A Colorado Springs officer was shot during a foot pursuit on February 2, 2026. Seconds later, a second officer opened fire again after the suspect reached for his gun. I break down both shootings — what was clearly justified, and where I believe a tactical mistake created a second deadly-force situation that may not have been necessary.
On February 2, 2026, Colorado Springs Police were conducting a warrant operation with federal partners. The original target was unrelated to what happened next.
Officers observed a masked male acting suspiciously. When they attempted contact, he ran. A foot pursuit followed.
First Shooting – Clean and Justified
After a short chase, the suspect turned, drew a handgun, and fired.
One officer was struck.
Simultaneously, the officer returned fire and dropped the suspect. The suspect was disarmed. A loaded Springfield Hellcat 9mm — later determined to be stolen — was recovered.
This is a textbook deadly-force scenario:
• Armed suspect
• Direct threat
• Officer shot first
• Immediate return fire
That shooting is legally and tactically solid.
Second Shooting – The Critical Moment
A second officer arrives behind the first.
The suspect is on the ground.
He is being held at gunpoint.
At that moment, control must be established.
The second officer holsters his weapon. The only reason to holster there is to go hands-on and detain.
But no immediate physical control is applied.
The suspect moves.
He attempts to flee.
During the attempted detention, he reaches for the officer’s firearm.
The officer fires multiple rounds.
Legally, this is justified.
A suspect who just shot an officer and then reaches for an officer’s gun presents an immediate deadly threat.
That will likely clear under any reasonable use-of-force standard.
The Tactical Issue
My issue is not legality.
My issue is execution.
Once you holster, you commit to control.
If you are not going hands-on immediately, you maintain distance and firearm control.
There was hesitation.
That hesitation allowed the suspect to regain movement and create a second deadly-force encounter.
Could it have been prevented?
Possibly.
Once the suspect reached for the firearm, the second shooting became necessary.
But that moment developed because control was not immediately established.
Final Assessment
• First shooting — completely justified.
• Second shooting — legally justified.
• Tactical execution — questionable.
Both officers survived.
The suspect remains hospitalized.
An outside agency is reviewing the use of force per Colorado law.
The takeaway:
Legal justification and tactical discipline are not the same thing.
