Shouldn't the use of deadly force require something like, I don't know, a threat of death or injury to the officer or a bystander? There were no bystanders. There was no threat to the officer. Just drive up and shoot. So I guess the real question in all this is under what circumstances is the use of deadly force not justified?
Your assertion that there was no possible discernible threat to the safety of the officers is 100% straight-up BS.