In a recent report from Washington Gun Law, President William Kirk highlighted a disturbing incident in Seattle that calls into question the effectiveness of restrictive gun laws. A shooting on May 27, 2025, at the intersection of First and Union left three people shot – one of them fatally. But in this case, the fatality was the armed attacker, stopped by a legally armed citizen who intervened. According to Kirk, this is yet another example of how gun control fails to prevent crime but how lawful citizens can help stop it.
What Happened on May 27
The events unfolded rapidly. As Kirk recounted, a 16-year-old opened fire on two other teenagers, one 17 and the other 18, during an argument in downtown Seattle. Then, a nearby bystander, who was lawfully carrying a concealed firearm, drew his weapon and shot the attacker, ending the threat. Police confirmed that the armed citizen was not involved in the initial conflict and cooperated fully with authorities before being released without charges.
The Seattle Police Department noted that the bystander’s actions appeared consistent with lawful self-defense under Washington law. According to Kirk, that’s significant: when police release a shooter the same night, it usually means the evidence points strongly toward a justified use of force.
Gun Laws Didn’t Stop the 16-Year-Old
As William Kirk emphasized, this tragic story underscores a bitter truth – none of Washington’s numerous gun laws prevented a 16-year-old from acquiring and using a firearm to shoot two people. Kirk bluntly observed, “What we have here is a 16-year-old kid shooting a 17-year-old kid and an 18-year-old kid and then being shot by a bystander.” In a state with some of the strictest firearm regulations in the nation, this should raise eyebrows.
The young shooter was clearly prohibited from owning a firearm under both federal and state law, yet he had one anyway. This, Kirk argues, shows that gun laws often don’t stop determined criminals, especially juveniles who ignore the rules from the start.
A Clear Case of Legal Self-Defense
Kirk broke down how the armed citizen likely met Washington’s legal threshold for using deadly force. State law permits the use of lethal force when someone is at risk of death or serious bodily harm, or when another person nearby is facing that danger. Since the shooting happened right in front of the bystander, and two people had already been shot, the use of a firearm to stop the attacker likely met all necessary criteria.
Importantly, Kirk noted that the bystander also met a fourth criteria – he wasn’t the aggressor. He acted as what Kirk calls “his own first responder,” stepping in when seconds counted.
Politicians and Media Stay Quiet
One of Kirk’s main criticisms was aimed at Seattle officials and the media. He pointed out that despite the clear-cut heroism of the bystander, local politicians have remained silent. “Will America’s most awkward mayor finally recognize the heroism shown by this individual?” Kirk asked, referencing Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell. So far, no statement has been issued acknowledging the bystander’s actions.
That silence, Kirk argued, is telling. When a gun is used in a criminal act, it makes headlines and politicians rush to propose new laws. But when a gun is used to stop a crime? The response is often muted, if not entirely absent.
Seattle’s Long History of Anti-Gun Efforts
Kirk also reminded viewers that Seattle has been a major advocate for tougher gun laws. From trying to turn public parks into gun-free zones to pushing through gun and ammunition taxes, city leaders have consistently worked to limit firearm access, even for lawful citizens.
Yet, as Kirk pointed out, these policies didn’t stop this shooting. Instead, it was a gun owner, someone who followed the rules, who ended the violence. Meanwhile, the city’s police department is operating at half capacity, thanks in part to defunding efforts, and crime has spiked in recent years.
Over 700,000 Washingtonians Carry Legally
Despite all the laws aimed at reducing gun ownership, Kirk noted that Washington is now home to more than 705,000 lawful concealed pistol license (CPL) holders. That’s an all-time high. “Washingtonians see things differently,” Kirk said. In other words, many residents are choosing to arm themselves, likely in response to increasing crime and the perceived inability of the government to protect them.
That number alone should be a message to lawmakers: when people don’t feel safe, they take personal responsibility for their protection. The state’s efforts to curtail legal gun ownership may be backfiring.
What This Incident Teaches Us
This isn’t just a one-time story. It’s part of a broader trend. Kirk framed this event as “a teachable moment” – a real-world example of what happens when good intentions (like gun control laws) crash into hard reality. Criminals break the law. Law-abiding citizens get punished with restrictions. And ultimately, when something terrible happens, it’s often an armed civilian, not a law or a sign, that makes the difference.
This moment, Kirk argues, is a microcosm of the entire gun rights debate. It puts the spotlight on one undeniable fact: gun control didn’t save the two victims, but a good guy with a gun did.
Real Protection Comes from Real People
This story stuck with me because it reveals how fragile safety can be in cities that spend more time crafting laws than enforcing them. We’re constantly told that if we just pass one more restriction, we’ll all be safer. But as this story shows, safety isn’t guaranteed by legislation – it’s often secured by ordinary citizens who step up in dangerous moments.
What’s fascinating is how political silence seems louder than any press conference. When a legally armed man does exactly what society should want, protect others and act lawfully, he gets ignored. That sends a chilling message: some victories don’t count because they don’t fit the narrative.
When Silence Says Everything
Mayor Bruce Harrell has had nothing to say. That’s not surprising, but it’s deeply disappointing. Kirk was right to call him out. If the situation had been reversed, if the gun owner had made a mistake, it would have made national headlines. But because he stopped the violence, there’s nothing but crickets from City Hall.
This lack of public recognition erodes trust. Citizens deserve to know that their actions, when legal and lifesaving, will be acknowledged and respected. Instead, we’re seeing a pattern of downplaying defensive gun use to avoid uncomfortable truths about the limits of gun control.
Laws That Punish the Wrong People
William Kirk’s breakdown of this incident is a sobering reminder that gun laws are often reactive, not preventative. They restrict people who follow rules but fail to stop those who never planned to follow them in the first place. The Seattle shooting shows this clearly: one young man bent on violence, two victims, and only one person, the armed bystander, did anything that actually made a difference.
Gun control may be politically popular in some places, but stories like this one make it harder to argue that it’s effective. If anything, they show that preparedness, training, and the right to carry can be the last real defense when everything else fails.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.