Apparently we're living in the Judge Dredd era of US law enforcement ideology, and if you've ever been convicted a crime (doesn't matter that you've paid your debt to society) then civil liberties are voided and it's perfectly OK to be gunned down by police at their discretion.
It is really odd.
I think we can all recognize that the job of a law enforcement officer is stressful and dangerous, and sympathize with officers who are injured or killed in the line of duty. They are public servants who have chosen to risk life and limb, ostensibly for the public good.
But the system is broken, and people should not be killed with such frequency by the police. It is a discussion worth having, and for some reason some people don't want to have it. If you kneel, you're an entitled brat who doesn't know his place. If you protest, you're a rioter. If you call for police reform and conditional funding, you're calling for anarchy. If you have a criminal history, you deserved to die. It's dumb.
A person who puts on that uniform assumes the risk of death or other bodily injury. It is a mistake to say "I would have done the same thing as that officer were I in his position." A
trained public servant has a greater responsibility, and yet they are actually treated with greater leniency under the same facts and circumstances. If a civilian shot that man multiple times in the back, no reasonable person would argue that it was justified.
A citizen should not have to bear a greater risk of death at the hands of police in order to reduce the risk to police officers. One is a choice, the other is not. All efforts should be made to reduce risk to law enforcement while minimizing the risk to the general public, regardless of criminal history.