Looks like you need an elementary class in English 101. I take it you had an public high school education in Compton or in the Bronx. How else would you continue to write this stuff:
“The Garner case allows the police to use deadly force against a fleeing felon, if the police believe allowing the escape will put the public at risk.”
Damn, it, for the 1000th time, in such a case the fleeing felon is now threatening lethal force and any one with an ounce of intelligence knows the answer to that. So you shift you stand by positing an obvious circumstance to which the answer is a given. Nice try. This ain’t so much about credibility but a lack of reading comprehension on your part.
And this ... "[The police can] Not [use deadly force to stop a fleeing felon] unless the cops are themselves in danger of life or in danger of serious physical injury."
And I'm the one with reading comprehension issues?