Don't be silly. The sooner the guy was shot the better, if it had saved lives or he'd posed a risk - both of which he clearly did. But if it had come down to a straight choice between shooting him and taking him alive - with no other risk or consequences either way - then clearly he should have been taken alive. (Or don't you agree?) It really is as simple as that. How your tortured thinking can try and get mileage out of this is beyond me.