I'm noit sure that the story is being "accepted" as much as it is being ignored. At least by me. I doi share your concern regarding the ability to track any random person's whereabouts to the second for "safety concerns". As we know, surveillance has never even once stopped a violent act from occurring. The cameras aren't for "safety", they are to identify people, whether they have "broken the law" or not, and are used by "law enforcement" only AFTER a crime has been committed. "We couldn't siop your son from being killed, but here's a video of his death. Maybe you canm play this on a loop at his funeral."
BTW, shooting the victim in the leg first is the act of a professional killer. First immobilize the victim, then close in and fire enough bullets to ensure that the victim is dead.
RE: CEO shooting proves con/cons in media aren't your friends