A cop is called to a situation where a man in practice wants help with his suicide. The policeman seems to have sense and maturity and sees the person as no threat to anyone except himself. The man waves with an unloaded gun and the other policeman called to the scene kills him, apparently with a shot to the head. That is shoot to kill, not to take away the threat. I wonder why they do not use stun guns on apparently distraught individuals? Hitting the head needs careful aim, I would presume? Absurdly, the non-firing cop gets fired!
We had cases here in Sweden when obviously confused or psychotic persons wave with a knife and they are killed by police gunfire. Comparatively few persons gets killed by police here. There are of course situations when police should use their guns, if necessary to kill (as a method, not as a goal). But why not use stun guns when possible?
But what do I know? I am just a stupid un-armed citizen.