we don't execute people for what they *might* do -the police don't necessarily wait for the act to be committed, but they at least wait until the offense is imminent.
True, but I would equate someone engaging in a hi-speed getaway through a residential neighborhood to someone resisting arrest by waving a gun around in a crowded room. Would a police officer hesitate before shooting someone waving said gun around? Depends on the officer; but I don't think we'd fault him for ending the eminent threat.
Personally, I believe this video illustrates the versatility of a small calliber handgun. Sure with a rifle she could have taken the shot from further away, but with a handgun and an increasing proximity, she can MAKE the shot unstead of waiting to TAKE the shot. And as we saw, the gentlemen may not have stayed down with a single shot. She was able to "make sure" he stayed down. A rifleman would not have been able to do this. The hostage would have been well in the way to block a follow-up shot (or 3); possibly giving him time to take her life in the event of a wound instead of a kill. Instead, she took a small handgun, got in close, and made sure about it. Well done and solid tactics made sure that the only person who got dead was the bad guy.
I see no problem with her tactics. A wise man once said, "Fear the man with one gun." You should do this because a man who wields a single weapon perfectly understands the strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of that weapon and will employ them effectively in any situation, adjusting his tactics accordingly. This woman had a 9x18mm Makarov. She knew she had to get in close. She also understood the ballistic limitations of her small caliber, so she put enough rounds in him to make sure he didn't get up and wasn't a threat. If it was a .45ACP, her tactics very well may have been different.
Solid from my standpoint,
~LT