I can attest that in most of the other countries of the world, you can't point a gun at the police and get away with it.
Most importantly, you can't even talk about this case in the media, you can't sue the government, you can't hire a lawyer to fight against the government, your family will be threatened and you surely won't receive a 5 million dollar settlement that all US shootings inevitably end up with.
I do agree that in many cases both sides did something wrong, but in this case I can't imagine how you can find fault there.
Indeed, the victims in this case did nothing wrong, given the information that I have. I would probably shoot at the intruders too in that situation.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that I don't live in China. But it's pretty embarrassing for the richest and most powerful country in the world (allegedly bearing the mantle of freedom and democracy and Enlightenment values), to have to compare ourselves to totalitarian dictatorships to feel better about ourselves, instead of other democracies, most of whom have yearly counts of deaths by law enforcement in the single digits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc...
It seems like a lot, but then consider that only 5% of people killed by police in the US were unarmed. The other 95% were armed, and most of those cases seem to be actual criminals rather than ordinary people like Breonna Taylor's boyfriend.
I'm with you on the American police being quite distinct from other police forces, and there's a lot of criticism to be made about them - like failure to keep proper statistics about police killings - but I think it's also fair to consider the circumstances that they work in.
As for your first point, many of the things can be true at the same time: US puts too many people into jails, there is too much crime in the US, and there are ways to obtain justice that are not available in most other countries (mass media, social media, courts).
I'm not sure to which countries you are referring.
But in many countries around the world this problem is greatly reduced, if not eliminated only because these countries also have strict gun laws that stop this happening.
According to your link, the US leads the world in prison population, period.
You say this so casually, like the 95% of people killed deserve to be dead? Most other developed countries had problems with guns, and have dealt with it by restricting them, not by making the police militarised and just shooting more 'bad guys'
How many countries in the world do you imagine don't have courts, social media or mass media? Or even lack any of the above?
Do you have the link?
I don't know how to find the number of arrests, but in Australia there were 4 people killed by law enforcement in 2016/17 and in the US there were 1,536 killed (2019). Australia has a population of 24M, the US 329M, (so 13 times the population). At the same per-population rate as Australia, the US would kill 52 people, and at double the per-population rate it would be 104.
It would seem astonishing that the arrest rates somehow converts to the US only killing twice as many people!
So I think that makes around 125-130 unarmed people killed by police. [1] says that there were 1,134 people killed that year by police.
125/1134 = 11%
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/31/the-counted-...
Also that's still "only" 25% that are unarmed.
A police office in the US has to assume the perpetrator will be armed with a weapon and that then leads to the 'shoot first ask questions later' approach to policing.
Alternatively, places where guns are not so prevalent means that anxiety is greatly reduced.
As an example the majority of English police (i.e. bobbies) do their patrol work while not carrying a gun.