"but it’s not a threat to police, especially when the felon was running away"
The article says the perp was running TOWARDS another officer with a gun when he was shot. Yeah, the dude was running, trying to evade police during a criminal act; he refused to stop and drop his weapon; he was running-with that weapon- TOWARDS other officers who were trying to subdue him and was shot because of his actions.
I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment.
From your source:
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), is a civil case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."
It was found that the use of deadly force to prevent escape is an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment, in the absence of probable cause that the fleeing suspect posed a physical danger.: 563–7 Legal scholars have expressed support for this decision stating that the decision had "a strong effect on police behavior" and specifically that it can "influence police use of deadly force."
Ryan Hinton was not only a co-conspirator in a car theft, but was fleeing while armed.
While he may not have posed an immediate danger to the pursuing officers, he was armed and did pose a serious threat to them or others.
If I were sitting on a jury hearing this case, I would find in favor of the officers for the reason that an armed fleeing suspect could have opened fire at any time on the officers that could have seriously injured or killed them, not to mention that if he did fire on the officers and missed, those shots could have reasonably injured or killed innocent bystanders.