Just my opinion, but if someone is armed with a weapon and poses an immediate danger to the police or civilians lethal force can be considered a logical possibility. If he didn't have a weapon and wasn't an immediate threat a neutralizing weapon such as a tazer or rubber bullet would be preferable. Tough to tell really as none of us were there and the facts are so all over the place currently, I'm glad there wasn't a civil war or a historically violent event from this. My hope is that the justice system progresses and actually judges based on justice and not bias.
|