Yep we certainly agree on that. It is wrong to shoot someone who has surrendered and does not represent an immediate threat.
If he goes for a gun in his pocket, or jumps up and runs at ya then all bets are off.
I would much rather not shoot anyone.
100%, as long as he’s being compliant just keep down that path, everybody will be happier. Anyway there’s a lot less paperwork and cleaning if you don’t shoot him.
But then you will have to convince a jury that you shot a man (with full intent to kill) in the back because you thought he was reaching in his pants or jacket or boot...
Which puts us back at square one of this case. Does saying that "he was reaching" give you that much protection when the perp is dead?
I wouldn't want anyone to lie under oath or in a police report, I just don't see how WAITING until you are AGAIN threatened would be proven to a jury. They only look at the result (man dead in your yard, shot in the back, not the foot).