Police routinely use lethal force against armed suspects. The armed bank-robber doesn't get a trial before he gets shot. While this is a low-bar, morally, it's

Police routinely use lethal force against armed suspects. The armed bank-robber doesn't get a trial before he gets shot. While this is a low-bar, morally, it's not something unlawful. It's not even particularly controversial, unless there's a clear abuse of power. The difficulty with this kind of armed-conflict is similar to the problems with prosecuting higher-ups in organized crime. They won't be holding the gun, or directly doing the dirty work. They are actively involved in planning operations, though. Is this a dangerous policy? Sure. Will there be cases of abuse? Yes, like any government policy (note, I'm not singling out government here; it's a property of any collective system where individuals don't bear full responsibility for their decisions).