Four major findings resulted from the two experiments conducted. First, the average civilian had extreme difficulty in distinguishing a handgun from an innocuous object, such as a power tool. Second, this difficulty persisted even under ideal viewing conditions that were significantly better than is typical of actual crime situations. Third, the average civilian had a strong tendency to shoot, or at least to decide to shoot, an "armed" perpetrator if given the opportunity, regardless of whether the "armed" subject displayed a power tool or a handgun. Fourth, even though the vast majority of the civilian respondents showed a readiness to shoot the perpetrator themselves, only about 1 person in 10 felt it would be appropriate for the police to do so under the same circumstances. Thus, the findings show a significant disparity between the actions, attitudes, and beliefs of typical adults and the practical realities of police work in potentially violent situations. Further research should test whether this disparity might stem from public perceptions conditioned by popular media depictions of crime and police work that do not portray realistic conditions under which potential threats are perceived, assessed, and acted upon. Research findings should ultimately have relevance for real-world court cases in which witnesses, jurors, and the public might testify and evaluate the actions of police officers who respond to real-world violent crime. One experiment addressed the issue of how untrained people would react if placed in the position of police officers in a situation that potentially involved firearms and their use. The second experiment determined how untrained civilians assessed police responses in a situation that involved potential gun violence. 21 references