You make many good points in your post. The more bureaucratic rules there are, the less gets done. And soon people are afraid to do anything.
But I think there is a fix in this particular case. As I mentioned in my post #26, I'm guessing that the knee-to-the-back technique is what killed Garner by restricting his breathing. That technique needs to be reexamined.
That technique and ones like it came about from the fallout from the Rodney King incident. I suspect the chances of an asthma attack would have been lesser with batons to the arms and legs, but I think there’s been a general decision to go with swarming and holding in place, and fewer tazers. Even aggressive staring has potential for harm.
The problem here was not the takedown...it was exceptionally non-violent considering Mr. Garners physical response. The issues were the choice to engage him for arrest at all, imperfect knowledge of Mr. Garners health, and potentially delays in getting Mr. Garner correct medical attention.
It is unfortunate that there are trade offs between methods(more risk of this, vs.more risk of that), and that the government is imperfect even after those trade offs, and that people of good nature fail to be omniscient, and that people such as Mr. Garner get to have a vote in the way things happen and make choices which are detrimental to their own health...but after a certain point, as marktwain said: “stuff happens.”