I disagree with the use of fire, but if I had been in charge of the operation and had already lost an officer and had another wounded, there is no way I would have risked more officers just to make sure he got "every chance" to surrender. I would have ordered snipers to take him down at the first opportunity.
I'm not sure where anyone has gotten the idea that we should spend massive amounts of money to make sure we don't hurt the killer when we get him holed up somewhere. Starving him out could have taken weeks or months and would have risked lives unnecessarily.
'Merica: Back to back World War Champs