The Deuce: Doesn’t the DOJ Title governing the use of force in this situation

prohibit officers from discharging firearms at a vehicle if there is any reasonable means of getting out of the way? Meaning, even IF the driver was trying to hit him and IF he genuinely believed his life was in danger (both massive if’s based on the video evidence) his primary responsibility is still to get out of the way, not shoot.

From Title 1, U.S. DOJ Policy on Use of Force:

“Firearms may not be discharged solely to disable moving vehicles. Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless: (1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or (2) the vehicle is operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical injury … and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”

Previous Message

I'm just sad about the state of our country.

I don't see how anyone - on either side of this dispute - can say with any degree of confidence that the *first* shot fired by the officer was or was not justified. We haven't even had an investigation!

I can say with lots of confidence that she wasn't trying to run him over or ram him with her car. What I can't say with any confidence is what he perceived in the almost instantaneous moment that he decided to shoot.

I can say with lots of confidence that the second and third shots were not justified. I can say with lots of confidence that refusing to allow a doctor to provide medical assistance to the victim was utterly inhumane.

I am sad that the current administration is choosing to enforce immigration policy in this manner.

I am mortified that humans have reacted to this tragic event by posting things like "FAFO." What is wrong with someone who would do that?