Strambo said:
It is too bad we can't see the trooper. As he was the winner, it would be most instructive to emulate what he did right while improving upon and anything he could have done better.
Well there was many more variables and decisions made but there is also a big difference:
The officer had body armor that likely stopped the pistol round of the attacker and is why he determined he was okay on the radio, and the attacker did not. They both took a round to the torso, though the officer's shot was probably centered better on the other guy as I don't think the officer was entirely sideways to the attacker when hit himself and he was hit in the side.
The armor plays a big a role when two are exchanging fire and both scoring hits, because the hits of one are counting a lot more than the hits of the other.
Body armor is hot, generally stiff, degrades over time, and is probably not going to be worn by most concealed carry individuals.
Additionally officers often get priority medical treatment such as the first ambulance on the scene if they are injured. While the other guy may get second or otherwise delayed or even no medical treatment after shooting it out with police.
Several minutes difference between treatment times can also often be the difference between life and death. Other times they don't treat them at all or neglect them because they are the bad guy and considered fatally injured. This may not be officially done, but happens all the time.
So considering someone the loser or winner of the gunfight based on who survives in such situations is often faulty.