A deadly school shooting in Oregon has renewed debate over the role of armed civilians in stopping mass attacks. The attack at Silver Rail Elementary School in Bend killed three students and one teacher. A father who entered the school fired at the teenage gunman.
President Donald Trump praised the man’s actions on Friday. He said it was fortunate that someone with a gun knew how to use it.
The man was Kaylub Giamanco, a 36-year-old carpenter and father of two girls. His mother, Kenda Freeman, said he stepped in after gunfire broke out at the school attended by his daughters.
Bend Police Chief Mike Krantz said Giamanco had a .40-caliber pistol stored legally in his vehicle. He entered the school after hearing gunshots. He then saw a teacher fighting with the shooter and opened fire.
Such cases are rare in the United States. Data from a research center at Texas State University shows that armed civilians have stopped only a small share of active attacks before police arrived.
The Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center studied 634 attacks between 2000 and 2025. The cases involved attackers who used guns, knives or vehicles.
The study found that 374 attacks ended before police reached the scene. Armed civilians shot the attacker in 29 of those cases. In 31 other cases, civilians stopped the attacker by other means. Some people wrestled the attacker to the ground or took away the weapon.
James Keith, a spokesperson for the center, said people may act when they believe they are the only ones able to stop an attack before law enforcement arrives.
The findings show that civilians can sometimes play a key role during a crisis. Yet they also show how uncommon it is for an armed person to end an attack by shooting the attacker.
Gun rights supporters have long promoted the idea of a good person with a gun. They argue that armed citizens can protect themselves and others when violence breaks out. They also say that a person at the scene may be able to act before police arrive.
People who intervene have varied levels of training. Some have served in the military or worked in law enforcement. Others are ordinary people who make a quick choice during a frightening event.
However, armed intervention can bring serious risks. During a fast-moving attack, it may be hard to know who is responsible for the violence. Police officers arriving at the scene may also struggle to tell an armed civilian from the attacker.
Some states have tried to place trained and armed people in schools and other public spaces. Supporters say this could help stop an attacker before more people are hurt.
Texas created its school marshal program in 2013. The program allows trained teachers and school staff to carry concealed firearms on campus. The state later expanded school safety rules and programs for armed security staff.
These changes followed major school shootings, including an attack at a high school near Houston in 2018 and the deadly shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde in 2022.
Gun laws differ across the country. Texas has some of the least strict gun laws in the United States, according to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. The group rates Oregon among the states with stronger gun laws.
The difference reflects a wider debate over how to protect schools and public places. Some people support wider access to guns for self-defense. Others call for stronger gun laws and better safety plans to reduce the risk of mass shootings.
The Oregon attack has brought these questions back into focus. Giamanco’s decision to intervene may have helped stop the gunman. But one event cannot prove that more armed civilians would prevent mass attacks or save more lives.
The research data also shows that attacks can end in different ways before police arrive. Some are stopped by armed civilians, while others end when people use physical force or remove an attacker’s weapon.
Cases like the Oregon shooting often draw public praise for those who step in to protect others. They also show the hard choices people may face during a violent attack. In such moments, time is short, the danger is high, and any attempt to intervene can carry serious risks.
