What optimal number of people should be killed by police in the United States?

We have come to the point in the discussion of Black Lives Matter and statistics about police killing people that the ignorant are attempting to refute the idea that police killing people is bad by saying that white people are killed by police at a rate two times greater than Black people, so STFU. And since this is an absolute logical fallacy, but fools and racists do not see that it is a logical fallacy, it is incumbent on non-fool anti-racists to contest the narrative by asking, “What optimal number of people should be killed by police in the United States?”

First-order reasoning tells us that a state agency that has a monopoly on force should kill zero people, optimally. We know this because we literally do not have a state agency in the US that has a monopoly on force whose mission is to kill people. This appears to me to be uncontroversial, if a little naive, but I am happy to accept the idea that I may be wrong here. I am proceeding however as if I am not wrong, and that no rational person believes there should be a state agency in the US that has a monopoly on force whose mission is to kill people.

With that as our given, are there times when it is necessary to excuse a killing by the police? If we accept that the mission of the police is to protect the lives and property of the citizenry, then we can, based upon evidence, conclude that it is more likely than not that at some point police may, confronted by necessity, kill a person to protect…