1. Do we get to then believe cops when they say it's hard enough hitting a lethal shot? Hitting a limb like a leg is even harder.
2. As long as we're giving them the right to self-defense, do we also concede the cop fear that they may not get a second shot so that's why they shoot to kill?
My position is that the gun is the wrong tool here. That said even much bigger fans of firearms than I am could be trained to recognize common kitchen implements or to de-escalate conflictive situations to reduce the risk of tragedy. Of course no one is going to think to try until there is enough public outrage, enough lawsuits, enough nerds writing studies!"
I was trained in law enforcement (by Monterey sheriffs) and firearms (by the FBI). I was never taught to shoot in any other way than "shoot-to-kill." Maybe sharpshooters can do otherwise.... What cops are trained to do in a situation in which they're close to the suspect (close means within 10 feet) is to take the gun out and shoot repeatedly all the way up...as the gun comes up in an arc. Of course, cops are not only trained in firearms but also in self-defense and what do you call it? arm to arm combat????
Anyway, any cop could take down a 4 ft woman without having to use a gun. They also have mace and pepper spray. I think this particular cop just lost it. All the cops I have ever talked to (as a fellow cop) were deathly afraid of domestic disturbance calls because that's when they get hurt. So, this cop, probably went in on a hair-trigger and it didn't take much to set him off. Nevertheless, I think he should be facing manslaughter charges and at least, face suspension for a while.
I don't think you can call what happened a "criminal" act; I don't think he went in planning to kill the woman; but he panicked and reacted in an inappropriate way and his job is precisely NOT to do that. Of course, given that he has been exonerated, this will not set any kind of good precedent...just the usual carte blanche...
Joanna