Of course.
But I think the posters who asked if he was wearing a bracelet were looking at it from the help aspect, rather than the mandatory aspect. That something might be a good idea both for the affected person and the responders doesn’t necessarily mean that it must be mandatory.
Maybe you interpreted those posts differently than I did, and thought they were on the side of mandating a bracelet?
They were grasping at straws to excuse the officers actions and the med bracelet is all they could muster. When the problem is that everyone is considered a “suspect” and NEVER given any benefit of the doubt as innocent until proven guilty. The universal sentiment that everyone is guilty and these ill conceived protocols “just in case” lead directly to all these outrageous violations of rights and unnecessary loss of life. If they fear the public so much that they would violate rights so easily and often because they are afraid, then they have chosen the wrong line of work. They swore an oath to protect rights, and they are not.
If they had given the rational benefit of the doubt that it could be a medical problem rather than first and always considering everyone a criminal, this would not have happened.