Reply #173: and that's exactly why mandatory leg shots

[Tactical Progressive]

are simply the only reasonable policy.

Because your attitude is that kill-shots are sanctioned based on nothing more than your training.

Again, cops have no more legal right to kill someone than any citizen does. And they should be held to the same standard as anyone who kills someone else, that being that unless their very life was in immediate and irrefutable peril nobody has a right to kill someone else.

Can you just imagine if one citizen shot another because they were reaching for 'a weapon' that turned out to be a cellphone. Any doubt what a jury would do with that one? Or five guys gunning down someone with a knife in "self defense"? Your standard is the same as ours in all these scenarios, "consistent with my training" notwithstanding.

And since you seem to rest on that reasoning as some kind of justification, it practically demands that your training be to shoot-to-disable replacing shoot-to-kill as the standard response.

And again, nobody is going to raise an eyebrow should force requirements escalate above that. In fact, a record of shooting to disable would lend quite a bit of credibilty to police actions where lethal response is claimed as necessity, wouldn't it?