Yeah. I noticed. That's why I said "you're stuck on a specific example that doesn't reflect the problem." And then I gave data and examples of different situations, that are problematic. When a police officer kills someone under the circumstances you're talking about, nothing bad happens to them. It's uncontroversial, unless there's some kind of bizarre extenuating circumstances.
My argument here is not and has never been that police don't have the right to use deadly force to protect their own lives or the lives of others. Joe Blow on the street has a right to use deadly force if his life is in danger. My argument is that it should be a professional value for police to not kill unless absolutely necessary. I think police should be willing to accept more personal risk than Joe Blow does. And yes, I do think an attitude of playing fast and loose with deadly force contributes to police brutality, which I think is usually a twitch reaction and not premeditated. You can call this "moving the goalposts" but frankly I don't know what your point is other than that you're really, really insistent on shooting this hypothetical guy.