People who carry guns and have legal authority to kill people should have a higher tolerance for danger and exposure to harm than the average citizen.

This case is fucked up but if you're asking for my honest opinion then if a fucked up badly injured guy with a machete is running at you you should tackle him and risk being injured because you're paid to protect people from danger not to kill.

I genuinely think that if we saw more cops getting black eyes and broken ribs in 85% of these cases then the 15% where they use force would be more understandable because we see with our own eyes that the cops are putting it on the line routinely and not just because it's the easiest course of action.

Like cops are supposed to be heroes. If your first reaction isn't how do I fix this without killing them you're a bad cop. And this whole idea of acceptable risk highlights the gap in public perception of the responsibility of an officer vs the actual job description which doesn't require one to protect and serve their community. That job culture makes it hard not to see police shootings as expedience in the best scenario.

I work emergency services, I don't carry a gun and end up in dangerous situations sometimes. I also work closely with police on some responses...I don't think this guy was necessarily wrong to fire based on department criteria, but fuck me why are you a cop if you can't conjure the nerve to risk injury or worse...why is that not the point of this job?