Questions about the current news

I don't normally comment on current news events but I'm a graduated citizen now (retired) so I can do whatever I want - normal or non.


There's much recent news in the U.S. about white police officers hurting citizens of color.  I am not qualified to comment on the general debate regarding that but I do have one or two questions about a local incident associated with it.


Here in Tulsa there was recently a 'sting' operation in front of a Dollar Store (5 and dime store to you citizen graduates - Convenience store to you whippers).  It seems that a black guy wanted to sell a gun.  I understand that was his business and he wasn't that good at it since he had an impressive record with the local police suggesting that he incorrectly tried to sell guns and drugs in ways that weren't as secret as a successful gun and dope seller should.  So he had this rap sheet.  So  the local coppers wanted to get him off the streets, as they say. 


So this guy met some undercover police in a Dollar Store parking lot and attempted to sell them a gun and the police attempted to arrest him.  Some uniformed and some non-uniformed police gave chase and one uniformed policeman pulled a weapon that he claims he thought was a taser (non lethal).  Instead of a taser the officer brandished a 38 caliber revolver and he shot the fleeing felon, killing him.  He apologized.  He was arrested for second degree murder, which prompts my questions.


Here is my first question:
What?


I don't follow the news every single day, nor do I read or hear every single thing that is news.  I forget most of what I've read and heard anyway.  So I ask, when did it become wrong for a police officer to shoot a fleeing felon?  I don't remember that.  Dang, all my life I've seen news excerpts depicting the not so sad death or serious injury of a rapist, armed robber, dope dealer, etc stopped from flight through the judicious use of lethal weapons.  The shooting cop is often claimed to be a hero.  When did that become a crime?


Another question:
What?


A detailed story from the Tulsa World explains how the culprit ran from the police at the Dollar Store.  It was explained that he ran in a certain direction.  I saw on television, the video of the man running.  He was running down the busy street, toward houses in a residential area.  The police questioned in the article said that, had the suspect run the other direction - toward a school which was in session - they would have shot him. 


They would have shot him for running toward a school.  I presume that they would have shot him because he would pose a continuous threat to the children and teachers in the school.  Which makes me wonder why the police didn't feel that he posed a continuous threat to the people driving down the street or the people living in the residential neighborhood.  Why wouldn't they shoot him for running in that direction?  How old do the residents need to be to make it OK to shoot in their direction?  And, in the future should we check I.D.'s of local citizens before shooting?  I mean, find out if anyone in the area is school-age and if not, then blow the fleeing fool away. 


The police have actually charged a pursuing officer with MURDER for shooting a fleeing felon because that felon ran one direction and not the other.  They are saying that the officer would not have been in trouble at all had the fleeing felon chosen a different direction to run.


What?