Shoot to kill: A policy that was DOA?

[Prudence]

It highlights the difference between proactive and reactionary intelligence. It's not as big of a deal when you're reacting to ordinary crime to react, conduct surveillance, detain, chase, etc... But when you're dealing with terrorists, failure to detain isn't just letting one slip by -- it's potentially devastating. The stakes are higher and pressure to "shoot to kill" is greater. The risk of of a suicide bomber escaping is greater than the risk of a innocent person being killed.

Now stop and read that one more time: The risk of of a suicide bomber escaping is greater than the risk of a innocent person being killed.

*That* is what makes this "war" so challenging and what makes suicide bombing so effective. What happens when crimes are so enormous, cause so much destruction of human life and property, that reactive law enforcement is no longer acceptible?