Gross ex-cop Bo Dietl was on some piece of crap show to defend a cop shooting an unarmed kid a bunch of times while his hands were raised, and this is what he came up with:
“When you’re in a shoot-out, and you’re firing away, and you stop, and you’re shooting the torso, you’re trying to stop somebody,” Dietl continued. “I don’t know how he got hit in the head, but bullets go that way. He was trying to stop this guy obviously.”
Um okayyyy. . .
That might be a valid point, maybe, if the cop had been in a shootout. Then, yeah, maybe you could say that bullets go every-which-way and hey, what are ya gonna do? but THERE WAS NO SHOOTOUT! Even the cop has never claimed that the kid had a gun. Do you know what a shootout is? There has to be at least two shooters, otherwise it's just someone getting gunned down.
Have you ever seen a Western movie? They have shootouts in them. Notice that there is always more than one shooter in every single one of these shootouts. Otherwise, it's just Wyatt Earp murdering all the Clantons while they try to surrender which would be a really shitty movie.
Hmm. . . or would it?
I know that for some reason (racism? Nah!) the same people who usually are wetting their pants over the specter of "Jack-Booted Government Thugs" feel the need to defend this particular government thug and his jack-booted compatriots who are militarizing a small Midwestern town, but holy fuck, Dietl, do you even listen to yourself? Are you even trying?