Or is an armed citizen moving to use his weapon against police a menace requiring disarmament...?
While these are split-second decisions--and the officers must be given the discretion to act--unless we question them later, then we are destined to move to the wrong choice. Heck, I'll never be on a jury in part because I answer that I'm more likely to trust the testimony of a police officer because of his profession (which includes training, etc.), but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be careful against knee-jerk responses!
The reports state that Jackson was shot after he pulled a weapon from behind his jacket!
BEHIND his Jacket.
Which means he did NOT have to “let it fall” or “not show”.
It was a choice to DRAW the weapon.
A choice for which cost him his life... likely saving the life of many others whom he would have shot in some other robbery, altercation, bad drug deal, domestic disturbance or whatever else gangsters do with stolen weapons.