Aren't police in the 21st century also trained in several non-lethal deterrents? Six shots to an unarmed man is excessive. While I don't know the whole story of what happened (stories are conflicting and the physical evidence that I've read hasn't been 100% sussed out as to what was what), I think it's clear that this guy shouldn't be an officer anymore. If he couldn't of used a taser or pepper spray or even just waited for back-up, his judgement seems to be in question.
I don't pretend to know all the facts that haven't been disclosed, and am just offering the conceivable counter-argument:
1) the officer was treated for injuries and has a damaged eye-socket. He was dazed after having already been struck by suspect Michael Brown, when (his account, apparently supported by several on-site witnesses) Brown charged him.
2) As is evidenced from the half-baked response of the Ferguson police department in the 7 days after the shooting, this is not the best-trained police department, with the most up-to-date equipment. I'd agree that under normal circumstances, pepper-spray or just wrestling the suspect to the ground and cuffing him would have been a possible better alternative.
But (by "Josie"'s radio-call acount) Wilson fired at least 6 rounds at Brown, and Brown still kept on coming at him, and not until the 6th shot to the head did Brown stop. If this account is accurate (and the three autopsies back it) Wilson
tried to just wound Brown several times in the arm and shoulder, and only shot Brown in the head when, Wilson already dazed with a head injury and unable to further fight, was about to be overtaken by Brown.
