I wouldn't want to be a policeman...

The shooting dead of the distraught pensioner Mervyn Tussler makes me ask why the police do not shoot to disable someone who is perceived to be a threat, rather than shoot to kill, if shooting is indeed at all necessary. I wouldn't want to be a policeman mind you (well apart from being a traffic cop), as they are nearly always in a no win situation. Just look at the tube shooting affair and the recent violence portrayed in the London G20 protests. We need them to protect us from crime and in these days, the threat of terrorism but if they appear to overstep the mark then we come down on them like a ton of bricks. They don't always help themselves of course but even then I have some sympathy, as they are required to uphold the law as dictated by our less than glorious government. An example of this would be the curtailing of our right to free speech and to make protest, as demonstrated by the lady, who a few years ago, stood at the Whitehall Epitaph with a roll of toilet paper in her hand. She was arrested under the terrorist act and thrown into a police cell, all because we are no longer allowed to protest near No. 10 Downing Street, which of course is the seat of power as proscribed by Mr T Blair. This lady was harmless and was making a valid point but that didn't count for anything in what for some is becoming (is?) a police state. What's this got to do with the pensioner? Well how about the possibility of over reacting for one thing. ! Latest news suggests that the police did have a need to shoot, as they themselves were in danger. What a human tragedy - lost his wife to the state, then she loses him to Death.