I find the difference in these news reports to be disturbing. Is it that the story changed as time passed or that two different news reporters took down conflicting information from a same and lone accounting of what was told to them?
In the first one its reported as:
"after reports of a man armed with a weapon were called in." (as in multiple reports, not just one)
"Authorities said shots were then exchanged and Barker was later pronounced dead at the scene. No officers were injured in the shooting."
then the other report says:
"after a report of a man with a gun "
"They contacted 28-year-old Nicholas Barker and during that time shots were fired. Barker died at the scene."
It says they responded to a man with a gun call and initially the Sgt on the scene says that shots were exchanged and then the second report says that they are releasing new details and the only thing that's actually different is that they removed the comment about shots being exchanged and changed the calls of "man with gun" downgraded from plural to singular.
I would think that if the man fired his weapon or if he was menacing anyone with it that it would be clearly reported as such because it would help to justify the use of lethal force. A man with a gun hardly justifies lethal force on its own to anyone but those who automatically assume any citizen with a firearm is obviously up to no good and probably deserves to be shot down on the spot.
I don't live anywhere near Idaho but I am very interested in finding out what actually happened in this incident and kind of worry that the media might not see it the same way and automatically assume that anyone with a gun is probably asking to be shot down by the authorities and that their news blurbs more than cover the story adequately. I hope they stick on this story and alot more information is forthcoming.