The suspects in the mass shooting of Dallas police officers have killed at least 5 and injured several more. The last suspected sniper was unwilling to surrender, and continued firing shots at police. The police had to neutralize the last sniper in a way that would protect the lives of law enforcement officers. Therefore, using a bomb to kill the attacker was appropriate to prevent further violent acts.
Choosing to use deadly force to end more deadly force is a no brainer. It's often the only and quickest way to end a deadly situation. The individual had the right to choose not to commit murder multiple times. He chose poorly and paid for his actions. I don't think providing him with 3 squares a day, a free college education and free housing for life would provide any comfort to the families of those he killed in cold blood.
The Dallas police detonated a bomb, and killed the suspect of a mass shooting. The suspect was presently engaged in the act of killing police officers, and causing a panic. The police had every right to use any means necessary, including detonating a bomb, to bring the carnage to an end.
Using bombs to stop violent attacks is a gross overreaction that costs lives. Police have been using other, non fatal methods for years with great success. Tear gas, fire hoses, and smoke bombs can all help break up riots and violent attacks without killing anyone. Using bombs may be effective, but the consequences are dire.