"𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗺𝘂𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁. 𝗛𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗮 𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝗱𝘂𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀...
- Jeffrey Ehasz
- Jun 1
- 2 min read
This now makes at least 13 incidents since the first of the year (two in the past six days), where one subject has wounded and/or killed at least two officers in a singular incident. As of today, that makes at least 35 officers shot, six of them killed, by 13 subjects, of whom, nine have died, two were wounded, and two more arrested.
Last year there were at least 28 of these incidents, so we're almost halfway to that number in 2025.
Of the totals in my list, there are 113 such incidents with 337 LEOs involved, 99 of them being killed and 238 wounded by 126 subjects. Of the subjects, 70 have died (either by suicide, or LEO action), 30 were wounded, 26 were arrested. The fugitive subject from the Mifflin Township incident last week shot himself Saturday and is in critical condition. He's listed here as "wounded."
That's an average of 2.7 LEOs wounded or killed per incident. Subjects are wounded (30) or killed (70) in over 30% of the incidents.
BTW, since Barnes v Felix just came out, of the 13 incidents so far this year, six of them started out as traffic stops. Of the 28 incidents last year, only seven were traffic/vehicle related.
This begs the following questions:
1. Are officers being trained/educated with proper mindset, tactics, and tools?
2. Officers are trained/educated on proper mindset, tactics, and tools but are they not using them appropriately?
3. Are subjects becoming more adept (mindset, tactics, tools) at wounding or killing more officers in singular incidents?
4. Is it a combination of all three?
5. How do we educate/train LEOs to mitigate these incidents?
Looking at the events on my list and reading the news stories, I lean into questions 1 and 2 being a larger source of the problem (media filter on as best as possible) in one combination or another.
Subjects don't have to be good, they just have to be lucky and if LEOs are contributing to the subject's "luck," then we need to eliminate that variable.
Comments