I didn't read all 4 pages of this thread, so I'll chime in knowing that there is the possibility that what I am saying may have been covered before now.
There is a woeful issue in policing where training is concerned. First is in the hand-to-hand element of confronting a suspect. One of my dojo training partners is chief of police in a town about 90 minutes from us. He runs his own MA school in the area. He is holding FREE training for police to help cover the hand-to-hand element. One of my instructors drove down yesterday to help teach the class. He was astounded by the degree to which police have NOT been trained to manage aggressive threats. He played the role of an aggressive suspect being handcuffed; he said the only reason he didn't end up handcuffing the officer was because the officer threw the handcuffs across the room. Zero skills in this area for police.
Second is the level of training police receive with their weapons. Because so many of them have such little unconscious competence with their service weapons, they are too quick to shoot when a situation gets tense. Sure, some officers go to the range and shoot at static paper targets, but 1) they have to pay for the training themselves and 2) paper targets are no substitute for tactical shooting on an outdoor range. Any training that does cover simulated live situations is usually cost prohibitive.
I don't blame police. Their job is harder than the average citizen can begin to understand, then they have to deal with every decision they make being shredded in the public sphere.
So what happened in Tulsa? Did the officer overreact? Did she mistake the service weapon in her hand for her taser (
it's happened before - in Tulsa)? Was her training insufficient to give her a degree of unconscious competence in this situation?
The likely answer is likely 'yes' to all of those questions.