I agree. Although it is pretty interesting how quickly they were able to release the bodycam footage.

googles

I mean, I'm not gonna get too worked up either, but just to be clear, California's bar for use of deadly force is that it has to be to protect against expected severe bodily injury or death.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-835a/

(c)(1) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a peace officer is justified in using deadly force upon another person only when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that such force is necessary for either of the following reasons:

(A) To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person.

(B) To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended. Where feasible, a peace officer shall, prior to the use of force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly force may be used, unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe the person is aware of those facts.

(2) A peace officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger that person poses to themselves, if an objectively reasonable officer would believe the person does not pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or to another person.

So that's the bar that a court is gonna expect the male officer to need to meet. I imagine that it's not impossible that a court could find that that didn't meet the bar. The article doesn't say that the guy who got shot actually attempted to pull the weapon.

That being said, the guy was hiding a weapon and was attempting to overpower an officer, and I imagine that a court is gonna be (not-unreasonably) inclined to give the benefit of the doubt in a situation like that.

Cant they use their tazer?

Because when a cop is arresting someone, it's not a mutual agreement to be in a fight. It's not a friendly spar or anything like that

In this particular situation, the use of deadly force was more so triggered by the fact that the guy was lying about having a weapon and then tries to pull said weapon during a search of his person. The headlock was not the key factor here.

people are always wrong and cops are always right, duh.

Because dude pulled the I don’t have a weapon what’s this my gun and then headlock. That’s an unusual story. I’m anti-cop, but this was new and interesting to me.

Copaganda. Also the only time I've seen a working bodycam.

The world is a dangerous place though; there's all these armed psychos driving around, shooting and beating people!

Sure, sometimes they arrest someone who deserves it, but that doesn't make me exactly feel safe knowing they're out there...