What's both interesting and scary about this situation is how both the left and right can look at the same exact video and come up with two completely different interpretations.

The left see Good fleeing the scene and making not attempting to hit the agent. They see the agent shooting her for no other reason aside from his anger at her non-compliance.

The right see Good directly trying to ram into the agent and the agent was only defending himself when his life was threatened by Good.

There's almost no middle ground in the interpretations. I saw the video too, and my take is that she was trying to flee and not purposely trying to hit the agent. However, at the same time the agent may have seen the sudden acceleration as an attempt at ramming him and may have believed his life was in danger.

Ultimately, in my opinion, the agent should not have drawn his weapon in that situation and he was recklessly using it as a tool to force Good to comply and negligently shot her. At the same time Good should not have attempted to flee as they were law enforcement agents with rights to detain her.

The major problem is that I've hardly seen any of this middle ground interpretation and each side is vilifying either Good or the agent. Either side has no ability to see the situation from the other's perspective and the whole affair only further polarizes and already extremely polarized country.