Posted on 02/14/2013 6:21:43 AM PST by KeyLargo
Edited on 02/14/2013 9:25:10 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Police in Christopher Dorner standoff launched incendiary tear gas into cabin
By CHUCK BENNETT and DAVID K. LI From Post Wires Last Updated: 6:14 AM, February 14, 2013
Murderous ex-cop Christopher Jordan Dorner wanted to go out in a blaze of glory — and the sheriff’s deputies who surrounded his California mountain hideout provided the flames.
The San Bernardino County cops torched the wooden cabin with highly flammable “incendiary tear gas” as Dorner took refuge Tuesday, apparently burning him to a crisp.
“Burn this mf--er!” one officer shouted as they had Dorner — who had earlier killed a deputy and seriously wounded another — pinned down in the cabin, according to police radio transmissions.
Amid sounds of gunfire, voices can be head shouting, “Burn it down!” and “Shoot the gas!”
Excerpt, read more at nypost
It provides an example of a government gone wild, that doesn't think twice about blackmailing citizens, then using heavy handed tactics to impose their will.
Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been handled much differently.
Presumably, you can find the opposite in the Constitution, too?
We live in a fast food, American idol, internet speed and ADD culture. They didn't have hours and hours to wait this out. The viewer's attention span wouldn't last that long and something had to be done! kingobama was scheduled to go on within the hour. Speed was of the essence. Sheesh!
It was a question to which I thought you would answer. I repeat, "What rights of citizenship allow a person to shoot at, wound and kill police officers?"
That pretty much nails it. Along with the fact those LEOs were so set on vengeance they were blind to any other solution or decorum.
That question doesn’t even deserve an answer.
Would you let them lead you to a gas chamber? Think about it. It doesn't apply to Dorner, but the right to self defense is not stopped by a badge.
So what? This is an exigent circumstance. Targeting US citizens for assassination who are wanted for nothing and taking down a murdering prick holding out in a cabin are two entirely different things.
Please explain that you aren't claiming Dorner was acting in self defense? This thread is all about Dorner, fugitve/suspected murderer who had ample time over 6 days to surrender peacefully for due process and he refused.
Because it would expose you for what you are.
NO, because it was a really amateurish and juvenile question.
Then it was right on target, wasn't it?
Of course they were trying to kill the son of a bitch.
Miltie, I had you figured for one who hates the cops.
Maybe I am mistaken in that.
At the very least it seems you are chiming in with the habitual cop-haters. Perhaps I am wrong about that too.
I’m in a bit of a different situation. I divide my time between three rural states along the Canadian border, and in each of those states I’ve been treated almost exclusively in a fair and even generous manner by state & local cops and especially by county sheriff’s departments.
I just don’t have a beef with the law enforcement officers (most of them anyway) that I’ve encountered.
At the same time, if someone committed the crimes against me that this guy did, I would want to go after him. Maybe that wouldn’t be possible—I wouldn’t hurt innocent people in order to get to him, and maybe I wouldn’t want to spend the rest of my life in prison either.
But if he were in the next house, and I knew he was there and I was first on the scene-—and let’s say he shot at me-—I would do everything and anything to remove him from the earth.
Absolutely I would. As I see it “society’s protection” is nowadays all too often offered TO the perps, not those they offend against.
Yes, those people were indeed murdered.
I note that you deliberately misquoted my question in an attempt to distract from the unpleasant truth you wish to avoid.
I asked:
What financial threshold justifies murder under the color of authority?
In addition the the murders you correctly noted, a police officer's daughter, her fiancé, and uniformed police officers, there were three attempted murders under color of authority, and one actual murder under color of authority.
The surfer dude and the newspaper delivery chicks were not, and had not ever shot at police, their crime was to look nothing whatsoever like the suspect, and be driving pickup trucks, like the suspect.
They were targeted for what, had the triggers been pulled by anyone not in the blue uniform club, would have unquestionably and unhesitatingly been called gang violence at the very best and attempted murder by all but the most charitable of bleeding heart liberals.
The excuse? It was "a tragic misinterpretation" by officers working under "incredible tension," according to LAPD Chief Charlie Beck.
Sorry, Charlie, it is attempted murder to shoot dozens of rounds at unarmed civilians from behind, with no warning simply because, like half a million or so other Angelenos, they drive a pickup truck.
As to Dorner? The only nice thing I can say is they murdered their intended target, and apparently didn't actually succeed in killing anyone else.
Did he deserve to die? Yes, I'd have to say he did.
But he didn't deserve to be murdered.
I say murdered based on the actual police scanner tapes that indicate he was burned alive as pre-planned. The SWAT team had decided in advance before they had assessed the situation that they would deploy "burners" and incinerate him in situ as their first plan of action upon arriving on scene.
That resistance had ceased, that physical inspection of the interior revealed blood splatter, a strong indication that the suspect, and his legal status at that point is just that, a suspect, not a convict, had been rendered incapable of active resistance. was irreverent. They had decided to burn him alive, and that is precisely what they set about to do.
First, they made sure that there would be no troublesome video record of their actions by chasing the media helicopters 5 miles away.
To me, that indicates either an attempt to keep them safe, or an attempt to aid in the coverup. And I don't think the news choppers were at any realistic risk.
They have other non-incendiary tear gas delivery systems. They maliciously chose to use infernal devices on an old wooden structure.
In order to insure that there was no possibility of a failure to ignite, they used not one, not two, nor even three or five, they pumped SEVEN "burners" into this small building.
The intent was unquestionably not to effect an arrest, but to kill. Premeditated death with only the skinniest of skinny fig-leafs of "tear gas".
Then they blandly announced that they didn't mean to burn the building down, no really we didn't, honest!
Let me be perfectly clear, because I know you have comprehension problems, bless your heart, Alaska Wolf, in my opinion, Dorner was murdered with malice aforethought, by uniformed members of the police department, with once again in my opinion, full approval of their superior officers. It was a deliberate preplanned action designed to insure that he died on scene.
Whether this was because the police were "working under incredible tension", or because they were afraid of having him expose the culture of the LAPD from the witness stand, or simply a sense of vengeance we'll never know.
Let me be perfectly clear again, I firmly believe that Dorner was at the very best a dangerous and murderous whacko, I firmly believe that in a just legal system, he would either by tried, convicted and sentenced to death, or spend the rest of his miserable existence in a "home" for the criminally insane.
I also believe that those people who best know our legal system, the very ones at the point of the spear, those mostly fine men and women in blue uniforms do not believe that justice can be served in a court of law, but must be done in the street at the point of a gun or by immolation.
That worries me.
It should worry you or anyone else who values civil process.
What part of “It doesn’t apply to Dorner” did you fail to understand?
Then you realize you just called the cops murderers, right? I mean, you said all things were equal, and that the suspect was trying to commit murder, and that the cops were trying to commit murder right back.
FWIW, that's against the law on both sides. Except for one thing, Studly - IF it was Dorner in there, and IF Dorner killed those other people, then that's all the people who Dorner murdered.
But what does history tell us about cops who get to toss the law aside and go on killing rampages? How many people end up being killed then? Have you read any history? Maybe you should. Because we live in a nation of laws, and cops who disregard the law to kill people are called criminals. You know, like the cops who blew a hundred rounds through the back of that pickup truck with two women in it, or the cop who fired three rounds into the headspace of the pickup truck he rammed - both incidents done while the same police force was looking for Dorner.
That this murderous fiasco is being supported by people posting on Free Republic - the SAME Free Republic that squawks every single day about the threat of gun confiscation and protection for the rule of law - is both astonishing and revolting.
Here's a quote to ponder while you're licking the jackboots, from "A Man for All Seasons":
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
They were attempting to kill the SOB by firing hundreds of rounds at him and the SOB was firing back and had already ended one persons life out front.
They were trying to kill him real dead.
Is this not professional?
Wait a minute.
So if I just shot and killed some innocent people and then ya chased me to a house where I shot your brother to death, and I was now trying to shoot you to death, what would you do slick?
What do you think this is? Ya think this is all some funny joke?
Ya watch your brother vomiting up blood while choking on his last breath, what are you going to do slick?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.