A welfare check can change without warning, especially when officers are responding to reports involving drug use, weapons and threats against children.
In this incident, Susanville police officers arrive at a home after relatives report that a man believed to be under the influence of methamphetamine has threatened his children. What begins with officers speaking to the man through an upstairs window escalates into an immediate threat to a toddler, a hurried attempt to breach the home and a close-quarters machete attack on an officer.
As you watch the video, consider the decision points throughout the encounter: What would you have done?
What happened?
On May 6, 2026, Susanville Police Department officers responded to a home to check on the welfare of three children. Relatives told police the children’s father was acting erratically, was possibly under the influence of methamphetamine and had threatened to harm the children. Family members also said they had intervened several days earlier when he threatened the children with a machete.
Officers located the man upstairs with the children. Speaking through a window, he told officers the children were sleeping and safe. He denied having a weapon, refused to come downstairs and told officers they could leave.
The man became increasingly agitated as relatives attempted to speak with him. He armed himself with a machete and held a 2-year-old child outside a second-story window. After bringing the toddler inside, he continued swinging the machete with the child nearby.
When the man appeared ready to stab the child, an officer fired two rounds from outside the home.
Officers rushed to enter the house, breaking a window to unlock the front door after the man attempted to barricade it. As they crossed the threshold, the man came downstairs and attacked them with the machete. One officer was struck in the shoulder and fired three rounds.
Officers retreated from the doorway. When the man began moving farther into the home while still holding the machete, another officer fired a less-lethal round, knocking him down.
Officers secured the man and began providing medical care. He later died from his injuries. The wounded officer required eight staples for a significant shoulder laceration. The three children, ages 2, 4 and 8, were found unharmed. The Lassen County district attorney later determined that the officers’ use of deadly force was justified under California law, Police1 previously reported.
Decision point 1: Stay ready
Knowing how the encounter ends can distort how we evaluate the officers’ initial response. That is hindsight bias.
The officers were dispatched for a welfare check, but the information available to them included several warning signs:
- Possible methamphetamine use
- Current threats against children
- A recent incident involving a machete
- A man refusing to come outside
- Three children inside the home
Welfare checks are unpredictable. Before arriving, officers should consider how they will make contact, contain the location and respond if the situation suddenly escalates.
What resources would you request? Where would you position officers? What equipment might you need if immediate entry becomes necessary?
Decision point 2: Plan for escalation
The officers maintained distance while family members approached the home and tried to speak with the man.
A familiar voice can sometimes calm a person in crisis. It can also increase agitation, create additional potential victims and complicate an officer’s response.
Every tactical plan has three possible outcomes: The situation improves, worsens or remains unchanged. Officers must be ready for all three because the suspect’s actions ultimately determine what happens next.
If relatives are allowed to approach, what limits should officers establish? How quickly can they be moved to safety if the encounter deteriorates?
Decision point 3: Know the law
The threat developed in stages.
The man first displayed a machete while the children were nearby. He then held a toddler outside an upstairs window. After bringing the child back inside, he continued swinging the weapon and appeared to prepare to stab the child.
At what point did the totality of the circumstances make deadly force objectively reasonable? Did officers need to wait until the machete was raised over the child, or did the man’s actions and previous threats establish an imminent threat earlier?
An armed person can act faster than officers can react. That problem becomes even more urgent when the intended victim is only a few feet from the weapon.
Officers must understand the law and be able to articulate when deadly force is authorized. They must also recognize that the point at which force becomes legally justified and the moment an individual officer decides to fire may not be identical.
Decision point 4: Own your skills
The officer fired from approximately 9 yards away with children close to the suspect.
Could you make that shot under stress? Would using the fence or another stable object as a rest improve your accuracy? Have you practiced shooting from supported positions outside a controlled qualification course?
Firearms proficiency is perishable. Department qualification establishes a minimum standard; it does not replicate the pressure of firing at an armed suspect who is moving near a child.
Officers should know their abilities, understand their limitations and practice the shots they may be required to make in the field.
Decision point 5: Use your tools
Once shots were fired, officers had to reach the children. The suspect had attempted to barricade the front door, forcing officers to break a nearby window and reach inside to unlock it.
What breaching tools are carried in your patrol vehicle? Do you know how to use them?
At a minimum, officers should have access to basic tools such as a sledgehammer and crowbar. They should also be trained to recognize when a door is not going to give way and move to a secondary entry point.
Windows may be easier to break, but entering through one presents its own hazards. Officers should know how to perform a break-and-rake, clear the frame and create an entry point without causing unnecessary injuries.
Officers carrying less-lethal shotguns should also understand the weapon’s capabilities and limitations. If an agency authorizes the shotgun as a breaching tool, officers need training on placement, firing angle and safe standoff distance.
Decision point 6: Close target
As officers entered, the suspect came down the stairs and attacked with the machete. The encounter compressed from a shot across the yard to a close-quarters fight inside the doorway.
Have you practiced firing one-handed? From a retention position? At a target only a few feet away?
The officer carrying the less-lethal shotgun faced an additional concern. At such close range, would that officer have been prepared to use the shotgun as a lethal-force option if necessary? Could the officer transition to a handgun or move to create distance?
Officers must be prepared for weapons and tactics to change as distance changes.
Decision point 7: See the whole scene
The officers were focused on defeating the barricaded door and reaching the children. That urgent task may have made it more difficult to see the suspect waiting just inside.
This is inattentional blindness: Concentrating so intensely on one task that other threats go unnoticed.
The officer working on a door may not be able to monitor the room beyond it. That makes the responsibilities of the contact and cover officers especially important.
Can a second officer watch the interior while the first works on the breach? Is that officer positioned to warn, pull or redirect a partner who is stepping into danger?
Decision point 8: Control bystanders
Relatives remained near the entrance and attempted to move toward the house as the incident unfolded.
Their actions are understandable, but they created more hazards for themselves and the officers. Bystanders near an entry point can interfere with movement, enter the line of fire or become additional victims.
When staffing permits, officers should move family members away from the immediate scene and assign someone to remain with them. That becomes harder once the incident turns critical, which is why the issue should be addressed early whenever possible.
Decision point 9: Never stop training
The suspect’s fall did not end the incident. Officers still had to secure him, remove the machete, search the home, locate the children and begin medical care.
Those actions require coordination.
Before approaching a downed suspect, officers should form a plan that identifies who will provide cover, who will handcuff the suspect, who will remove the weapon and who will provide medical aid.
Training scenarios often stop as soon as the shooting ends. Real incidents do not. Officers should practice securing an armed suspect, handcuffing an injured person, searching for additional threats and providing first aid.
Six officers moving forward with six different plans is not a coordinated response.
Key lessons
- Stay ready during welfare checks: Calls labeled as welfare checks can involve impaired subjects, weapons and threatened victims. Use the information available to anticipate how the situation could change.
- Plan for escalation: Before trying a tactic, consider what officers will do if the situation improves, worsens or remains the same.
- Know when deadly force is authorized: Officers must understand the law, evaluate the totality of the circumstances and be prepared to explain when a threat became imminent.
- Own your firearms skills: Qualification is not training. Regular personal practice helps officers maintain the accuracy and confidence needed for difficult shots under stress.
- Know your tools: Breaching equipment and less-lethal weapons are useful only when officers understand their capabilities, limitations and safe operation.
- Watch what your partner cannot: Task fixation and inattentional blindness can conceal a threat directly in front of an officer. Team roles should account for those human limitations.
- Control the scene: Move relatives and bystanders away from danger when circumstances and staffing allow.
- Train the finish: Scenario-based training should continue through the suspect’s arrest, disarming, handcuffing, medical treatment and the search for additional victims or threats.
Whether you are a trainer, patrol officer or supervisor, use this incident to identify gaps in your knowledge and training. Then work to close them before the next call.
Every critical incident contains a decision point. The question is: What would you do?
