again, read the article. I have re-posted twice that she was running towards US-19, which is a high volume road. She could have put her life in danger, the trooper's life in danger, and the lives of the automobile drivers in danger. He did what he had to do to quickly put an end to the pursuit without risking her being a threat to herself or society.
So you think you and others should use mind reading to predict what may happen when someone is running and think that the best option is to assume the worst and use the most force?
you are illogical.
It's just as likely she ran towards the woods, assuming she was going to run out into traffic as an accuse is stupid it's a unfounded assumption one that cost this lady her life pretty much. You are suggesting that we protect from the worst outcome, that is absurd.
Its not even logically from human psychology that she would put her life in dire straights as she is attempting to flea assumable because she values her life and freedom. It was a misdameanor which indicates that she wasn't violent, abusive etc.. thus her running if it is dangerous to her is more precious then stopping this criminal at all costs.
Seriously, the policy states that you cannot stun gun motherfuckers for fleaing, it states this. Thus, even from a justice perspective, he did the wrong thing, i find it both morally and logically wrong as well.