wmw999 2,461 #26 February 13, 2013 fear + urgency. Makes you use the closest tool to do something. When you're a cop, that closest tool is likely to be a gun. Yeah, it's totally and completely wrong. It's human nature, cops are trained not to react that way, and it has to be made an example of. But it's also human nature. I almost added testosterone to the mix, but there are plenty of woman cops too. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #27 February 13, 2013 Quote I almost added testosterone to the mix, but there are plenty of woman cops too. And some of them are Italian. Just sayin'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #28 February 13, 2013 I fully agree. Killing the daughter and her fiance was inexcusable ("evil" in your terms). Of course they're not the reason he had 0% chance of surviving arrest. The cops shooting a 71 year old woman was pretty bad too, but I'm willing to believe it was just criminally negligent rather than intentional. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #29 February 13, 2013 Quote I especially liked the "a suspect tried to exit the rear of the cabin but was pushed back in" part of last night's coverage of the roast. The way the fire was reported, one would think the police intentionally set the fire. I was kind of disappointed that he didn't come out at the moment of truth with guns blazing, like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, or like the movie Young Guns. Now the ending of the movie about this is going to suck. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #30 February 13, 2013 I won't shed any tears for Dorner. We all knew going in that he was already a dead man. I just think it would have been interesting to hear his side of the story...then kill him.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #31 February 13, 2013 QuoteDespite all of the technology advances of the past thirty years the "vehicle stop" remains one of the most dangerous situations in existence; when things go wrong it happens in seconds. Add in language and IQ barriers and it gets worse. It doesn't matter if you have the cover of a backup with a 12-guage or an APC with a 20-mm cannon whoever is the point is likely going down. That said this is sort of case lawyer's dreams are made of. I understand the victims will get paid. My concern is that the perpetrators of a criminally negligent shooting will not be charged with what was very clearly an unjustifiable assault simply because they're under the protective cloak of the LAPD. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #32 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteDespite all of the technology advances of the past thirty years the "vehicle stop" remains one of the most dangerous situations in existence; when things go wrong it happens in seconds. Add in language and IQ barriers and it gets worse. It doesn't matter if you have the cover of a backup with a 12-guage or an APC with a 20-mm cannon whoever is the point is likely going down. That said this is sort of case lawyer's dreams are made of. I understand the victims will get paid. My concern is that the perpetrators of a criminally negligent shooting will not be charged with what was very clearly an unjustifiable assault simply because they're under the protective cloak of the LAPD. Blues, Dave Mmm, that remains to be seen. Everyone in the US has this under a hi-powered microscope. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #33 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteDespite all of the technology advances of the past thirty years the "vehicle stop" remains one of the most dangerous situations in existence; when things go wrong it happens in seconds. Add in language and IQ barriers and it gets worse. It doesn't matter if you have the cover of a backup with a 12-guage or an APC with a 20-mm cannon whoever is the point is likely going down. That said this is sort of case lawyer's dreams are made of. I understand the victims will get paid. My concern is that the perpetrators of a criminally negligent shooting will not be charged with what was very clearly an unjustifiable assault simply because they're under the protective cloak of the LAPD. Blues, Dave Mmm, that remains to be seen. Everyone in the US has this under a hi-powered microscope. With Dorner dead, the press may turn their attention to it, but so far it has been amazingly glossed over. If that remains the case, I doubt the DA will break ranks. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #34 February 13, 2013 QuoteI won't shed any tears for Dorner. We all knew going in that he was already a dead man. I just think it would have been interesting to hear his side of the story...then kill him. I understand what you're saying, but that just wasn't EVER gonna happen... He could have walked into the L.A. county courthouse hands raised & 5 minutes later they would be zippin' up the body bag after he slipped on the wet floor and 'accidentally' broke his head off. He was a cop...he knew it. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,461 #35 February 13, 2013 Maybe, just maybe, if he turns himself into the feds he tells his story in person. OTOH, I'm sure he knew that, and deliberately didn't. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #36 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDespite all of the technology advances of the past thirty years the "vehicle stop" remains one of the most dangerous situations in existence; when things go wrong it happens in seconds. Add in language and IQ barriers and it gets worse. It doesn't matter if you have the cover of a backup with a 12-guage or an APC with a 20-mm cannon whoever is the point is likely going down. That said this is sort of case lawyer's dreams are made of. I understand the victims will get paid. My concern is that the perpetrators of a criminally negligent shooting will not be charged with what was very clearly an unjustifiable assault simply because they're under the protective cloak of the LAPD. Blues, Dave Mmm, that remains to be seen. Everyone in the US has this under a hi-powered microscope. With Dorner dead, the press may turn their attention to it, but so far it has been amazingly glossed over. If that remains the case, I doubt the DA will break ranks. Blues, Dave Because after all, you don't fuck with the blue line! And that is what is wrong with the LAPD. Beck claims he's re-opening the investigation into Dorner's dismissal in the name of transparency. I think you and I both know its a crock of donkey shit. It in no way excuses what Dorner did. If he was that pissed off, why not go after Quan himself? Why go after his daughter? That was chickenshit. Only way I figure it is Dorner wanted Quan to live with knowing a family member died because of something he allegedly did."Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #37 February 13, 2013 Quote Maybe, just maybe, if he turns himself into the feds he tells his story in person. OTOH, I'm sure he knew that, and deliberately didn't. Wendy P. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8oQo02lYTM ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #38 February 13, 2013 "Lets burn this motherfucker." Interesting way to proverbialy fight fire with fire. Extrajudicial much? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #39 February 13, 2013 Quote"Lets burn this motherfucker." Interesting way to proverbialy fight fire with fire. Extrajudicial much? Even if that's what happened at the cabin - and again, we don't know if Dorner or the cops started the fire, I'd point out, again, that the line had been crossed to use deadly force without further notice or attempts to apprehend the suspect. At that point, it's just a matter of method. That being the case, I have no problem with the method being one to minimize the further risk to LEOs by destroying the building in order to kill the suspect inside, as opposed to incurring the risk of an assault by personnel. This was "combat" rules of engagement. Had they had military-grade explosive munitions on hand, I'd have been fine with them using those, too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewGuy2005 53 #40 February 13, 2013 QuoteHmmm...Waco redux. Bullshit Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #41 February 13, 2013 I won't believe he is dead until they i'd his body by forensics. A drivers license and a charred body is not good enough for me. That man is too smart to say he didn't have another person his size as a hostage and he escaped and let the body burn so they would think it was him. I also believe the fire was STARTED by a smoke or flash bang. I have seen those set couches in fire personally. I don't think it hurt the cops feelings that it did catch on fire tho. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #42 February 13, 2013 QuoteHad they had military-grade explosive munitions on hand, I'd have been fine with them using those, too. You from Philly? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rifleman 70 #43 February 13, 2013 Quote"Lets burn this motherfucker." Interesting way to proverbialy fight fire with fire. Extrajudicial much? YupAtheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #44 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuote"Lets burn this motherfucker." Interesting way to proverbialy fight fire with fire. Extrajudicial much? Even if that's what happened at the cabin - and again, we don't know if Dorner or the cops started the fire, I'd point out, again, that the line had been crossed to use deadly force without further notice or attempts to apprehend the suspect. At that point, it's just a matter of method. That being the case, I have no problem with the method being one to minimize the further risk to LEOs by destroying the building in order to kill the suspect inside, as opposed to incurring the risk of an assault by personnel. This was "combat" rules of engagement. Had they had military-grade explosive munitions on hand, I'd have been fine with them using those, too. He could have always come out...most 'sane' people tend to run from a fire. Of course he may have figured fleeing the flame to get one between the horns from a sniper isn't really much of an option...so it seems that instead, he slapped his own off switch. All things considered, probably the best option in his eyes. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #45 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuote"Lets burn this motherfucker." Interesting way to proverbialy fight fire with fire. Extrajudicial much? Even if that's what happened at the cabin - and again, we don't know if Dorner or the cops started the fire, I'd point out, again, that the line had been crossed to use deadly force without further notice or attempts to apprehend the suspect. At that point, it's just a matter of method. That being the case, I have no problem with the method being one to minimize the further risk to LEOs by destroying the building in order to kill the suspect inside, as opposed to incurring the risk of an assault by personnel. This was "combat" rules of engagement. Had they had military-grade explosive munitions on hand, I'd have been fine with them using those, too. Only problem with "combat" rules of engagement is that LEO are not military and citizens, are not enemy combatants. We are a nation of laws. Laws like due process. We also have the 4th amendment. Burning the building down around this particular suspect was not the last course of action. If the suspect is attempting to flee, then there is definitely rational for using deadly force. No one will deny that.... Burn the guy out...does not really pass the sniff test. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #46 February 13, 2013 Quoteand citizens, are not enemy combatants He was given the label "domestic terrorist." Maybe that changed the ROE. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #47 February 13, 2013 Quote Quote Had they had military-grade explosive munitions on hand, I'd have been fine with them using those, too. You from Philly? Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #48 February 13, 2013 Quote Quote and citizens, are not enemy combatants He was given the label "domestic terrorist." Maybe that changed the ROE. It is a brave new world. You may be right there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #49 February 13, 2013 Quote Quote and citizens, are not enemy combatants He was given the label "domestic terrorist." Maybe that changed the ROE. Maybe they naped him with new LAPD UAV? ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #50 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuote"Lets burn this motherfucker." Interesting way to proverbialy fight fire with fire. Extrajudicial much? Even if that's what happened at the cabin - and again, we don't know if Dorner or the cops started the fire, I'd point out, again, that the line had been crossed to use deadly force without further notice or attempts to apprehend the suspect. At that point, it's just a matter of method. That being the case, I have no problem with the method being one to minimize the further risk to LEOs by destroying the building in order to kill the suspect inside, as opposed to incurring the risk of an assault by personnel. This was "combat" rules of engagement. Had they had military-grade explosive munitions on hand, I'd have been fine with them using those, too. Only problem with "combat" rules of engagement is that LEO are not military and citizens, are not enemy combatants. We are a nation of laws. Laws like due process. We also have the 4th amendment. Burning the building down around this particular suspect was not the last course of action. If the suspect is attempting to flee, then there is definitely rational for using deadly force. No one will deny that.... Burn the guy out...does not really pass the sniff test. To be reasonable, what would you have proposed? Waiting him out? What if he escaped? It was a cabin out there in the woods. What if he tunneled out? What if it was a pre-planned, pre-prepared escape cabin that he had previously fitted-out with a tunnel? What if he'd pre-prepared the area around the cabin with mines or IEDs? Lots of "what ifs", to be sure; but at some point the LEO commanders have to be able to make the decision "we need to end this now". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
