According to FBI Law Enforcement Killed and Assaulted (LEOKA) statistics, between 2013 and 2022, a total of 515 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in America. Of that number, LEOKA only received information on whether 387 of the 515 victim officers discharged their own weapons during the incidents that led to their deaths. Alarmingly, LEOKA reported that only 60 of those 387 officers fired their weapons during these fatal encounters. In other words, just 15.5% of the 387 murdered officers returned fire at their assailants. [1] These figures raise a critical question: Why didn’t the victim officers fire back at their killers?
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
The National Fraternal Order of Police (NFOP) reported on January 2, 2024, that 378 officers were shot in 2023. Of these, 138 officers were victims of 115 ambush-style attacks. Such attacks are likely a significant factor in many of the deadly incidents where officers did not fire their weapons. Simply put, many of the murdered officers likely never had a chance to respond.
| DOWNLOAD: This article is from our eBook, “Officer down! A tactical guide to ambush prevention and response.” Get your copy here.
One area of police enforcement particularly vulnerable to officer ambush is traffic enforcement and vehicle stops. LEOKA statistics reveal that between 2013 and 2022, 33 officers were murdered during traffic violation stops. Additionally, three officers were killed during high-risk vehicle stops, and 11 others lost their lives in incidents involving vehicles. These figures underscore the inherent risks of ambush during vehicle stops, making it imperative for officers to approach stopped vehicles with heightened caution and a well-thought-out, preplanned strategy.
The Lewinski safe approach study
In March 2013, Dr. William J. Lewinski of the Force Science Institute published a study titled “The Influence of Officer Positioning on Movement during a Threatening Traffic Stop Scenario.” The study examined officers with holstered weapons as they chose either a driver-side or passenger-side approach to a vehicle stopped for a traffic infraction.
Participating officers were directed to stop at a designated point positioned at a 45-degree angle forward from the vehicle’s “B-pillar” [2] on either side.
The Lewinski study identified a “Mitigation Zone” (MZ) on both sides of a stopped vehicle, which serves as a safety zone for officers. The MZ was determined by analyzing the angles that make it most challenging for a driver seated in the vehicle to shoot at an officer. The testing revealed that the MZ for a driver’s-side approach is a 10-degree angle backward from the B-pillar, while the MZ for a passenger-side approach is a 45-degree angle backward from the B-pillar.
During the study, the driver of the suspect vehicle was able to aim and fire a concealed training pistol loaded with marking cartridges in just 0.50 seconds at an officer positioned at the designated spot on the driver’s side. Similarly, for an officer positioned at the designated spot on the passenger side, the driver fired the first shot in 0.52 seconds.
Officers positioned on the passenger side were able to retreat fully into the Mitigation Zone (MZ) in an average of 1.5 seconds and fire a return shot in 2.15 seconds. Meanwhile, officers on the driver’s side required an average of 2.46 seconds to fully retreat into the MZ. They were able to fire their first shot from the driver’s side MZ in an average of 1.99 seconds.
The study reveals that it takes a suspect slightly longer to fire a shot at an officer positioned on the passenger side. Additionally, the Mitigation Zone (MZ) on the passenger side is wider — offering greater safety — and officers can enter it more quickly. Regardless of the side chosen for the approach, officers should stop at the B-pillar. This forces the driver to turn and look backward over their shoulder, increasing reaction time. Furthermore, the B-pillar of a vehicle is constructed from high-strength steel, [3] providing immediate, though relatively narrow, protection against incoming bullets.
Avoid giving a driver the opportunity for a direct head or torso shot. Once the driver fires the first shot, subsequent shots can be discharged at an average rate of 0.25 seconds per shot until the firearm locks back. [4] Consider the danger this poses to an officer standing directly to the right or left of a driver who initiates an ambush. In such a scenario, the officer is in the direct line of fire with no chance to draw their holstered weapon and return fire, leaving them critically exposed.
An officer who suspects an imminent threat of being shot should remain within the designated Mitigation Zone (MZ) angle and retreat backward as quickly as balance allows. It is advisable to seek reliable cover behind the patrol car rather than attempting to engage the driver from the rear wheel or bumper of the suspect’s vehicle.
Engaging in a shootout from such a position is neither safe nor strategically sound, as it leaves the officer exposed to further danger.
Vehicle approach advice
Chief William G. “Bill” Brooks, who retired in June 2024 after an exemplary 47-year career in law enforcement, [5] has provided seasoned advice on approaching stopped vehicles.
“For several years leading up to my recent retirement, I instructed my officers to exclusively use passenger-side approaches during vehicle stops, with only two exceptions,” said Brooks. “One, when the vehicle is stopped too close to a guardrail, making a passenger-side approach impractical. Two, when extreme weather conditions, such as high snowbanks, render a passenger-side approach impossible. These guidelines were designed to prioritize officer safety by leveraging the tactical advantages of the passenger-side approach whenever feasible.”
Brooks outlines numerous advantages to passenger-side traffic stops:
1. Reduced risk from passing traffic
Officers are less likely to be struck by passing vehicles during a passenger-side approach. Unlike a driver-side approach, it eliminates the need for officers to divide their attention between oncoming traffic and the vehicle occupants, allowing them to focus solely on assessing the stopped vehicle and its passengers. While there is a small chance that an officer could be struck by their own vehicle if it is rear-ended, this risk exists regardless of the officer’s position.
2. Element of surprise
Motorists often anticipate the officer approaching from the driver’s side and monitor their left-side mirror. This provides a brief but valuable moment for the officer to observe the interior of the vehicle unnoticed, potentially identifying suspicious activity or threats.
3. Improved visibility of the right side
A passenger-side approach gives officers a clear view of the violator’s right arm and thigh, which are common areas where a firearm or contraband may be concealed. This vantage point can be critical in identifying threats before they escalate.
4. Enhanced observation of concealed areas
The passenger side provides a better line of sight into the console and glovebox areas, enabling officers to see clearly if the motorist is reaching for a weapon instead of registration documents.
5. Defensive advantage
For a right-handed motorist attempting to fire at the officer, it is more challenging to swing their arm across their body to aim effectively. This provides the officer with a slight but significant tactical advantage.
6. Reduced risk of physical altercation
On the passenger side, the motorist can’t reachout and grab the officer’s clothing or equipment and attempt to drive off, a risk inherent in driver-side approaches.
7. Eliminates dangerous instinctive reactions
If a motorist drives away suddenly, the officer on the passenger side is less likely to instinctively reach into the vehicle, a dangerous reaction that can lead to severe injury. Instead, the officer can quickly return to their vehicle, initiate a pursuit, and communicate with dispatch.
8. Minimized risk of being pinned
A passenger-side approach reduces the risk of an officer being pinned between the stopped vehicle and the patrol car. To avoid this entirely, officers should either move quickly and remain alert to the driver’s actions or walk behind their patrol vehicle to reach the passenger side. Glancing at the stopped vehicle’s brake and reverse lights and monitoring oncoming traffic further enhances safety during the approach.
9. Modern vehicles enable safer tactics
Historically, driver-side approaches were preferred for convenience, as motorists needed to roll down their window manually. With the advent of electric windows, this is no longer necessary, removing a key barrier to passenger-side approaches.
Conclusion
Passenger-side approaches are significantly safer for officers and provide numerous tactical advantages. Police agencies should prioritize training their officers in this method and make it the standard practice wherever conditions allow. By doing so, they can reduce risks and enhance officer safety during traffic stops.
References
- LEOKA did not receive information regarding this issue on the remainder of the 515 officers feloniously killed.
- The “B Pillar” is the door post located between the front and back seat on both sides of a vehicle.
- Dhawal S. Design and Development of the B-Pillar (Interior Trim). Skill & Lync, 11/20/20.
- See, William J. Lewinski; Christina Redmann, “New Developments in Understanding the Psychological Factors In the Stop Shooting Response,” 2009, p.38.
- William G. Brooks retired in April 2024 as Chief of the Norwood (Mass.) Police Department following a career of over 47 years. He previously served as the Deputy Chief of the Wellesley (Mass.) Police Department and in various ranks at the Norwood and Westwood Police Departments. Chief Brooks is a former president of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association; a former member of the IACP Board of Directors; and currently is Chair of the IACP Firearms Committee. He is a graduate of the 175th session of the FBI National Academy.
| WATCH: How police officers can detect, prevent and defend against ambush attacks
