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 sheriffs 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
They got trigger happy and shot innocent people because they had become scared of their own shadow? I’m sorry, I hadn’t heard that part of the story. Yikes. Doesn’t make these police look very brave or professional, rather makes them look more like homicidal maniacs.
Perfectly worded
Like you are doing now?
Those officers involved in the shooting need to be held responsible. No question there, but it was Dorner who was ultimately responsible for his own death in the end. I will also add that the police chief should be fired for agreeing to reopen Dorner’s case file. Terrorists should not be appeased.
Yes, I suppose so. So was it wrong to use incendiary devices in this situation?
Hell, you don't even have to sneeze... remember that woodcarver in Oregon (IIRC)?
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/No-charges-in-woodcarver-shooting-by-Seattle-1016227.php
Yeah... I remember.
Obviously the same that allow the police to do the same in their duties.
It is the nature of authority that the one being sent is under the authority of those sending them.
So then it matters not if it is "people -> police" or "people -> government -> police" the people are of greater authority than the police.
Unless you wish to assert that the government exists separately and independently of the will of the people.
I know of police departments I absolutely trust (Fargo, ND) and ones that I absolutely distrust (Medford, OR). I know of departments where I trust the beat cops and not the leadership (Seattle, WA).
So, it’s a mixed bag out there. I pay close attention to the quality of the policing I see.
I want to see bad police departments like Medford held to account. That one has decided that they are going to be the baddest gang in town. They just happen to drive in fancier cars and operate under the color of authority. I view them as just as dangerous as the local Hispanic Gangs. They scare the crap out of me.
I wish the good beat cops in Seattle had worthy leadership. Those are some great guys lead by some of the biggest weenies in the world. I watched the WTO Riots unfold below my office. I talked to lots of the cops. They’re great guys. But the leadership left the perps. to occupy vacant buildings, and never allowed them to be arrested.
Fargo is interesting. When I was there, it was lead by “The Gay Mafia”, which is to say, it had a bunch of homosexuals on the force (including the Chief), and everyone knew it. They were by-the-book, completely reasonable, nice, effective police. Everyone thought they were spectacularly good at their jobs.
LAPD and other departments in this case did not seem to acquit themselves professionally, in my opinion (shooting at random trucks, etc.) I do not like the precedence set by burning down a cabin in what appears at first glance to be an extra-judicial murder. I hope there is a solid investigation so that rogue cops who fail to follow appropriate procedure are drummed out.
The unquestioning support of the police here is disappointing. Oughtn’t we expect a thorough review of this rather suspect death at the hands of the police? Lots of folks just want to declare the bad guy bad, and worthy of street justice.
I’m more in favor of, “Attempt to capture him using all the tools at your disposal,” then let Due Process take care of the rest. If in that attempt he leaves you no option but to shoot him, then shoot. I listen to the tapes, and I do not hear any reasonable attempt. They wanted to kill him. That’s what my ears hear.
That puts those cops at the level of the Medford police in my book. Not trustworthy until proven otherwise.
The beat cops in Seattle? You've got to be kidding.
Well, that depends; just because he's a uniformed officer doesn't mean he's a good-guy.
Do you remember the Indian woodcarver who was shot and killed by a police officer (OR or WA, I don't remember exactly) a while back? The guy just walked past the car, the officer got out ran around the front, and killed him... given that situation, would it be murder for an armed citizen to pull out his weapon and kill the police officer? After all, he'd just seen the officer mow down some guy who was minding his own business.
Yes. Because the presumption would be that the officer recognized a dangerous subject, one who was known to pose an immediate threat to all and sundry.
And that officer should be subject to immediate disarming and detention and suspension pending investigation.
And he had better have a VERY good reason for shooting first without any attempt to resolve the situation less aggressively, like he physically saw that the guy was wearing a bomb vest or something else equally clear.
I’ve met several, had discussions with them, watched them operate on the streets for 16 years (1984 - 2001.) Those guys at that time always did the right thing when I watched; except once.
Perhaps the department has changed since then. Given the limp-d**k leadership, it may be that the good ones left.
I don't see why cops have incendiary devices. What would happen in a hostage situation? I'm pretty sure there are tear gas canisters that don't start fires.
What was wrong with waiting him out or sending in a robot? What was the big rush to kill this guy?
The people grant the police power to enforce the laws, solve crimes and apprehend those accused of criminal activity. If during an apprehension they are fired upon they are not restrained from using deadly force.
Do you believe Dorner asked the 34 year old officer, father of two young girls, prior to killing him?
Do you remember the Indian woodcarver
Yes, are you claiming he gave Dorner permission to go on a killing spree?
How does "The people grant the police power to enforce the laws, solve crimes and apprehend those accused of criminal activity. If during an apprehension they are fired upon they are not restrained from using deadly force." fit into that?
You admit that the citizen is the commissioning authority for institution of the police, but you respond with something about being fired upon that is, quite frankly, irrelevant to the question or the answer. (Relevant to the threads other posts, perhaps, not relevant here.)
Seattle has Ben paying out big money on lots of civil rights claims over the past decade or so.
A Black Officer in Seattle told me he was avoiding arresting people if he possibly could because the paperwork surrounding the alleged perp’s race and the officer’s thoughts about the perp’s race were the primary concern of the Department.
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.