Originally Posted by
Eddy Munny
There was a struggle beforehand. Blake fought with officers and even shrugged off some taser if I'm not mistaken. He had a weapons charge on his history that the officers were probably well aware of. Now despite repeated verbal commands and physical altercations, this idiot proceeds to go into his vehicle and reach for something. It's not the officer's job to cross his fingers and hope that that "something" is anything but a deadly weapon. He acted in self-defense as any reasonable person would.
As for the seven shots? Who cares? If you're pushed to the point of having to use your firearm in a situation that could've been completely avoided with just a smidget of cooperation from the criminal, does it really matter whether it's 2, 3, or 7 shots fired? Who decides what an "appropriate" amount of shots is? You shoot until the threat is neutralized.
The reality is that bullets don't always incapacitate instantaneously, especially handgun rounds. If the officer fires one or two shots, then pauses to evaluate their effect, Blake could very well turn around with a weapon of his own and end the officer's life. There are plenty of cases where a criminal has posed a threat to an officer even after being shot at close range, especially if the perpetrator is hopped up on something.
Again, the sum total of the encounter is taken into consideration when judging the actions of the officer, not just the sensational climax that the media obsesses over.