[XD40]

There was an incident over the weekend that while not strictly a CCW issue, it is a relevant gun issue. The facts are not all clear as of this writing but what I can summarize is this:
An undercover University of Central Florida officer was patrolling the parking lot of the footbal game to curb underage drinking. He became involved in some sort of disturbance or scuffle with an unknown number of revellers. At some point, he drew his weapon and fired one or more shots in to the air. A uniformed LEO in the same parking lot drew his weapon and not identifying the UC as a cop, shot him dead, 3 shots in the back (allegedly).
There are more questions than answers right now about the entire incident but one that everyone seems to agree on is, why did he fire in to the air? If he was in danger, was this a warning shot? Police are trained to NOT fire warning shot (no such thing as a warning shot they say, and I agree). There are rumors that he turned and fired at the LEO after the LEO fired his first shot but no one knows for sure right now.
It appears to me to be an unfortunate incident where a perhaps under trained officer, reacted in an inaapropriate manner to a stressful situation and a LEO, thinking he was firing on people in the crowd (reasonable under the circumstances) stopped the threat.

 

[CombatEffective]

There are a lot of questions still unanswered. A person in the crowd was hit int he leg or so the reports say. Some reports say that the undercover cop was being pelted by beer bottles from a large group of folks.

I don't understand why they had undercover cops out looking for underage drinkers. They usually find me and announce themselves as such even when I'm uniform.

 

[P95Carry]

XD - this from a thread on THR -

If as reported, sounds like stupid act by one officer, and a "what would you have done?" act by second officer.

Fla. College Police Officer Fatally Shot by Another Officer
Report: Undercover Officer May Have Been Trying to Break Up Tailgate Party
http://www.officer.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=2&id=26049


A university police officer working with the state to curb underage drinking was shot to death by an Orlando police officer outside the Citrus Bowl Saturday as fans were arriving for a football game, authorities said.

Mario Jenkins, a canine officer working with Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco agents, was killed, said University of Central Florida Police Sgt. Troy Williamson.

Williamson said Jenkins was wearing street clothes. He would not talk about the circumstances of the shooting.

"You've got about 50 police officers and beverage agents who are in complete shock at this point," Williamson said.

Witnesses told the Orlando Sentinel that the incident started when an undercover officer tried to break up a tailgate party. When he encountered resistance, they said, he fired three shots into the air. An Orlando Police officer saw the man with the gun and shot him several times, the newspaper said.

Authorities believed a third person was involved, said Barbara Jones, spokeswoman for the Orlando Police Department. Jones refused to say whether the person was injured.

The shooting occurred before a game between University of Central Florida and Marshall University, which UCF won.

"It's pretty freaky. You don't think you would see this at a UCF game," junior Nicole Jorgensen, 22, of Melbourne.

 

[KC135]

Tragic.

Poor judgement appears to have led to one officers death, and another officer having the rest of his life to reflect.

Feel bad for all.

 

[rstickle]

I had seen this and would really like to find out what the final outcome is. It sounds like two cops both made really bad mistakes, one fatal.

 

[Euclidean]

I can't help but think of my "Warning Shot" thread.

To be honest I've always considered something like this one of the possible dangers one incurs by being armed. It's extremely likely a CCW holder would get shot by the police if the police show up at a crime scene.

However I honestly think the odds of that are so abysmal even next to the tiny odds of actually needing to fire a gun at another human being, I'll take that chance. It's about like saying I'll never use a computer on the off chance it electrocutes me. To live and be alive is to be in constant danger. But even then it's bound to happen once to someone as this incident demonstrates.

 

[LMarshall73]

Okay. Now I'm confused. All of the reports I've seen/read about this incident state that the officer that was killed had employed less-lethal rubber ammo to disperse the crowd and was (as stated above) shot in the back by a reserve OPD officer. One of the tailgaters ( a non-student) was wounded by the less lethal ammo and is recovering in the hospital.

 

[gunthorp]

A tragedy on all sides, including the college kids at their football game. Something seems amiss here. A K9 officer, undercover? Looking for underage drinking at a college football game? Mixed up with ATF? If this is the same federal agency working local LEO's, I know how they have operated in the past. Certainly a mismatch of mission vs training, unless there's something they're not telling us. I'm reminded of certain "intelligence gathering" personell overseas who get PFC's over their heads in dirty work. Guess who takes the fall?

 

[A1C Lickey]

Just my two cents, and I wish I had mentioned this earlier in the warning shots thread, but while we were taught to never fire a warning shot (this is military training, by the way) I was trained that three shots fired in rapid succession were to be used to summon help if you had no other means of communication.

Now the example given for this was- you're on a patrol on the far side of base, and armed assailants start coming over the fence. You try to radio in but your radio is out of commision. Three shots fired rapidly into the air will hopefully get someone's attention.

I don't know if this is how the dead officer was trained, but when I read the second story and it mentioned him firing three shots into the air it made me think of this.

A1C Lickey

 

[Shotgun Willie]

I thought the same thing A1C.

I have always been taught that three quick loud blows from a whistle, gun shots or car horn meant that you were calling for help. This is useful in wilderness survival where one is lost or stranded, helping to aid rescuers in finding you.

Though I am not passing judgement because I am short on all the facts, I don't know that this was the best place to use this type of call, if this was the intent of the fallen officer.

Wonder why the second LEO fired so quickly. Was it training or reflexes?

My thoughts are with his family and with the officer who had to make that decision to fire, killing one of his own.

P.S. Not sure if you know this or not LMarshall73, but less than lethal rubber rounds still have the capability of killing. Placement and quantity are important when using these rounds.

 

[Miggy]

A K9 officer, undercover? Looking for underage drinking at a college football game? Mixed up with ATF? If this is the same federal agency working local LEO's, I know how they have operated in the past.

I am guessing they are talking about Florida's version which is under the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation. And they do a lot of checking on underage drinking.

 

[srfl]

(SNIP) Looking for underage drinking at a college football game? Mixed up with ATF? If this is the same federal agency working local LEO's, I know how they have operated in the past. (SNIP)

Not ATF (Alcohol, Tabacco and Firearms) but ABT (FL State's Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco).

They enforce Title XXXIV, Chapter 562 of the FL statute.

 

[Rob72]

Having worked various sporting events, as EMS, things can get pretty hairy (the reason I don't "do" fairs, ballgames, etc..). Sounds like bad inter-agency, pre-event communication. I really would not fire "attention getter" shots in any area where I knew other armed officers were, unless I was on the ground, or literally backed into a corner (tho, where is your OC/ASP, at that stage?), for the reason that everyone is edgy, and PC is likely to be assumed a BG immediately. If this was a standing order action, someone senior needs to lose their job, and have a really bad day in civil court......

 

[500Mag]

Sounds like a SNAFU of sorts to me, and like most news reports, it seems like the whole story isn't being told. The one scenerio that comes to my mind is that the shooting officer, saw some guy in plain clothes with a gun pointed at a crowd of people. He feels innocent peoples lives are in danger then the shooting may be justified. Again, not there, probably don't know 1/4 of the story, but the outcome should be interesting.

 

[tanksoldier]

Here's what I posted reguarding this incident in another forum. Opinion didn't change over here:

The sole instigating factor here was the officer who fired warning shots into the air. If the responding officer received reports of a man shooting people it is entirely possible that he may have felt he had to engage the threat without warning... for example after firing his warning shots the firing officer likely was holding his weapon in a horizontal position, pointing at somebody.

It's possible that an opportunity might have existed for verbal warnings and the like, but IMO it was more probable that the responding officer believed he was in a situation where he had no time, and had to shoot without warning.

The responsability for this rests, IMO and unfortunately, with the slain officer. Even if the responding officer made a mistake the slain officer created the high-pressure split second decision situation where such a mistake was more likely.

The slain officer put himself in this position, AND endangered lives with his 3 rounds headed off to God knows where.

The tactical solution to preventing this problem is 3 fold: 1. Don't fire warning shots. 2. If undercover don't blow your cover. He was there to investigate underage drinking, not throw his weight around with fans that were getting a little rowdy. He should have backed off and called for uniformed backup if he felt the situation needed to be handled. Likewise if he needed to make an underage arrest he should have called for uniformed backup. 3. After firing your weapon (hopefully NOT as warning shots) immediately ID yourself as an officer loudly and obviously as possible.

 

[tanksoldier]

Wouldn't shooting AT the "armed assailants" have the same effect?

Now the example given for this was- you're on a patrol on the far side of base, and armed assailants start coming over the fence. You try to radio in but your radio is out of commision. Three shots fired rapidly into the air will hopefully get someone's attention.

A1C Lickey

 

[A1C Lickey]

Wouldn't shooting AT the "armed assailants" have the same effect?

I never understood that myself, and to be honest I had always planned to fire my three rapid shots at the BGs, the only time I could think of it having any useful effect is at night, where someone might see the tracers.

A1C Lickey

 

[LMarshall73]

http://www.wftv.com/sports/5016806/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/news/5022304/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/news/5022819/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/news/5019284/detail.html
http://www.wftv.com/news/5027339/detail.html
It will be interesting to see what FDLE discloses at the end of the investigation.

P.S. Not sure if you know this or not LMarshall73, but less than lethal rubber rounds still have the capability of killing. Placement and quantity are important when using these rounds.

Yes, I am aware that rubber rounds can be deadly, hence my use of the term "less-lethal" instead of "non-lethal." Some of the initial reports indicated the use of rubber ammo. It appears after reading the content of the above linked pages, that was not the case.

 

[rachilders]

While it may start a flame war among some of us, I'd like to offer this slightly different scenario to the shooting and see what response I get. Lets say all the details of the shooting (as known) were the same EXCEPT for the fact the shooter of the undercover cop was not another LEO but a civilian with a carry permit. So far most of the replies have said, essentially, that the undercover agent brought the shooting on himself and that the uniformed LEO, while possibly a bit quick on the trigger, was justified in shooting the other LEO.

Now, lets say the undercover agent had been killed by a lawfully armed civilian rather than by another LEO, would the response still be the same? Color me guilty of having a single standard (as in not giving our boys in blue the benefit of the doubt) for everyone that carries a deadly weapon, but I somehow doubt the response would be the same as it was by the local police. Would anyone here like to argue the point that the civilian shooter of the unfortunate undercover LEO would probably still be deep in a holding cell waiting for his next interrogation as we speak. My personal belief is a bad shooting is a bad shooting, and a LEO should be bound to not only the same laws as the rest of us but actually held to an higher standard because of his position of authority and training. Am I wrong to expect more from an individual who has the power of life and death, can lock me away at his personal discretion and who is suppose to protect and defend us common citizens from the lawless and miscarriages of justice?

 

[tanksoldier]

If changing the dead individual from cop to CCWer is all we do to modify the scenario, nothing changes.

If a cop shot a CCWer who he reasonably believed was threatening the lives of citizens, it would NOT be a bad shoot. It would be a good shoot, even if it turned out the cop was wrong. How many times has it been posted here "See a gun, shoot to kill" or some variation thereof?

If what causes the cop to ID the CCWer as a threat is the fact that the CCWer fired 3 warning shots in close proximity to a crowd, the CCWer deserves what he gets... and the gene pool is improved.

Incidentally, you have a funny idea of what a LEO is and can do... they can't do the things you seem to think they can, and their job isn't what you seem to think it is. Holding them to a higher standard than you hold yourself is also... a poor idea. The LEO wants to go home to spouse and kids as much as you do.