Civilians with permits stopped the attacks more frequently and faced a lower risk of being killed or injured than police. [More]
My guess would be the relevance of mentioning permits is that statistically, there may be more armed citizens with them in the types of areas where “active shootings” are more prevalent, especially since almost half the states don’t “allow” permitless carry. True, there’s no doubt an effect from the extra required training steps an average permit holder undergoes over permitless carriers, but I don’t think the data exists to quantify a difference. Many hardcore 2A activists who are practiced simply don’t believe in permits.
[Via Jess]
