[Police shoot a man armed with a crowbar.]

Agreed. That's the more affirmative way of saying what I meant haha. It raises the questions of legal deadly force if officers can't use it properly. I don't see how these dudes can be allowed back on the streets as officers - IMO they've simply failed the one-sit-only test.

[Police shoot a man armed with a crowbar.]

Such a knee-jerk reaction by the police - I mean, watching that in a video makes me wonder why they were unable to incapacitate someone moving so freaking slowly. I do however understand that in the heat of the moment, and if you are there, shit can be moving faster than you could think (rationally).

 

But then, officers are trained professionals. Surely, SURELY they have training that prepares them for such situations. If they're so worried, why not cap a limb? Or use their obvious number advantage to draw him out and bum rush him (you do raise a valid point about engaging someone of that character though). Their job is to use reasonable force.

 

This was not reasonable force. This is unnecessary use of deadly force. The use of deadly force is justified only under conditions of extreme necessity as a last resort, when all lesser means have failed or cannot reasonably be employed - these guys sprayed some shit in his eyes, panicked, and shot him.