I'm not saying the shooting was wrong; I'm saying I haven't seen the justification for it. She injured people and endangered people when she fled the scene, no question. It would seem that shooting at the driver of a speeding vehicle, one which has an infant inside, also risks endangering people. The question should be: were the lives of police officers who shot her or anyone else's life immediately in danger, such that the shooting was the best (if not only) way to prevent further loss of life or injury to innocent bystanders.
If the following account is correct, it appears the threat had been eliminated before the woman was shot:
Several minutes later, officers appeared to have the woman cornered in front of the western side of the Capitol facing the National Mall. But as officers, with their weapons drawn, approached Ms. Carey’s car, she rammed it into reverse.
Officers tried to dodge out of the way, but the Infiniti struck a police car and raced up Constitution Avenue, where it crashed into a barrier.
What occurred next was not clear. Ms. Carey managed to get out of the car, and was shot by several officers. According to a law enforcement official, she was not armed, and it was not known whether she presented an immediate danger.Was not known to whom, at what time? By the official when he was asked by the reporter, or by the officers who shot her right before they shot her?
I can see where it might be reasonable to assume that the woman had violent intentions even after she left her disabled vehicle. But was there a reasonable concern that she had the ability to commit violence once she outside her car?