I'm an LEO in TN, in which state it is not illegal to threaten or even attempt suicide (found this out a couple weeks ago). However, I cannot comment on the laws of Kerrville. I read in the other posts (aka take with a grain of salt) that this man was involved in a crime against a child or was at least wanted for questioning. In this case, I believe it would be lawful to stop him, if for no other reason that to make contact and set up an interview.
Here is my take on the 'lawful stop' angle. If a police officer pulls Joe Citizen over with no valid reason, i.e. he did not commit a traffic violation, fit the vehicle description from some other incident, etc AND THEN John D Police Officer happens to find say, a bag of marijuana, and charges Joe with a crime, the charges would be thrown out if the judge/jury determined that the stop was initially invalid.
However, in this case, even if it was a "bad stop," the man exited his vehicle with a weapon and refused to drop that weapon after repeated commands. There comes a point when you as an officer decide whether or not this BG is worth the risk to you, other officers, and the public at large. The officer that shot determined that this man was a threat to at least two of the above, so he ended that threat. Might you or I have reacted differently? Perhaps, and even probably. Or perhaps not.
Basically, just because a particular stop is a "bad stop" does not mean that Joe Citizen can brandish a weapon and ignore commands. Once it got to that point, the stop was irrelevant. The two are mutually exclusive. A bad stop does not mean that anything you do criminally during the stop is okay.
Here is my take on the 'lawful stop' angle. If a police officer pulls Joe Citizen over with no valid reason, i.e. he did not commit a traffic violation, fit the vehicle description from some other incident, etc AND THEN John D Police Officer happens to find say, a bag of marijuana, and charges Joe with a crime, the charges would be thrown out if the judge/jury determined that the stop was initially invalid.
However, in this case, even if it was a "bad stop," the man exited his vehicle with a weapon and refused to drop that weapon after repeated commands. There comes a point when you as an officer decide whether or not this BG is worth the risk to you, other officers, and the public at large. The officer that shot determined that this man was a threat to at least two of the above, so he ended that threat. Might you or I have reacted differently? Perhaps, and even probably. Or perhaps not.
Basically, just because a particular stop is a "bad stop" does not mean that Joe Citizen can brandish a weapon and ignore commands. Once it got to that point, the stop was irrelevant. The two are mutually exclusive. A bad stop does not mean that anything you do criminally during the stop is okay.