No, this is exactly wrong. What you are doing exacerbates racism because it appears to excuse potentially lethal violence against law enforcement from black individuals.

Was it a mistake to make the traffic stop? Some types of violations can be really deadly (e.g. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-09-02/schmitt-davis-overstreet-pedestrian-deaths). A broken tail light isn't dangerous, so maybe yeah, could have passed on that one.

Was it a mistake for Jayland not to stop? You don't fault him for not stopping.

Was it a mistake for him to fire a shot, if he did? (Sure seems like he did.) You don't fault him for that.

Was it a mistake for the police to chase him? Maybe. After a shot was fired? Uh, no, you don't want people driving around shooting.

Was it a mistake for him to run instead of surrendering? You don't fault him for that.

Was 90 bullets excessive? Almost surely. The police armorer might want to have a word with the officers about wasting ordinance. It's also a clear sign that the officers were not calm, not trying for minimal force at that point, even though minimal force would very likely have been lethal--and the lack of clear-headedness may be cause for discipline. But if what they claim was true, and again, I'm skeptical, but if what they claim was true, they had at that point almost exhausted all their options. Not safe to tackle someone known to have fired a gun (and it was dark, so especially hard to tell if someone is unarmed). They say they tried and failed with a taser. (Why don't police have more reliable nonlethal options?! It's crazy! But police have to make do with what they've got at the moment.)

So, yes, if they'd stopped at like, I don't know a half dozen to a dozen bullets, then they'd have been using minimal force. Maybe Jayland would have survived. Probably not, though. It would have been less horrific of a spectacle, yes. But he'd have been just as dead.

All too often, the police say something that sounds reasonable, and then eventually we see bodycam footage or someone's cell phone recording and we realize that the only justification is "a black person moved and I got scared so I killed them". Those cases are horrible. This doesn't appear to be like that.

What message are you sending here? Black people are violent so don't provoke them, and it's not reasonable to expect them to obey law enforcement? How is that fair to the overwhelming majority of black people who aren't violent and will stop for police (just like the overwhelming majority of everyone else)?

You keep bringing up bad parallels. Storz (white) isn't a good parallel because officers didn't have the ability to kill him. They tried. They exchanged fire with him for six hours. He finally agreed to surrender. That's the only reason he's alive.

Andrew Coffee IV (black) is alive too, after a shootout with the police (no knock raid; he didn't know who was shooting)--he surrendered. (This case is just sickening in other details, including that Coffee rather than the officers was the defendant. I won't rehash it here. Say their names? How about Alteria Woods?)

Subway mass shooter Frank James (black)? Escaped the scene. Apprehended later. Surrendered. Alive.

Is there nonetheless a double-standard? You bet. You can't see it case-by-case, because every case happens to every race, but you can see it in the overall statistics. Unfair? Totally. But when you have so many cases of crystal-clear injustice, why pick this one where a person of any race is likely to end up dead? (Evidence it can happen to anyone: Daniel Shaver--white, pointed a gun out a hotel window, pretty much cooperating with officers when they showed up at the room? Made one tiny slightly iffy move. Dead.)

Sandra Bland didn't shoot at anyone. Tanisha Anderson didn't present a potentially lethal threat to pedestrians or police officers.

It's not fair to the many black victims who have done little to nothing wrong aside from being black and being human to mix them up with someone who--even if the police made some poor choices too--established themselves as a clear danger. Doing so perpetuates harmful stereotypes.

So--want to talk about pretext stops? They're bad. I'm with you. Traffic violations more generally? Varies, but I agree that a lot don't require stops.

Want to talk about excessive reliance on firearms in policing? Sure thing--it's highly excessive. Lack of conflict resolution training, de-escalation not valued? Yep, I'm there.

Want to point out that the spectacle of this case illustrates a disturbing switch to unbridled rather than restrained aggression? It does, absolutely.

But want me to say his name? Alongside Atatiana Jefferson? Latasha Walton?

I don't think that's fair to them.

It's tragic that things ended up this way, but it's a largely self-inflicted tragedy. (It's also tragic that our society leads people to have the opportunity to self-inflict tragedy like this.)

Unless, of course, the police are bending the truth again.