Yes!

> In December, a jury in Corpus Christi, Tex., acquitted a 48-year-old man who spent 664 days in jail after being charged with attempted capital murder for wounding three SWAT officers during a no-knock raid that targeted his nephew. The jury concluded that the man, Ray Rosas, did not know whom he was firing at through a blinded window.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/03/18/us/forced-ent...

Yes; it usually doesn't end well, and as NoImmatureAdHom notes the rights violation has to rise to the level at which lethal force is justified in self-defense, but it does happen and people get cleared of the inevitable charges, that's happened in my home town although the shooting did not kill the officer. And armenarmen's link doesn't include the case where black grandmother was killed in her dwelling, that didn't end well for the police.

It's always retrospective, of course, because whether you are "allowed" will be determined in court afterwards. The answer is sometimes yes. Usually you're only allowed to kill, or attempt to kill people when your or someone else's life is immediately at risk.

No...because no matter what the reality is, you will be painted as a criminal, and charged/convicted as such. It's more likely there is no charge/conviction step, and instead you will be murdered by another police officer under a false pretext of a "firefight". The story that we all hear will not reflect reality; you will take the truth to your grave.

There are numerous examples of this happening, a couple mentioned in responses to you, but in Indiana I know that a law was passed a few hears ago (with quite a bit of protest from police unions) saying basically that you can treat a cop as an armed intruder if he forcibly enters your house without a warrant.

In America you can do anything you want because you're presumed innocent until proven guilty... in theory at least. Times are a changin'.