"Fresh" out of the academy (1 month). Those statistics sound about right. At least, they sound just like the ones we talked about at the academy. Officers do have a relatively low % of shooting accuracy. Reasons are offered for this, all kinds so I'll skip the speculations.
I thought the writer did excellent research and analysis of the shootings, remarking the accuracy rate, but also remarking the possible contributing factors such as low light, likely shooting distance, etc.
He was also very fair in the reporting of the unarmed deaths, stating that the ACLU's stats were pre-TN v Garner. He also said that over half of the shootings involved a furtive movement mistaken for "going for a gun" or the suspect having something that could reasonably been perceived as being a gun.
While the source of this research may be a liberal college, I'm not able to conclude that these stats are deliberately biased. I think it's a good article and stresses the fact that we LEO's are not perfect and could use a lot more training. At least more time at the range. (oh, drat!
)