If someone breaks into your house and threatens your life, you have the right to use deadly force to protect yourself. But if he turns to leave, and is no longer an immediate threat to your life, you may not take his.
It does not matter how emotionally charged you are because of what this creep did in your house. It doesn’t even matter if he already killed one of your family members. The moment he stops being an immediate threat, taking his life is murder, and you will go to jail for it.
That is, unless you are on the Dallas police force today. The reprehensible piece of filth that shot 12 officers last night was holed up in a parking garage. He had been negotiating with police (I.e. he was no longer an immediate threat). Negotiations stalled.
So, rather than trying to get them restarted, the police sent in a robot with a bomb, with the intention of killing the creep. Did they use a flash-bang grenade to stun him? No. Did they use teargas to flush him out? No. Did they use some anesthetic gas to knock him out? No.
He killed some of their family members, and when he was no longer an immediate threat, they murdered him. Responding to violence with more violence never stops the violence. Did this lowlife scum need to pay for his crimes? Yes.
But in America, the police are not supposed to be judge, jury, and executioner. Given that the first rule of assassination is to kill the assassin once the job is complete, I have to wonder, were the police just emotionally charged, and committing murder against someone who killed some of their own, or were they so quick to needlessly kill him because this was some sort of “false flag” event, and they could not let him testify about who put him up to this?
Either way, letting the police get away with this circumvention of justice is a dangerous precedent.
M.Donald – engineer, security guard, and citizen.