Originally Posted by
econ21
So there was a five hour stand off and then the police shot her while she was contained in her own house with a child nearby? Sure she was an idiot, but it doesn't sound like a justified shooting from the information given.
If she had been shot as soon as she leveled a gun at the cops, then I can see a case could be made for justifiable shooting (i.e. they reasonably thought their lives were in danger) but given the protracted stand-off, it sounds like the police opening fire on her was more of a considered choice to end the stand off.
I'm not seeing an imminent threat to life or fear of escape. You would have thought the police could wait it out, until she cooled down and more attempts had been made to negotiate with her. She doesn't sound exactly like Public Enemy number 1: I doubt she to threatened shoot her son and she wasn't going anywhere.
Shooting her while the child was close enough to be injured in the exchange of fire out also sounds tactically reckless.
I think a more patient approach like was done with the anti-federal government people who invaded some government facility over a land dispute might have been preferable.