One on hand you've got a psycho cop willing to mow someone down with his car. On the other hand, the guy was apparently a very dangerous, violent, armed individual who was also likely a psycho. Even in another thread we have covered how TN v. Garner allows deadly force when apprehending a suspect who basically fits this guy's description to a T. Personally, I don't feel good about the fact that this is acceptable - and it seems cruel and unusual, but legally is it really a crime?
Would the alternative have been safer or more humane - the alternative probably being gunfight in a residential area? It's just hard for me to lump in the vehicular assault case with these unarmed people being shot to death. Is it disturbing nonetheless? Absolutely.
Also, if the guy was thinking of killing people and likely police officers, how did this not save lives?
Just trying to play devil's advocate here since I usually take such a hard line on these issues.