s Active Shooting Reports regarding cases where civilians stop attacks

Instead of 4.4%, the correct number is at least 34.4%. In 2021, it is at least 49.1%. Excluding gun-free zones, it averaged over 50%.

...The FBI reports that armed citizens only stopped 11 of the 252 active shooter incidents it identified for the period 2014-2021. The FBI defines active shooter incidents as those in which an individual actively kills or attempts to kill people in a populated, public area. But it does not include those it deems related to other criminal activity, such as a robbery or fighting over drug turf.

An analysis by my organization identified a total of 360 active shooter incidents during that period and found that an armed citizen stopped 124. A previous report looked at only instances when armed civilians stopped what likely would have been mass public shootings. There were another 24 cases that we didn’t include where armed civilians stopped armed attacks, but the suspect didn’t fire his gun. Those cases are excluded from our calculations, though it could be argued that a civilian also stopped what likely could have been an active shooting event.

The FBI reported that armed citizens thwarted 4.4% of active shooter incidents, while the CPRC found 34.4%.

Two factors explain this discrepancy – one, misclassified shootings; and two, overlooked incidents. Regarding the former, the CPRC determined that the FBI reports had misclassified five shootings: In two incidents, the Bureau notes in its detailed write-up that citizens possessing valid firearms permits confronted the shooters and caused them to flee the scene. However, the FBI did not list these cases as being stopped by armed citizens because police later apprehended the attackers. In two other incidents, the FBI misidentified armed civilians as armed security personnel. Finally, the FBI failed to mention citizen engagement in one incident.

For example, the Bureau’s report about the Dec. 29, 2019 attack on the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas, that left two men dead does not list this as an incident of “civic engagement.” Instead, the FBI lists this attack as being stopped by a security guard. A parishioner, who had volunteered to provide security during worship, fatally shot the perpetrator. That man, Jack Wilson, told Dr. John Lott that he was not a security professional. He said that 19 to 20 members of the congregation were armed that day, and they didn’t even keep track of who was carrying a concealed weapon.

As for the second factor — overlooked cases — the FBI, more significantly, missed 25 incidents identified by CPRC where what would likely have been a mass public shooting was thwarted by armed civilians. There were another 83 active shooting incidents that they missed.

There is no reason to think that the news media covers all the cases where civilians stopped attacks. And the farther back in time we go, the more cases we are likely to miss. The next table illustrates this bias. Using the 2014 to 2021 data clearly shows that 49.1% of active shooting attacks were stopped in 2021, 45.1% in 2020, and a declining percentage the farther back in time that we go. That pattern is consistent with us having a more difficult time finding cases that occurred farther in the past...

I myself wouldn't say errors, I'd say the under-counting is done intentionally. So it doesn't surprise me that the stasi fbi would do this.

A mistake of an order of magnitude? It COULD be a mistake, but for it to have gone on since 2014 means that it should have been noticed by now. If it was a mistake, it was probably ignored.

[Diopolis]

Massive errors in FBI’s Active Shooting Reports regarding cases where civilians stop attacks



I myself wouldn't say errors, I'd say the under-counting is done intentionally. So it doesn't surprise me that the stasi fbi would do this.

A mistake of an order of magnitude? It COULD be a mistake, but for it to have gone on since 2014 means that it should have been noticed by now. If it was a mistake, it was probably ignored.

Given everything we know about publication bias- that it's strongest in sociological fields like criminology and public health, consistently slants in a left wing direction, and becomes more likely with a larger differential in potential error...

[Paddy O Fernature]

Massive errors in FBI’s Active Shooting Reports regarding cases where civilians stop attacks

Instead of 4.4%, the correct number is at least 34.4%. In 2021, it is at least 49.1%. Excluding gun-free zones, it averaged over 50%.

...The FBI reports that armed citizens only stopped 11 of the 252 active shooter incidents it identified for the period 2014-2021. The FBI defines active shooter incidents as those in which an individual actively kills or attempts to kill people in a populated, public area. But it does not include those it deems related to other criminal activity, such as a robbery or fighting over drug turf.

An analysis by my organization identified a total of 360 active shooter incidents during that period and found that an armed citizen stopped 124. A previous report looked at only instances when armed civilians stopped what likely would have been mass public shootings. There were another 24 cases that we didn’t include where armed civilians stopped armed attacks, but the suspect didn’t fire his gun. Those cases are excluded from our calculations, though it could be argued that a civilian also stopped what likely could have been an active shooting event.

The FBI reported that armed citizens thwarted 4.4% of active shooter incidents, while the CPRC found 34.4%.

Two factors explain this discrepancy – one, misclassified shootings; and two, overlooked incidents. Regarding the former, the CPRC determined that the FBI reports had misclassified five shootings: In two incidents, the Bureau notes in its detailed write-up that citizens possessing valid firearms permits confronted the shooters and caused them to flee the scene. However, the FBI did not list these cases as being stopped by armed citizens because police later apprehended the attackers. In two other incidents, the FBI misidentified armed civilians as armed security personnel. Finally, the FBI failed to mention citizen engagement in one incident.

For example, the Bureau’s report about the Dec. 29, 2019 attack on the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas, that left two men dead does not list this as an incident of “civic engagement.” Instead, the FBI lists this attack as being stopped by a security guard. A parishioner, who had volunteered to provide security during worship, fatally shot the perpetrator. That man, Jack Wilson, told Dr. John Lott that he was not a security professional. He said that 19 to 20 members of the congregation were armed that day, and they didn’t even keep track of who was carrying a concealed weapon.

As for the second factor — overlooked cases — the FBI, more significantly, missed 25 incidents identified by CPRC where what would likely have been a mass public shooting was thwarted by armed civilians. There were another 83 active shooting incidents that they missed.

There is no reason to think that the news media covers all the cases where civilians stopped attacks. And the farther back in time we go, the more cases we are likely to miss. The next table illustrates this bias. Using the 2014 to 2021 data clearly shows that 49.1% of active shooting attacks were stopped in 2021, 45.1% in 2020, and a declining percentage the farther back in time that we go. That pattern is consistent with us having a more difficult time finding cases that occurred farther in the past...

I myself wouldn't say errors, I'd say the under-counting is done intentionally. So it doesn't surprise me that the stasi fbi would do this.

This isn't nearly as shocking as it should be, honestly.

[Holy Bazadaco]

Massive errors in FBI’s Active Shooting Reports regarding cases where civilians stop attacks



I myself wouldn't say errors, I'd say the under-counting is done intentionally. So it doesn't surprise me that the stasi fbi would do this.

This isn't nearly as shocking as it should be, honestly.

Yep, at this point you just can't be surprised anymore with those things.
On the offtopic a bit, what sort of gun cleaning kits https://gritroutdoors.com/hunting/hunting-tools-accessories/cleaning-tools/ do you guys use? I've lost mine while moving to Dallas... Ones from this store look okay imo, but not sure.