If you are a cop in this situation, not the lead officer, a grunt among other grunts. You are told the basic situation is that shots have been fired and women and children are in danger...as are you and your team. There is an ARMED individual in the house. Your police training also tells you there is a split second between you and one of your team getting killed as well. Your team members are also husbands and fathers. Your version of deescalating the situation is to remove the suspect as quickly as possible before anything REALLY bad happens (wife gets killed, kid gets killed, you get killed). These aren't "rage-monsters", they are afraid of what could happen.
Also, it is good to remember, the worst case situation, is what cops often have to deal with. But those cases often don't make the news. Even in my small city, these worst case situations happen.
But there isn't an armed individual in the house. You've just been told that there might be. Don't you see how you've fallen into the epistemological error here of not only assuming the truth of a claim without further evidence, but also shifting all your attention tot he possibility of someone being armed.
That sounds very hand-wavey and you might say well it's a lot different in the real world, but I've been in a bunch of high-danger real-world situations. Survival is about more than having great reflexes, it's also about having a cool head and knowing when not to act.
And look, while it's legitimate to have some fears/stress, rage monsters are absolutely a problem in policing. Cops are just as likely, or more, to take steroids or be assholes as people in the general population. Let's not forget that nobody is forced to be a cop. If you want to help people and like excitement you could always be an EMT or a firefighter.
Your version of deescalating the situation is to remove the suspect as quickly as possible
See, that's not de-escalation, it's catharsis through crisis - literally the exact opposite of de-escalation. By abdicating your own decision-making power you've ended up arguing for counterfactuals. I realize that you're attempting to model the thought process of police in high pressure situations, but counterfactuals + weapons = deadly errors. The thought process is, however, something we could change.
They signed up to put themselves in danger. I as a civilian never signed up for it. If anyone should accept an increased risk, it's not me or my family that were peacefully minding our own business.
Also, it is good to remember, the worst case situation, is what cops often have to deal with. But those cases often don't make the news. Even in my small city, these worst case situations happen.