BillyVance 34 #51 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote"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". Plus, it was getting close to sunset and they did not want to risk Dorner sneaking away in darkness."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
ManagingPrime 0 #52 February 13, 2013 Quote To be reasonable, what would you have proposed? One option: The attacks will stop when the department states the truth about my innocence, PUBLICLY!!! I will not accept any type of currency/goods in exchange for the attacks to stop, nor do i want it. I want my name back, period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #53 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuote To be reasonable, what would you have proposed? One option: The attacks will stop when the department states the truth about my innocence, PUBLICLY!!! I will not accept any type of currency/goods in exchange for the attacks to stop, nor do i want it. I want my name back, period. That's not an option. This isn't a Rambo movie. Aside from not negotiating with an armed fugitive murderer, it doesn't address the time-exigency. Totally unrealistic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #54 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote"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". Plus, it was getting close to sunset and they did not want to risk Dorner sneaking away in darkness. I can make all kinds of excuses for killing someone in the name of expediency. However, I won't get away with it. If I'm not killed by responding police, I'll have my day in court. This does not apply so much to police as it does citizens. THAT is the whole point of all of this. Equal justice under the law.... We can ignore it, sure. We can continue to make excuses for behavior that is not reflective of our long held values of justice, equality, etc.... but at some point there will be a catalyst for riots. Look at the comments section of most news sites... A lot of people are of the opinion that there are a number of LEO operating above and beyond the law. While they don't condone Doners actions....they understand where he is coming from and are similarly frustrated by how engrained the corruption is. Chickens coming home to roost and what not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #55 February 13, 2013 QuoteThe way the fire was reported, one would think the police intentionally set the fire. They did most certainly set the fire intentionally. The "Pushing the suspect back into the house bit was too much as well, what's that about? I read elsewhere after the smoke bomb was thrown into the cabin(s) they took a front end loader and pushed the walls in to facilitate the burning of the cabin, they also said on the news they wanted an end to the fracus before nightfall.-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #56 February 13, 2013 . The "Pushing the suspect back into the house bit was too much as well, what's that about? --------------------------------------------------------------- I was wondering the same thing?? Is that standard procedure? I would think getting the perp out of the house is the goal.You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #57 February 13, 2013 That is if they had any inclination of taking him in alive. They executed Charles. End of deal. (Not that I care)-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #58 February 13, 2013 Quote. The "Pushing the suspect back into the house bit was too much as well, what's that about? --------------------------------------------------------------- I was wondering the same thing?? Is that standard procedure? I would think getting the perp out of the house is the goal. I understood that to mean that there was a firefight at the rear of the home when he tried to escape out of the back and he was "pushed back" with returning fire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #59 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuote. The "Pushing the suspect back into the house bit was too much as well, what's that about? --------------------------------------------------------------- I was wondering the same thing?? Is that standard procedure? I would think getting the perp out of the house is the goal. I understood that to mean that there was a firefight at the rear of the home when he tried to escape out of the back and he was "pushed back" with returning fire. Exactly. The conspiratorial rhetoric is really thick in here today. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #60 February 13, 2013 Quote 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? Yep. Wait him out. What if he escaped? That’s why there’s a perimeter. A cabin in the woods at night? That’s why the police have IR equipment and he’d be easy to spot. How about putting out trip flares around the place – can be done. Or bright bright lights. What if he tunneled out? Fire hoses directing a few hundred gallons per minute to the inside of the cabin would not only reveal the presence of a tunnel (“where’d this spring come from?”) but would also make the tunnel unusable due to flooding. (Sure, some people would decry police using fire hoses on a black man as symbolic but there’s a tactical reason for doing it) Also note that if one is worried about mines and IEDs that “burn the place down” is a helluva way to expose everyone within a half mile of the place to significant risk of injury and death. Indeed, if he had a massive store of ammo in the place then fire would result in a massive store of ammo cooking off. A couple of hundred .50 cal rounds would create a danger for miles and just taking cover ain’t gonna do it. Smaller caliber rounds are also a pretty major threat. I should also point out that about a decade ago Big Bear had a massive forest fire. Then while snow was still on the ground a proscribed burn went out of control. A fire like that in a mountainous forested region can jack you up. There are ways besides firebombing. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #61 February 13, 2013 Careful, boy. You're easing into middle age - gonna tear a rotator cuff stre-e-e-tching like that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #62 February 13, 2013 Quote Quote Quote . The "Pushing the suspect back into the house bit was too much as well, what's that about? --------------------------------------------------------------- I was wondering the same thing?? Is that standard procedure? I would think getting the perp out of the house is the goal. I understood that to mean that there was a firefight at the rear of the home when he tried to escape out of the back and he was "pushed back" with returning fire. Exactly. The conspiratorial rhetoric is really thick in here today. wow that's funny I misunderstood the lingo and now I need a tin foil hat You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #63 February 13, 2013 Hey - you asked the question, "what would you have proposed?" I answered it. Opposite of fire. Use water. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #64 February 13, 2013 Fruitloop good riddance.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #65 February 13, 2013 QuoteHey - you asked the question, "what would you have proposed?" I answered it. Opposite of fire. Use water. Why water? Why not beer? Fill a tanker with brewskie, hose it in there, get him drunk, he falls asleep, game over. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #66 February 13, 2013 QuoteQuoteHmmm...Waco redux. And you really think that just by saying "Waco", like it's some kind of Battle Cry Of The Free Man, that that really makes it an apt comparison? It doesn't. He didn't just murder "combatants", he deliberately targeted and murdered 2 total civilians. My only regret is that he probably was able to euthanize himself with a shot to the head before the flames of Hell consumed him. I can't say I disagree.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #67 February 13, 2013 You consider our constitution a conspiracy? Cause those cops just shit on it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #68 February 13, 2013 If it's Coors or Budweiser or Miller that's fine. Other than that it's a waste of good beer My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
regulator 0 #69 February 13, 2013 Here is a video of part of the firefight. Just in case no one else posted it on here. http://www.nowthisnews.com/news/shocking-footage-of-dorner-firefight/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #70 February 13, 2013 QuoteYou consider our constitution a conspiracy? QuoteCause those cops just shit on it. I'm open minded. How so? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #71 February 13, 2013 Clear violation of his miranda rights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 42 #72 February 13, 2013 well first off I am not really sure he's dead... they'll probably find the bodies of two older, un-armed hispanic women in that cabin. But what I find amazing is the hue and cry over the US gov't killing Americans working with terrorists overseas when it appears that Dorner was executed by his gov't too. All the blather about the American overseas not getting due process. Granted I know fuck all compared to many about a lot of things, but it appears to me that someone decided Dorner wasn't going to be seen by a judge and jury either. edit to add: not a response top any one comment on here... just a general comment "Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #73 February 13, 2013 Looks to me like they tried other means and methods before the end of it: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/dorner-manhunt-highly-incendiary-hot-gas-used-on-cabin.html QuoteLaw enforcement sources said the officers got into several gun battles with Dorner during a nearly four-hour siege at the cabin in the Big Bear area. Hoping to end the standoff, law enforcement authorities first lobbed "traditional" tear gas into the cabin. When that did not work, they opted to use CS gas canisters, which are known in law enforcement parlance as incendiary tear gas. These canisters have significantly more chance of starting a fire. This gas can cause humans to have burning eyes and start to feel as if they are being starved for oxygen. It is often used to drive barricaded individuals out. Just before 5 p.m. [roughly an hour before nightfall], authorities smashed the cabin's windows, pumped in tear gas and called for the suspect to surrender, officials said. They got no response. Then, using a demolition vehicle, they tore down the cabin's walls one by one. When they reached the last wall, they heard a gunshot. Then the cabin burst into flames, officials said. Yes, I know the info is supplied by the police; but I'm not really in the mood to entertain consipracy thinking today. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #74 February 13, 2013 Quoteit appears that Dorner was executed by his gov't too. All the blather about the American overseas not getting due process. Granted I know fuck all compared to many about a lot of things, but it appears to me that someone decided Dorner wasn't going to be seen by a judge and jury either. I'm surprised you'd take this tack. Have you read the entire thread? In summary, sometimes a suspect leaves no further practical choice than deadly force. I've practiced quite a bit of criminal defense and constitutional law, so believe me, I'm quite sensitive to "due process" and "rule of law" issues. Also please read my most recent post above re: the cops' attempts to gas him out, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 42 #75 February 13, 2013 Quote Quote it appears that Dorner was executed by his gov't too. All the blather about the American overseas not getting due process. Granted I know fuck all compared to many about a lot of things, but it appears to me that someone decided Dorner wasn't going to be seen by a judge and jury either. I'm surprised you'd take this tack. Have you read the entire thread? In summary, sometimes a suspect leaves no further practical choice than deadly force. I've done a tone of criminal defense, so believe me, I'm quite sensitive to "due process" and "rule of law" issues. Also please read my most recent post above re: the cops' attempts to gas him out, etc. Yup I've read the thread and I've read some of the news reports, and like most new commentary... its all someone's personal opinion, I have formed my own "Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
