[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Okay a few things that I think I want to chime in on:

1) Cops are often trained to shoot more than once. RCMP and Calgary Police are both trained to shot at least twice, so the 20 shots being fired is not completely beyond reason if there are a lot of cops there.

2) Handguns are hard to shoot (believe me, I own one, and shoot it regularily and it is pretty hard to shoot accurately beyond about 15 meters, and this is not under any sort of stress), so for cops to shoot more than a few times to ensure that a suspect, who they have every reason to believe is dangerous and armed, is neutralized, does not seem unreasoable either

3) Cops are not trained to wound a suspect. Someone who is shot in the leg, can still shoot back. If it gets to the point that they are shooting, they are shooting to kill. At this point, what difference does it make if one guy shoots twice, or 10 guys shoot 20 times?

Take that for what it is worth. People seem to be held up too much on the fact that there were 20 shots fired, this really is the irrelevant part of the story. What should be debated is were the officers justified in using deadly force? 1 bullet can be just as deadly as 20 bullets, you can't be any deader than dead.

From what I've been able to pick up from this, the cops were told by the dude's mom that he had a gun, and he wasn't following instructions, and moved towards the cops (How aggressively I don't know), but it seems that they may have been justified. How may times they shot is completely irrevant if in fact they were justified in using deadly force.