Too many people draw the wrong conclusions when they see this body cam footage.
A black man on a bus had taken drugs and was unresponsive. EMTs arrived and revived him. Cops also arrived and escalated until the man pulled out a little 380-auto and fired two shots. An EMT was struck by one of the bullets and died (which is pretty surprising given how other EMTs and an ambulance were on the scene—that should be investigated).
The perspective of most Americans is that it was good the police were there to protect the EMT from such an "animal", and that although they failed to protect one EMT, at least they killed the perp.
We see in the video that the cops knew the bulge on his right hip indicated a concealed weapon (which was his Constitutional right), and that he was somewhat incoherent because of the drugs (also a Constitutional right). They could also see that the man was acting like an asshole (another Constitutional right), and given that he was a black man who was expressing a fear and distrust of cops, these cops would have known that he would have probably been at least somewhat afraid for his life in this situation.
The man wanted to go home, but the cops wouldn't let him. One of the ways they could have de-escalated would have been to reassure him that although he appeared to have a concealed weapon, and that although it might be illegal, that they knew it was his Constitutional right and that he was not in any trouble, but instead, they made him feel afraid and asked him to pull up his shirt, which of course would have made him afraid that he was about to be shot (when they saw his gun—American cops have killed people—especially black people—for less), so he shot first.
The cops had multiple opportunities to de-escalate or to simply disengage entirely, and of course they could have simply chosen to not intervene in the first place. As they engaged, it was increasingly obvious that this outcome was becoming possible. Wouldn't it have been better for the cops to de-escalate (instead of challenging the man) or disengage entirely? If the cop was going to continue challenging and scaring a man who had an attitude and was likely armed, couldn't he have first asked the medic to move 20 feet back?
If only EMT had showed up, no one would have died. EMTs were not the ones who provoked the man to violence. If there had been no cops, there would have been no shooting. The cops were not trying to help. That is just a pretense. They were only trying to establish dominance. Their behavior was pretty standard (in America)—no doubt they were just following policy.
One effect of such a policy is a kind of eugenics program to eliminate those genes that make one inclined to stand up for one's rights. America is circling the drain, and this is just one more reason why.
Most Americans would argue that cops should have been there because of the drug use, which is illegal. However, drug laws are not only unconstitutional, but the war on drugs is exactly the opposite of the best policy if one truly cares about users, cops, the economy, and everyone. One reason the war on drugs is so bad is that it creates a pretense for more of a police state and a surveillance state. It is a pretense used to justify the initiation of force (e.g. guns in one's face), and theft (e.g. asset forfeiture), and it helps cops frame people thousands of times per year (based on talking to ex-cops).
Although I would say the man acted like an asshole, most Americans are saying that he was an "animal" ... or some other kind of sub-human. That's not healthy. Such Americans are in bad place. Perhaps hearing that will help them find their way again. Everyone is redeemable. The light in one is allied with the light in all.