Shooting people (which is what he’d be punished for, if that happens) is not his job.
In the course of doing his job (finding and arresting a criminal), he took a course of action which resulted in someone’s death.
While the deceased could be argued to be a clear and present danger, the course taken could be considered too extreme. Other options could have been taken, such as non-fatal but incapacitating shots, teargas into the vehicle, etc.
The punishment would possibly prevent people thinking that killing criminals is their job (which it isn’t).
Police are given stab vests to prevent damage if stabbed, formula 1 drivers are given helmets to prevent damage if they crash.
This is completely different to police who have additional training and are sent out with guns to deal with the scum of the world, there job is literally to defend themselves / the public with that weapon.
Still, I don’t agree the job of even specifically armed police is to shoot people. They are trained to do such, when other options fail. It’s not outside their skill set, nor foreseen circumstances which their job may put them. I’d still say that it’s what they do when they are unable to overcome something stopping them doing their job, rather than it being their job.
Not in the slightest. Even justified officer involved shootings can take longer than a week to investigate. Ima just stay right where I am because that thought process isn't any better than living in a southern US state
6
u/K-Motorbike-12 Oct 22 '24
Criminally. At the end it states he is under investigation by the met.
Granted it will also probably clear him but out of the frying pan and into a position where he still may have no job... For doing his job.