So this is all over the news right now so I figured it would be a good discussion point. Admittedly, I haven't followed this as closely as I probably should because I mainly get my news from Bloomberg TV. With that said, I didn't realize burning houses down, ala Branch Davidian style, was standard police tactics.
Since when did police go from humble civil servants to a paramilitary force doing pretty much whatever they want. And one must wonder how many violations of justice occur when the cameras are off.
This also ties into a couple other important recent topics, such as video taping police and gun control. It seems like whenever someone video tapes a cop they get arrested, which is concerning since the police and cities seem to love rolling out more and more surveillance equipment. Also, gun control arguments are usually supported by police and by supporters who insist that it is the polices job to protect you.
When you have a group of people who are paid to protect and serve, who basically forbid citizens to tape them and who act outside the law when one of theirs is harmed, I fail to see how they are protecting or serving anyone but themselves. Furthermore, I find it concerning how cops have gone from guys walking the beat to pretty much a paramilitary force.
Since the Department of Homeland Security was created. Police Departments get tons of funding from DHS to buy up all sorts of insane weaponry and related paraphernalia. It's completely insane.
Oh I agree. Backdoor to removing Posse Comitatus. Government should fear its citizens, not the other way around.
See people. This is what happens when government gets big. It gets entrenched and wants to protect itself.
you guys are supposed to be fighting not getting along :)
Agree big time in this case. I think much of this also applies to the tactics used to shut down Occupy Wall Street. However you feel about OWS, the fact that a coordinated strike took place to forcefully end the "occupations" should bother you.
Btw, some of the weapons that the forces are buying are simply insane. Check this out:
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2012/12/2012122…
Don't shit on the source, read it. Scary shit.
HA! You didn't even cite me on that. Funny story, about a year ago I said that exact phrase in a class and the prof went absolutely nuts. Saying that I was inciting violence against govt officials ala Gabby Giffords style. Pretty much told him to shove it and that if he felt so safe living under lots of govt he should move to Cuba. Ended up getting a C+ in the class. Very worth it.
This is a fucking joke. If this guy had just murdered 4 people with no relation to the LAPD, there'd still be a standoff. Pieces of shit, the lot of them.
I thought he shot himself before it started?
I don't know. OWS protested for a long ass time. The police were pretty restrained. Yes, the cameras were on them and they probably would have been assholes had the cameras been gone, but they were largely peaceful.
And while I support the right to protest, I don't think people have the right to occupy public space. It is for everyones enjoyment and use, not just protesters. One could argue that setting up quasi-permanent encampments constitutes infringing on others equal right to enjoy the property.
NYPD and LAPD are the biggest gangs in America.
There, I said it.
TNA hacked TheKing's account!!!!
pm me his password
Apparently Dorner's mom was chilling at a Mexican restaurant watching the whole thing on TV:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/02/12/dorners-mom-spotted-drinking-…
In her defense, what the hell else are you gonna do?
Seriously guys? The guy kills 4 cops and we're gonna feel sorry for him because the cops wanted to flush him out by torching the house? I guess we should complain about UBL getting shot in the face multiple times instead of a more humane and accurate double tap? Dorner could have easily come out of the house and faced the music had he wanted to, but everyone knew how this was going to end and though we don't really know if he was burned alive or shot or what happened, it's safe to say if he was burned alive it's because he didn't want to choose to come out guns blazing which I would have expected actually happened. Cry about the cops being excessive all you want but I'll assume most of us still dial 911 when something bad happens. I don't doubt for a minute they are excessive in a lot of cases but that's a necessary evil given that when these guys put on their uniform, they're immediately a life-threatening force to lifetime criminals even if the cop doesn't know it.
Oh and give me a break with this everytime they put on the uniform nonsense. The vast majority of cops are bullys that are now bullys with a badge and bunch of buddies. Thats it. This isnt some noble calling to protect and serve, its an attempt to grab power by those that crave it.
You are making a completely over reactionary stereotype. I'm not saying that there's any sense of duty for many of these people. For many, it is just a job; yet it is a job that most people can't even comprehend. I don't think it can easily be said that cops are mostly bullies before they join, these effects manifests in the workplace. Also, it seems strange to me how police are vilified because of their brutality towards our own citizens, yet people in the military are usually held in high regards despite the atrocities that they commit to citizens of different countries.
When there is some unnecessary brutality in the military, it is categorized as being something outside of the individuals control due to being at war mentality and the "atmosphere", etc. The same standard is not held for police.
Don't get me wrong, I've had my fair share of run ins with police. This however has not led me to judge the individual person with prejudice just because they were a "bully".
I also think it varies drastically upon the location and settings that they operate in.
This is the kind of stuff that inevitably becomes the leftist public response to vilify the cops and martyr a killer, albeit a killer who I actually feel bad for.
You think the ulterior motive behind becoming a cop is to boss people around? Most people become cops because it's a pretty damn easy job to get without much of an education, it's a public service profession that at least sounds better than being the garbage collector, and 99% of the time you get to be pretty lazy most of the time. I agree it's not a noble calling and anyone who says they woke up one day and decided to become a cop to protect and service is full of shit... but your sweeping generalization of cops as power-hungry assholes not only has no backing behind it but has absolutely nothing to do with the uniform argument I made, so I guess that makes two of us working that cognitive dissonance angle.
And by the way I would never call 911, I can do a better job by myself, and I'm more than happy to shoot a home invader without a fair trial first. I still don't understand what more evidence you guys need that the dude clearly killed people, aside from the fact that it happened in front of many other people, that he continued shooting at people in multiple locations including the cabin that they decided to torch (not sure how this would have been interpreted as a bad idea... a megaphone screaming "Chris there's so many reasons to live!" may have been better you're suggesting?) and of course him bragging about it over and over in his little manifesto. And again, we don't know if he was burned alive yet, and my money would be on that not being the case.
This is a great article from Dealbreaker that sort of relates to this thread.
The comments are priceless too.
http://dealbreaker.com/2013/02/former-deutsche-bank-exec-and-lapd-not-y…
No one is crying about Dorner burning to death. People are crying about LAPD deciding when and when not to follow the law.
We all follow the law or no one follows it. Just because you have a badge doesn't mean you can burn people to death because you like it. They wouldn't have done it if this guy killed 4 civilians. They shouldn't have done it because he killed 4 cops.
Many of you guys are probably too young to remember this, but I suggest you read about Ruby Ridge from the early '90's and how police can overstep their boundaries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge
You've absolutely got to be kidding me. What more questions does one need to ask? Are you aware of the manifesto he wrote explaining that not only had he killed cops and their children/relatives already, but he had definitive plans to kill more and more until he got his revenge or was killed in the process? Are you honestly suggesting that this guy could have been innocent?
And to respond to an earlier comment, after listening to the audio there should be very little doubt that burning down the cabin was an intentional tactic by the police. Of course it's not standard operating procedure to do so, but I don't think the situation was a very standard procedure for them either... Exactly which part of this are we mourning about... the loss of the shitty cabin, the death of a mass murderer, or the greenhouse gases that attacked the ozone layer as the result of the fire? And the argument that they wouldn't have burned the cabin down to flush him out if his main targets weren't cops is so ass-backwards I can't even begin to describe it. If someone kills a bunch of a certain type of people then publicly decries that he intends to kill a bunch more of those people with no regard for anyone's safety including his own, I think it's safe to say the safest way to respond to the threat is to kill on sight if there's even the slightest amount of danger surrounding his capture. I don't know the individual political leanings of the WSO users in this thread but liberal, conservative, libertarian, or whatever, I have no clue how someone could have a problem with the way it was handled given the circumstances... unless your harmless grandma was killed in an unreasonably forcible cabin fire attack brought on by unruly authorities.
Edit: Lon Horiuchi is a badass.
I have no idea why people are surprised that I agree with TNA on this. I've never said anything in line with being ok with police forces acting like paramilitary groups. This is common sense.
Also, no one is defending Dorner. No one. The entire crux of everything I've said in here is that it's distressing how militarized the police have become in this country. It's also distressing how much tax payer money has been spent to arm them.
I think they're blown away that you guys agree on something. Either that or they don't understand that your political stances converge in a number of places.
He and I agree on things reasonably often, at least on our core views of humanity. Haha. It's just our solutions are often different.
I'd like to add a hypothesis that another issue with militarizing police forces also attracts the wrong types of people to police work. Rather than wanting to uphold the law and protect civilians, you get nuts that want to play with big guns and other macho toys.
I hate this kind of crap in the same way that I don't care for gun nuts. I don't have any issue with guns and think that "assault weapons" is more or less a smear term. But, I think that so much of what's wrong is the culture surrounding guns. The macho vigilante-wannabe crap that you hear whenever there's a debate about guns in America is simply ridiculous and makes the clowns that go to extremes to defend their matte-black AR-15s look like limp-dick idiots.
See, this is why civilians need assault rifles. To protect against a militarizing police force.
It's all about control, they don't give two shits about violence.
We could halve gun violence and deaths but legalizing drugs and helping inner city kids get an education and job. But instead we want to stop some hillbilly from owning a machine gun in the middle of nowhere with no gun violence.
I don't even want to blame politicians. It is retards who watch CNN and freak out whenever a random act occurs.
I've been reading WSO for about a year and posting for a few months. This is probably the first time that you've said something that I absolutely don't even remotely agree with. The guy was armed and extremely dangerous--he'd already killed at least 2 police officers at that point, 1 in a shootout a few hours prior. It was painfully obvious that he had no intention of surrendering peacefully. If you set the house on fire it gives him the opportunity to come out peacefully and to surrender, to come out guns a blazin' and to be gunned down, or to stay inside and suffocate. Instead of surrendering, he chose to suffocate. No one else's life was put into jeopardy as a result of the decision to burn the house.
I'm a libertarian leaning conservative, but it's positions like yours that will always keep me arms length from the libertarians.
Fair enough, but once you start denying liberty for "certain" people you ruin the concept of liberty. And lets be real here. This guy was burnt to death because he killed cops. If he killed 4 of us it would have been a long stand off and nothing would have happened.
Why is a cops life > my life ? It shouldn't be. Furthermore, the LAPD has had a horrible history of violating rights. They should have been extra precautions in this situation. They also have been shooting up any pickup truck that moves, which seems rash to me.
Denying liberty? If a guy points a gun at a police officer, he's lost his right to due process when he gets shot. The only thing that could have happened by not setting the place on fire was suicide or more dead cops if they had raided the building. They set the house on fire--he could have easily escaped and surrendered. He CHOSE to die. It's not like the LAPD dropped a missile on the house.
My personal opinion is that they decided that they're going to kill this guy, and we've basically seen a public execution sans trial. It totally seems like this guy was guilty, so I'm pretty sure he'd have been convicted, but cops are not judges. Also, the background noise of extremely corrupt abuse of power that this guy was reacting to (again: inappropriately) has now effectively been covered up in the media frenzy.
If you disagree, then ask yourself why the feds would reopen the termination file...
Seriously guys, WTF? Are you really making an argument that police used excessive force on an ex-military, ex-cop trained suspect who engaged police in a firefight where two cops were shot, one of which was killed? This is as close to a "stand your ground" argument as it gets.
According to the report, the fire was due to the use of tear gas, not some torch wielding paramilitary tactic.
It is distressing the lack of ability to understand the law. He was in a house, shooting. The police had him surrounded and were protected. Yes, if he was in the open and raised his gun they can shoot him. But burning down a house is not police protocol or accepted behavior.
The LAPD would not have burnt the house down if this guys wasn't a cop killer. The double standard is what is at issue.
I'm sorry, could you quote California law to me? Are you now a lawyer?
I don't know what your definition of protected is. Two deputies got shot. One was killed. I fail to see the supposed protection.
The police used smoke grenades. There was report Dorner also had smoke grenades. He was in a wooden cabin. Is a fire likely to occur as a result? Probably. It's not like police were throwing napalm or molotov cocktails.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/explore?tag=standoff
If they would have burnt the house down regardless it would have been wrong. And what about them shooting up the truck with the Mexican women in it?
Listen, I support burning down houses. But lets just do away with this facade called America and do it right. As long as we are going to believe in this country, the bill of rights and what our forefathers built then cops should be held accountable. They shouldn't be a quasi military force and they shouldn't be burning fucking houses down around people.
You can't selectively condemn brutality. You can't say violating the law is OK in certain circumstances and not in others. Either you uphold the law or you don't.
Pure conjecture. TNA is right, its fair to assume(which is simply what we're doing) that had ordinary civilians been killed other then cops or their family members, Dorner would have been captured alive. Again, we're all speculating here though, with all the info leaking out, it definitely appears that the LAPD had a 'get-him-at-all-costs' mentality.
Bill of Rights.
5th - 8th Amendment.
I am sorry, but you simply cannot see the forest from the trees. You are also missing the overriding point of this argument. No one gives a fuck about Dorner burning to death. What we are discussing is the double standard that police operate on.
But continue to argue a point no one is making and ignore the very important topic we truly are trying to discuss.
The 5th Amendment was NOT violated here! First of all, as a libertarian and allegedly a strict construtionist, the Bill of Rights/Constitution isn't incorporated. Last time I checked, the LAPD was NOT a federal law enforcement agency. But even if the US Constitution is incorporated, nobody's due process rights were violated here. He was armed and pointing guns at police officers, allegedly shooting out from the windows.
Your definition and reality's definition of "due process" are simply totally different.
LOL also realize that the president is black and there's probably an army of FBI crawling around in the background now, scouring this case for impropriety. If you're a good cop, you don't want to see this kind of thing because now the people you're supposed to protect turn against you. I'm hoping this was an accident...
http://jalopnik.com/5983152/lapd-to-women-sorry-for-shooting-you-heres-…
Yeah, cops were just doing there job. No excessive for here.
Yeah man. Burning down a house is SOP for the LAPD. How you cannot see that police acting with vigilante justice whenever one of their own gets hurt, while arresting people for video taping them, using excessive force, etc isn't an issue is beyond me.
Once again, you are trying to defend their actions because Dorner is a scumbag. I am criticizing their own going violations of civil rights and the dual standard that they police and enforce the law with.
You guys just done care because he is black....
There are a lot of conflicting reports about what happened. The LAPD is saying that they tried using CS gas (Which besides being an extreme irritant is also highly flammable) and that it was ignited by gunfire. If that is what happened, then that's ok. They didn't try to kill him, but an accidental fire occurred. If the LAPD actually did light the house on fire on purpose, then that's really screwed up and way out of line.
No accident, go back and listen to the audio tapes.
LAPD deliberately burned down that cabin. Frightening precedent
http://www.ibtimes.com/did-cops-set-christopher-dorner-cabin-fire-liste…
Also, reports said they found his ID or wallet near the body.. Are they fucking serious? His body got torches but some piece of plastic made it unscathed?
COME ON MANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Libertarians have always put rational policy and human life below abstract legal arguments, even when those legal arguments are clearly wrong, as is the case in question. That's how you could have otherwise intelligent people making the most inane argument about injustice, due process and police brutality.
Let me know how you feel when a cop decides to ignore your rights and fucks you up. I'll happily make an argument about how you don't know what the cop was thinking and that police are stressed and you will heal so it isn't a big deal.
Cops apprehend people. Judges find guilt. Until we have Judge Dread you cannot surround a guy and burn him to fucking death.
And you simply are missing the point. This isn't about Dorner. This is about the LAPD specifically and the militarized police in general deciding when they obey the law and when they do not. Police are LAW ENFORCEMENT individuals. They follow the law and make sure others follow it. They do not go rogue and use war like tactics on US soil.
I don't understand whats so inane about it or what is so foreign that you fail to grasp. Its a natural reaction to fight back against those who have hurt you or those close to you. Are you seriously saying that you don't believe that the cops in question, related or friendly to the deceased, didnt have that reaction? Due process is mostly what the cops are deciding now. How else do you explain shooting up random,trucks, attacking and tasering kids for throwing snowballs, or shouting "burn that motherfucker"?
How do you determine imminent danger? To me, even trying to apprehend a (in this case obvious, until proven otherwise) serial killer would probably make me feel that I am in imminent danger. I know the basic precepts of the arguement "Liberty for all or none", but how many of you have actually been a policeman or in a fire fight? My rationale is that, though they may have acted unjustly, it is far and away our ability to make any claims of judgement on their situation.
Also, citing past incidents does not justify anything pertaining to this one. Honestly, maybe some cops are power hungry; but I think that also it is a form of self preservation. They are probably scared shitless. When you have been in the force for awhile, you may over react to certain situations and they get blown out of proportion. No doubt that some of the incidents are malicious, but I'm sure it is hard for the police to not be somewhat cynical when five years ago you simply went to answer a domestic disturbance, only to have your partner blown away.
It just does not seem to be my place or anyone else's to judge a profession as dangerous as being in law enforcement by its outlier situations.
I'd be interested to hear more about why Dorner felt he was wronged in the first place. Not justifying his actions in the slightest, but for intents and purposes, he either was completely delusional or the LAPD fucked him over.
Nobody does something that drastic without having been actually fucked over. Seems like the guy was a little overboard with his reaction to the whole thing but clearly a man of principle that decided he'd been screwed and had a pretty defined way of getting what he considered revenge.
People decreeing him as a martyr doesnt help http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dorner-online-article-1.1263907
Surprised this thread hasnt been locked yet.
You can only push some people so far. I mean this dude went all falling down on shit.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106856/
This film is fucking awesome.
Los Angeles Paramilitary Department. The other thing that always shocks me about local law enforcement is the amazing amount of military equipment they have. Armored vehicles? Military style M16s? How the fuck that is allowed is beyond me. They are better equipped to kill than 90% of national armies on this earth.
Est doloremque non dolor quo. Et ut et autem. Excepturi nulla aut voluptatum ut quia. Quod nemo dolor nulla quia iure. Possimus et ipsum et neque voluptas ullam quia. Dolores laborum iusto perferendis quia cumque aut. Aliquid aperiam rem non ducimus. Quia at itaque sapiente qui asperiores fugiat.
Rerum laboriosam ipsa sunt consequatur quia. Nihil sint et odio aut non qui. Ullam qui voluptas reiciendis voluptatem. Et cupiditate reiciendis modi voluptatem. Iure est non ut eveniet ullam eius modi.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Debitis sint facere omnis suscipit at dolore vitae. Nostrum soluta a ut quae vel quas omnis.
Omnis facilis nemo consequuntur et adipisci omnis facilis. Nostrum eos et ut deserunt. Consequatur qui quia velit minus voluptatem voluptas et. Omnis occaecati iure eum quae quisquam. Culpa ut totam et velit dignissimos.
Asperiores voluptates laudantium deserunt quia. Est tempora repellat ratione provident. Qui optio quos et quasi. Enim aut quia laborum corrupti. Repudiandae assumenda id eum voluptatem. Delectus consequuntur placeat saepe inventore. Qui eligendi odio velit aliquid dolores est dignissimos. Praesentium nam nihil voluptatem consequatur.
Quasi consectetur iusto occaecati sapiente aut a et. Ea aut et quia eaque velit. Eaque et recusandae quae et voluptas maxime voluptatem. Iusto nostrum voluptatum corrupti fugit. Repudiandae voluptas temporibus animi est minus consequatur impedit. Dolores est et tempora iste deleniti id perferendis.