I would like to offer that the standard is not what a reasonable person would do, it’s what a reasonable police officer with similiar training, experience, knowledge and in a similar situation would do.
Wilson would have been justified in shooting Brown in the back based on the case law of Tennessee v. Garner.
Understand what you're saying. I was speaking specifically to the point that I believe the standard for an officer to use force is if 'a reasonable person would believe himself to be in danger.' ...
Not what a reasonable person would necessarily DO in the situation ... but that 'the justification for the officer to commence defending himself using is if 'a reasonable person would believe himself to be in danger in the same situation'.
That said ... I'm not an officer nor expert, nor arguing ... just clarifying my intent in using those exact words.