…Can police shoot him?
The quarantine is legally authorized in Texas (I don’t have the cite) to protect public safety.
It seems like shooting him would make his bleed, and, at the bullet wound, make the blood aerosolize, spreading it over a larger area. So I’d think that shooting him would be the wrong thing to do.
Maybe Tasering.
He’s not a walking bomb. He has a disease that carries some risk of transmission under some circumstances. It would be really difficult to build a case that deadly force is warranted.
Well, that depends doesn’t it: what color is his skin?
It’s Texas, they’d just shoot everyone on the bus.
This ↑↑↑ is the only way to be sure. 
We shoot people for much less. Which jury is going to side with runaway ebola guy?
Gotta admit, even my fourteen-year-old is beginning to mutter, “take off and nuke the site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.”
I know the fear is mostly being mongered by our beloved media types, sure. But it’s beginning to feel like the US is ready to do some outlandish things.
Eh, it’s the media freak-out of the month. By November they’ll have moved on to some other silly issue to hyperventilate about, and the people commenting on online news stories and the barflies of the world will be offering bizarre, weirdly violent, half-literate solutions to that instead.
Moderator Note
Let’s keep political jabs out of GQ. No warning issued, but don’t do this again.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
PS. In the interests of keeping this in GQ, let’s focus on the legal aspects of this question.
Shooting him would no doubt be an overreation, but given the current panic over ebola, not stopping him would be viewed as inexcusable. Tasering him if he refused to come peacefully would probably be perfectly reasonable under the circumstances.
For the most part, however, I’m having a hard time imagining that many people would be sympathic to our would-be plague vector.