Trent, I read the story. And I still ask why it was neccessary to shoot to kill. That's all - a question. Your reaction is uncalled for. My take on the story was the first gunshot was intended to kill, not the subsequent. I would think there would be several non-lethal ways to stop the attack. Stun gun. Pepper spray. Club. Firehose. Shoot him in the leg.
If the answer is "there was only one cop at the scene who didnt have a stun gun, pepper spray, club, firehouse, or shooting him in the leg didnt work," then thats the answer. But from reading it, it seems like he shot to kill after telling him to stop didnt work. So thats why I have questions about what happened.
"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle