Quote:
Seriously? Is that how you justify police killings? Not only did police (and you) missed the opportunity to secure the weapon while the guy was far away from it, but they also failed to use non-lethal means to stop him: dog was supposed to pull him down and keep him there, taser was also an option. If not, than shoot him in the legs (he wasn't holding a weapon and wasn't posing a deadly threat!).
And those ****ers should also get a physical evaluation to see if they're fit for duty. Not being able to chase a guy who was barely walking and was max 3m (10ft) ahead of you? And fire that dog and her handler.
Let's just take a breather here and consider that a drugged out individual sprinting to pick up a gun against the commands of an officer. What are they supposed to do, not shoot him? Take their chances?
Life is important and in many cases is not respected nearly enough. But how about having some respect for the lives of the people around him?
I am all for the police having more options to disarm people through non lethal force. But it's also important to recognize if you are attempting to attain a weapon that can kill other people around you, then it cannot be the #1 concern to provide to safety to that individual.