When Everytown for Gun Safety announced it was holding online gun “training” classes, many anti-gun activists and volunteers with the organization were sharply critical of the move, declaring it was akin to the group normalizing gun ownership instead of advocating for a gun-free future.
Of course, the so-called training has proved to be mostly anti-gun talking points, but if the group’s anti-2A critics have any doubts that Everytown is still as opposed to our right to keep and bear arms as ever they just have to look at the organization’s latest report for reassurance.
Titled “Disarming Fear: Debunking Myths of Defensive Gun Use”, Everytown’s report starts with several incidents that they allege were reported as defensive gun uses even though there were elements of each incident that were immediately known that undercut any self-defense claim. One incident highlighted by Everytown, for example, was the shooting of teenager Ralph Yarl in Kansas City after he knocked on the wrong door of a home when he went to pick up his little brothers from a friend’s house. While Andrew Lester Lester told police that he believed that Yarl was trying to break in to his home and was “scared to death” of Yarl’s size, it only took prosecutors four days to file charges against him.
Everytown asserts that legitimate defensive gun uses are “exceedingly rare,” and that they are “often deployed against unarmed perpetrators, and often accompanied by underappreciated personal and social risks, including loss of life and property.”
How rare? Everytown says it used National Crime Victimization Survey data and came up with a figure of about 69,000 DGUs every year between 2019 and 2023. That’s far below the estimates of 1 million or more DGUs from researchers like Gary Kleck and William English, but even so, that’s about three times the number of homicides in the United States. If DGU’s are “rare”, then murders involving firearms are even more rare, which undercuts Everytown’s entire ideology.
Everytown also takes issue with using a gun to defend yourself against someone who doesn’t have a firearm.
In the majority of these uses, suspected perpetrators are unarmed. In fact, 58 percent of perpetrators are not armed with any weapon. In eight out of 10 DGUs, the suspected perpetrator is not armed with a gun.
So what? An unarmed individual can still pose a threat to life and limb. Just look at the recent DGU in Los Angeles where a 79-year-old Vietnam veteran shot and killed a man who had thrown him to the ground and broke both his legs and continued to assault him while he was writhing in pain. Does Everytown believe George Karkoc should be charged for acting in self-defense since his attacker wasn’t armed with any kind of weapon?
If not, it sure looks like they at least believe Karkoc would have been better off without a gun.
Crime victims who responded with a gun were less likely to get away from the offender than those who responded without one (7 percent with a gun compared to 18 percent without) and less likely to avoid injury (39 percent compared to 44 percent).
So… in either case the vast majority of individuals who were the victim of a violent crime were unable to get away from their attacker, and the difference in the injury rate is honestly negligible. If that’s true, then I would definitely prefer to be armed if someone decides to invade my home, carjack my vehicle, or assault me on the street.
Everytown also notes that violent crime is trending down across the United States, but as FPC’s Rob Romano notes, they still claim that an armed society is a more dangerous place.
After saying that crime is down and guns are rarely used for self-defense, Everytown complains that there’s too many justifiable homicides: pic.twitter.com/n822qO8Z7m
— Rob Romano (@2Aupdates) November 12, 2025
Giffords has also recently complained about the number of justifiable homicides, which makes me wonder if this going to be a new talking point for the gun control lobby. “Too many people are defending themselves from violent attackers” doesn’t sound like a great argument to me, but maybe their focus groups are telling them differently.
Everytown’s conclusion, of course, is that you’re better off not owning a gun at all. I’d say the gun control group gave us 69,000 reasons to disregard that advice. In reality the number of defensive gun uses is likely much higher than what the anti-gun org is wililng to admit, but even using their numbers hundreds of people are protecting themselves with firearms each and every day across the United States; proof positive that DGUs aren’t uncommon or unnecessary.
Editor’s Note: After more than 40 days of screwing Americans, a few Dems have finally caved. The Schumer Shutdown was never about principle—just inflicting pain for political points.
Help us report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here

21 Comments
I’d love to see a peer-reviewed study on their claims. Courts have ruled on self-defense cases—why ignore legal precedent?
If Everytown wants to educate, maybe they should teach firearm safety instead of demonizing legal self-defense.
The Yarl case was a terrible tragedy, but it doesn’t represent the majority of defensive gun uses. They’re framing a rare scenario.
This report is a PR move. They’re using sensational cases to push a narrative while ignoring the millions of responsible gun owners.
Everytown’s report rehashes old arguments but ignores the reality that guns deter crime daily. Statistics matter.
While I oppose some gun policies, this report feels like a political tool, not a balanced analysis. Let’s keep facts separate from activism.
This report seems to cherry-pick incidents to push a narrative. Real defensive gun use stats show a different story—where’s the data on those?
I’d be curious to see the methodology behind their report. Are they relying on anecdotes or actual data?
Call me skeptical, but a group opposing the 2A hosting a ‘training’ class feels more like a PR stunt than genuine education. Where’s the transparency?
Hosting a class while attacking gun ownership is hypocritical. If they’re so anti-gun, why not just advocate for bans outright?
This seems like a strategic shift for Everytown, even if the training is just anti-gun propaganda. It’s interesting how they’re pivoting to ‘education’ instead of outright bans.
Agreed, but will it actually change minds or just solidify existing views?
The ironies here are rich. A group advocating for gun restrictions is now teaching people about guns—what’s the actual goal?
I find it amusing that an anti-gun group is hosting ‘gun training’ sessions. What’s in the fine print? Mandatory registration or surrender?
The Ralph Yarl case is tragic, but using it to undermine all defensive gun uses feels exploitative and misleading. Everytown should focus on better solutions instead.
The framing of defensive gun uses as ‘myths’ is a strong claim. Do they have evidence to back it up, or is this just rhetoric?
A ‘training’ class that ignores real-world defensive gun use seems more like propaganda than education. What’s the point?
Hosting a gun class while undermining gun rights is a contradiction. Are they hypocritical or just ineffective at messaging?
If Everytown’s goal is gun control, why not say so outright? This report feels like a roundabout way to push restrictions.
This feels like a desperate attempt to regain relevance. If their report focuses on outliers, it’s not a true reflection of defensive gun use.
Everytown’s approach is still about fear-mongering, not actual safety. Defensive gun use saved lives; why ignore that?