On its face, I guess I cannot argue with that.
However, I have seen a video of a homeowner (holding the video camera) --
Opening his front door
Walking out to the street to where the police car is parked
Asking, "Officer, what's happening?"
The officer says "You can't film me. Get back in your house. Now."
The homeowner says, "Why do I have to do that?"
The officer says, "Sir, I feel threatened, based on the comments you made before you turned on that camera. Because I feel in danger right now, I'm asking you to get back inside your house."
The homeowner eventually got arrested, but I guess the police union might argue that shooting to kill was also an appropriate response -- after all, the officer said that he "felt threatened".
“Shooting to kill is appropriate “whenever you feel a threat on your own life or when you’re protecting someone else’s,” Hamilton said.”
I can argue with that, in that it predicates execution on the subjective state of mind of the police, whenever he FEELS threatened.
I would say shooting to kill is never appropriate, but somtimes justifiable when there is an overt, immediate threat to life.