Facts

So what, she deserved to get shot because she wasn't at work? I'm unsure of what you're trying to say here

Um yeah, she and her wife decided to go chasing after ICE.....play stupid games, win stupid prizes

She didn't break any laws? She didn't attempt to harm an officer? Why is her death justified?
You say play stupid games, win stupid prizes, but why is following ICE and holding them to account a stupid gam?. Not only that, why is it such a stupid game that her getting shot was a reasonable thing to happen? Not just arrested, or fined, shot. Why are there armed people in US cities who we can't even follow, let alone identify on pain of death? Usually that's a role reserved for mobsters, not federal agents

Yeah, Im not arguing this......cause yes he could've shot out her tires instead........but THEY followed ICE around, they are clearly on video obstructing them, taunting them, being asked to get out of the vehicle, yelling "drive baby drive" with the officer in front of the car, then hitting the officer before he shot.........it's not the public's job or place to police the police! I invite you to try and join a SWAT raid on a hostage situation if you think you need to be there........let's see you come out alive cause I guarantee you won't be getting shot by the SWAT team..........

It is actually the public's job and place to police the police. Who else do you think does it? What do you think "Protect and Serve" means? Even better though, ICE have nowhere near the accountability the police has. If hundreds of police detainees just disappeared one day, people would raise eyebrows, there'd probably be a national inquiry or something. Exactly that happened with Alligator Alcatraz, and ICE has faced no consequences.
Now I really love the comparison you've made between ICE and SWAT raids, because SWAT raids take place on criminals believed to be armed and dangerous. The two women were not armed. In fact, there is no reason for ICE to be any more heavily armed than a police officer on patrol, since illegal entry into the country is a nonviolent, civil offence. If you really think the women drove because an ageny was in front of the car, you're sorely mistaken. At the same time, another agent was attempting to open the car door. If you'll look at the video, the woman turns the steering wheel all the way to her right before accelerating, even though the agent was directly in front/to her left. And last I checked, obstructing a federal agent is not a crime for which the death penalty applies. It was not self defence, since by the time shots were fired, the car was already past the agent with no other agents in the way.
Let me be clear: the two drove to escape, and even turned the wheel away from the agent. Shots were fired after any danger to the agent had passed. There was no reason to shoot to kill, they were not armed and ICE is not SWAT. The two are seperate for a reason.

"Will post UK nature propaganda" Clearly you are not American, we don't police the police here jack, we stay out of their way......we have government to police the police not average people.......

The fact that you haven't responded to almost any of my points tells me all I need to know. But I'll humour you.
"We don't police the Redcoats here jack, we stay out of their way" - you after the Boston Massacre, 1770.
"We don't police the SS here jack, we stay out of their way" - you in Oradour-sur-Glane, 1944.
"We don't police the Police here jack, we stay out of their way" - you in Paris, 1961 (you probably didn't know about this one so here's the wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_Paris_massacre)
"We don't police the Army here jack, we stay out of their way" - you in Tiananmen Square, 1989
She was protesting rather peacefully against ICE, but we seem to live in a world where "Land of the Free" really means "we the people don't hold government agencies accountable because we're scared of getting shot, we rely on a government elected on historically narrow margins to do that for us". I always thought the Second Amendment was to protect against government overreach, and I've always admired it, despite the fact that it needs reinterpretation to limit mass shootings. But no, when the government sends masked armed men around who deport, beat and imprison people (and then can't account for huge numbers of said people, not to mention several of those people are US citizens, people those men are not meant to target at all), that's not government overreach. That's just business as usual. French people have rioted over less. Ukrainians have toppled governments over less. If you can't defend a woman peacefully protesting something she doesn't like, I have to wonder whether "Land of the Free" and "2nd Amendment" are anything more than wishful thinking.

Hope this helps.