Sorry – but it was the police who escalated the violence to this point

[X_Digger]

83. You want information, here have some. I expect a full apology.

Texas-
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or

Florida-
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.—
...
(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

California-
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/197.html

197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
any of the following cases:
...
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a
wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such
person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to
commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent
danger of such design being accomplished;

New York-
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article35.htm

1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she
reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a
third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or
imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person

Mullenix v Luna
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mullenix-v-luna/

This Court has considered excessive force claims in
connection with high-speed chases on only two occasions
since Brosseau. In Scott v. Harris, 550 U. S. 372, the
Court held that an officer did not violate the Fourth
Amendment by ramming the car of a fugitive whose reckless
driving “posed an actual and imminent threat to the
lives of any pedestrians who might have been present, to
other civilian motorists, and to the officers involved in the
chase.” Id., at 384. And in Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U. S.
___ (2014), the Court reaffirmed Scott by holding that an
officer acted reasonably when he fatally shot a fugitive
who was “intent on resuming” a chase that “pose[d] a
deadly threat for others on the road.”

Plumhoff v Rickard
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1117_1bn5.pdf

A “police
officer’s attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase
that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the
Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk
of serious injury or death.” Scott, supra, at 385. Rickard’s outrageously
reckless driving—which lasted more than five minutes, exceeded
100 miles per hour, and included the passing of more than two
dozen other motorists—posed a grave public safety risk, and the record
conclusively disproves that the chase was over when Rickard’s
car came to a temporary standstill and officers began shooting. Under
the circumstances when the shots were fired, all that a reasonable
officer could have concluded from Rickard’s conduct was that he
was intent on resuming his flight, which would again pose a threat to
others on the road. Pp. 9–11.

Graham v Connor

(c) The Fourth Amendment "reasonableness" inquiry is whether the officers' actions are "objectively reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene

Now.. what information do YOU have?

Cough it up, or apologize.