[txleapd]

Originally Posted by G19G20

That's all great and whatnot but whenever it becomes acceptable to burn houses with people inside (see: Waco) because they are an alleged and perceived threat, we have crossed the rubicon as a society that believes in the rule of law and have moved into Judge Dredd territory.

Im sorry but if you joined the police force and suddenly find yourself in a situation "too dangerous" to follow the rule book (you did say such things aren't policy) in ending the standoff with a suspect then you probably shouldn't be police. Plus there's a prohibition against something called "cruel and unusual punishment". Burning someone alive is what radical muslims do. Are you ok with doing what they do to address a problem?

Legally speaking It doesn't really matter if the fire started because cops pumped CS canisters and flashbangs in the house, or if they doused it in gas and lit a match themselves.

He murdered at least 5 people. The cops had been in a sustained gunfight with him, he was reasonably believed to be in possession of a .50 cal rifle, and was a continuing threat.

Deadly force is deadly force. If its authorized, it doesn't matter if you use a hammer, a handgun, or a house fire.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[lawman800]

Originally Posted by txleapd

Legally speaking It doesn't really matter if the fire started because cops pumped CS canisters and flashbangs in the house, or if they doused it in gas and lit a match themselves.

He murdered at least 5 people. The cops had been in a sustained gunfight with him, he was reasonably believed to be in possession of a .50 cal rifle, and was a continuing threat.

Deadly force is deadly force. If its authorized, it doesn't matter if you use a hammer, a handgun, or a house fire.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

I remember this from the academy when the instructor was talking about using deadly force and he gave a scenario where we were justified in shooting the guy. The whole class agreed that we could use our sidearms in that situation.

Then he goes, how about your gun jams or whatever, and you take out your folding knife and stab the guy a few times? Some people were hesitant and said probably not. The instructor said why not? If you are authorized for deadly force, it doesn't matter what deadly force you use.

Deadly force is deadly force. Might not be pretty and might not be what you think or what most people find acceptable, but it doesn't matter under the law. There's nothing that says you have to use one type of deadly force over another if it is called for.

[spcwes]

Yea one of the classes I was a part of I asked the class when you see an officer that is pinned down in a gun fight and the suspect is in front of you with his back turned as you pull in with your patrol vehicle what is the best course of action? Most responded to stop, get out and engage with the firearm but one who is now a patrolman with my agency said..hmmm I would run him over with my car!

I had a smile from ear to ear.

[RyanNREMTP]

Fox News is reporting that there was a charred body in the cabin along with a wallet with the murderer's ID in it. Still like everyone else no rest until it's confirmed that the murderer is dead.

[LEOson]

Originally Posted by G19G20

Scanner recording here, clearly showing the cops intentionally started the fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCdqy...ayer_embedded#!

Regardless of what you feel about Dorner, we can not allow the rule of law to be pushed aside whenever it is expedient, particularly when that power is in the hands of the gov't. That's how this country got into the mess it's in now.

All I hear in that clip is them talking about deploying burners, which has already been stated is CS. So no I don't believe they intentionally set the house on fire.

[TBO]

damnant quod non intellegunt

[Mayhem like Me]

Originally Posted by LEOson

All I hear in that clip is them talking about deploying burners, which has already been stated is CS. So no I don't believe they intentionally set the house on fire.

Barricaded gunman 101, after it has been confirmed no hostages, surrender order, Burning Cs/Cn depending on preference.

This is the concept simplified for the simple.

[spcwes]

Originally Posted by TBO

damnant quod non intellegunt

Even if they did the ones doing so here would not stop.

[ICARRY2]

Originally Posted by G19G20

That's all great and whatnot but whenever it becomes acceptable to burn houses with people inside (see: Waco) because they are an alleged and perceived threat, we have crossed the rubicon as a society that believes in the rule of law and have moved into Judge Dredd territory.

Im sorry but if you joined the police force and suddenly find yourself in a situation "too dangerous" to follow the rule book (you did say such things aren't policy) in ending the standoff with a suspect then you probably shouldn't be police. Plus there's a prohibition against something called "cruel and unusual punishment". Burning someone alive is what radical muslims do. Are you ok with doing what they do to address a problem?

I'm not a leo, but Dorner was not an alleged or perceived threat. He was an imminent threat. A threat where the actions of the police were absolutely 100% justified.

[TBO]

The ignore button can save you from seeing excrement, unless someone quotes it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 2

[RWBlue]

Originally Posted by TBO

damnant quod non intellegunt

I am talking process and others are talking emotion.

It is the reason I am constantly in the middle on GT. The cop haters think the cops are always wrong. The cop lovers always think the cops are right.

I believe in that the system works most of the time, WHEN the system is used.

[TBO]

Originally Posted by RWBlue

I am talking process and others are talking emotion.

It is the reason I am constantly in the middle on GT. The cop haters think the cops are always wrong. The cop lovers always think the cops are right.

I believe in that the system works most of the time, WHEN the system is used.

Do you have relevant real world experience/training/knowledge?


Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 2

[RussP]

Originally Posted by RWBlue

It is the reason I am constantly in the middle on GT. The cop haters think the cops are always wrong. The cop lovers always think the cops are right.

What about those in and around law enforcement who are slow to condemn until all facts are discovered and investigated? Where do they fall into the order?

[indigent]

Originally Posted by RWBlue

I am talking process and others are talking emotion.

It is the reason I am constantly in the middle on GT. The cop haters think the cops are always wrong. The cop lovers always think the cops are right.

I believe in that the system works most of the time, WHEN the system is used.

What system are you speaking of.....

[Marlowe]

Seems pretty likely to me that, do to the threat presented by Dorner (a threat established by his behavior last week and yesterday), the San Bernardino SWAT team attempted to induce his surrender with CS gas.

No drones.

No napalm.

CS gas. A long accepted tool in the tactical toolbox.

They pulled off walls to expose him, and to reduce the risk to their deputies.

A shot was heard. Quite possibly Dorner shot himself.

A fire began.

Why?

No one knows yet, for certain. Arson investigators will determine the cause and origin of the fire. Maybe it was inadvertently due to the CS deployment, or maybe Dorner somehow caused it.

In any event, it seems to me, based on the initial reporting, that LE was trying to induce surrender, while mitigating the risk to their deputies and did not use direct lethal force on Dorner...meaning, no one intentionally shot him down, nor directly engaged him.

Yet, predictably, the forever Righteously Indignant types here, always in search of an example of government over-reaching, want to harp on this situation.

Ever hear of the boy who cried wolf? Harping on situations like this prematurely---before the logical investigations are completed and the facts known---and you lose all credibility.

Who will listen when you are complaining of real government over-reaching if you exhaust your credibility with knee jerk and ill informed accusations such as in this thread?

[indigent]

Originally Posted by Marlowe

A fire began.

Why?

Oh that's easy...... I think this is how the hosemonkeys explain it now

[volsbear]

The fire started because police tossed in burners. There's audio of it on youtube. One cop is saying "burn mother*******"

Somebody's writing a check for that stupid comment.

[Cav]

So can the home owners file arson charges? I mean someone burned everything they owned...

[jdavionic]

Odd...where I live, Police Scanners are useless. They made changes last year and I believe it's all encrypted. Just seems odd that CA would be further behind the times.

Not questioning the accuracy of the audio files, etc. Just a curious observation.

[knotquiteawake]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

Odd...where I live, Police Scanners are useless. They made changes last year and I believe it's all encrypted. Just seems odd that CA would be further behind the times.

Not questioning the accuracy of the audio files, etc. Just a curious observation.

Some areas are and some aren't. The LAPD has digital encrypted radios so even the $$$$ digital scanners are useless. Other surrounding agencies have not switched over to digital, its really really expensive. Range is better on some of the old systems too which is better for the rural areas like Big Bear.

[volsbear]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

Odd...where I live, Police Scanners are useless. They made changes last year and I believe it's all encrypted. Just seems odd that CA would be further behind the times.

Not questioning the accuracy of the audio files, etc. Just a curious observation.

You can get scanners that will pick up trunking radio systems.

[indigent]

Originally Posted by Cav

So can the home owners file arson charges? I mean someone burned everything they owned...

I see what you did there.

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by RWBlue

I am talking process and others are talking emotion.

It is the reason I am constantly in the middle on GT. The cop haters think the cops are always wrong. The cop lovers always think the cops are right.

I believe in that the system works most of the time, WHEN the system is used.

As RussP said, some us reserve judgement until the facts are assembled. Just like Sandy Hook. In any incident, there's a lot of emotion, rush to judgement, errors in reporting, etc.

I don't think any of us sitting at a computer can determine whether the police took actions that were appropriate or not.

Based on the facts so far, I think I'd be roasting hot dogs over his burning corpse if I was the father of the daughter that he murdered and later taunted the father. The man was a sick bastard. I wouldn't condone the actions of the cops if they intentionally prevented him from surrendering and killed him. However I won't mourn his loss either.

Let's see the facts. For example, there are reports that he tried to leave and "was pushed back into the cabin". Did that really happen? What means were used to "push him back inside"? Was he armed and trying to leave...then LE shot at him & forced him back inside? Who knows.

Let's be mindful of one thing. The cops didn't cause this whole scene. They were hunting this man for a reason. His actions put himself in a situation where he inevitably lost his life (assuming he was the charred corpse that they found).

[volsbear]

But not for the actions of Dorner, Dorner would still be alive.

[Seriously?]

I notice the department re-opened his case, but are they just going to investigate themselves again?

So......coverup #2 and all forgotten?