Should an armed drone be dispatched to kill Christopher Dorner?

The Manchester Guardian ^ | February 11, 2013 | Glenn Greenwald

[2ndDivisionVet]

Why should the lives of law enforcement agents be risked to apprehend this suspected domestic terrorist?

A major manhunt has been underway in the Los Angeles area for Chris Dorner, the former LAPD officer, Navy reservist, and trained marksman who is the prime suspect in the murder of three people, including the daughter of an LAPD captain (who previously represented him in a disciplinary proceeding) and her fiance. A lengthy Facebook message attributed to Dorner vows that he will continue to kill not only members of the LAPD but also their children and spouses until he receives a public apology for what he believes was his unfair firing:

"This will be a war of attrition . . . . I will utilize OSINT to discover your residences, spouses workplaces, and children's schools. IMINT to coordinate and plan attacks on your fixed locations. . . . HUMINT will be utilized to collect personal schedules of targets. I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own, I'm terminating yours. . . . I know your significant others routine, your children's best friends and recess. I know Your Sancha's gym hours and routine. I assure you that the casualty rate will be high."

Surveillance drones are now being used to try to locate him. LAPD are so apprehensive that they have already mistakenly shot at innocent people when they saw vehicles resembling the one they thought belonged to Dorner. Authorities suspect he's hiding in "the icy wilderness" of Big Bear east of Los Angeles which, reported AP, is "filled with thick forests and jagged peaks, that creates peril as much for Dorner as the officers hunting him."

Here's my question: if the surveillance drones detect his location, should the lives of law enforcement agents be risked, along with other civilians...

[montag813]

An LAPD drone? Perhaps they will get him - after killing 20 innocent civilians.

[jwalsh07]

Sure, I’ve been waiting 61 years for the US to become a certified police state.

[jmcenanly]

From the way the LAPD has been operating, they will go after everyone named ‘Dorner’ in the LA phone book.

[heartwood]

You can’t put your hands in the air and surrender to a drone, can you?

Nope. Sentenced, sealed, delivered.

I hope he froze to death in the snow, but we can’t send drones after people.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Obama should do it with his skeet gun!

[Seizethecarp]

This is a case of police hysteria, but think back to the DC sniper when ALL citizens, young and old and of all races were at risk. My sister used to frequent the Home Depot where a suburban woman got nailed.

The hysteria was so deep that I am sure that if killer drones had been available the public would have demanded that they be used to preemptively nail the DC sniper.

These days if there were to be another such homicidal maniac on the loose and armed drones WEREN’T used to go after him, there would be hell to pay for public officials now that the public has been extensively educated on the rationale for using them against foreign terrorists.

Many in congress have already demanded to know why killer drones weren’t over the mission in Libya and only an impotent unarmed drone was there.

IMO drones are like guns. They can be used to protect the weak and innocent or to kill the weak and innocent. Drones are here now and they aren’t going away.

In the same way that many in the public are asking why the Sandy Hook children weren’t protected with good guys with guns and many US schools are protected by officers with guns, after a few more episodes like this LAPD episode or the DC sniper, the public will soon conclude that they WANT to be protected by armed drones. Sad, but to be expected.