Ex-officer suspect in California cop killing

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by Badgered1

 

Dorner may very well have legitimate grievances against the LAPD, but the way he is going about seeking a redress of those grievances is completely wrong. I do not like the fact the restaurant I ate at the other day served cold food to me, but I cannot kill the waiter's family members because of it.

I'm not going to excuse his actions, but have YOU ever had your entire life stripped away? A meal is not even in the same universe as a life long career. Your analogy is irrelevant and self-serving.

I truly believe that by behaving in the manner he has (allegedly) -- he is no better than those he accuses. Having said that, I can put myself in this man's shoes and understand his frustration. Does that justify his actions? I do not believe so.

Growing up watching Star Trek (all seasons, all shows) I learned an important lesson: There is always another option.

While I disagree with is actions, I find logical fault with your argument.

Are you perhaps a lurking LEO? I find it odd that we always hear from LEO's in the multitude of "police brutality" threads on ATS; and yet these same members have not come forward with their opinions. If not, I apologize in advance.

Does anyone else find it odd that no former or current LEO forum members have stepped forward in this discussion topic? Why is that? Apparently that "blue line" is pretty thick. And I think that Dorner's "mission" is targeting that line.

I was under the impression that my tax money that pays the police was to protect and serve me, not each other.

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

Explanation: Assasins do NOT telegraph their intentions!

Personal Disclosure: It IS a WAR ok!

Sorry dude,

This is NOT the spark that's going to be fanned into the flames of domestic conflict in the United States, for two reasons:

1. The average citizen isn't as cluey about propaganda as we are and will (as seen here in this very thread) cherry pick from the various versions of the story presented to them so long as said version agrees with their own worldview. He will have little support from the general public and certainly not enough to attract followers.

2. Everyone knows this is just one man's vendetta against a state government organization. It's his battle to wage and his alone. He knows it too and he's willing to become a martyr for positive change in the organizational culture of the Los Angeles Police Department.

Wanting doom will not make it so.

Twenty years ago I would have applauded this former LAPD officer's actions against current LAPD personnel. Watching what they did to Rodney King made me want to drive out to Los Angeles and sacrifice myself to get rid of a few officers at that precinct.

I'm older and wiser now, but can understand when someone feels so much rage that nothing will stop them except being caught or killed.
-cwm

reply to post by OmegaLogos


This is so messed up I do not know where to begin.

First of all, an individual cannot just declare war and get to do whatever they want. Countries cannot just declare war and do whatever they want. We have all been wronged in some way and we cannot all go on killing sprees whenever we do not get our way.

Second, you said the governor of California should arrest all the cops named in Dorner's manifesto and investigate them. You cannot arrest people without probable cause. You are assuming probable cause exists because one deranged person made some allegations in the manifesto. How do we know he is right? Should the governor be able to arrest you because I posted on this message board you murdered the flying spaghetti monster?

I predict the longer this goes on, the less Dorner will be perceived as a deranged homicidal maniac and more of a folk hero. Billy the Kid and Jesse James were serial killers, but in the popular imagination they are folk heroes. Perhaps the same will be thought of Dorner.

So they'll shoot up a truck just because its blue. What happens when they shoot a man just because he's black?

reply to post by MystikMushroom


I have lost jobs. I have been divorced. I did not go on killing sprees. People are forced to change careers all the time and in this economy many people have lost their jobs and their livelihoods. If everybody that was unhappy went on a killing spree, there would be all out chaos.

I am not in law enforcement, but I am a lawyer. I know all to well that our justice system is flawed. I often lose sleep at night worrying about whether some dimwit judge who got on the bench only because he cut checks to the right politicians is going to throw away my case because he is too dumb to grasp a complex point of law or because he plays golf with the other side's lawyer.

I don't go around killing judges or killing other lawyers. I just have to assume that I will win some and lose some. Unfair things have happened to me and will continue to happen to me. I have also benefited from and will continue to benefit from other's misfortunes. This is life and this is true of all of us.

The fact of the matter all of our institutions, whether they be courts, police departments, corporations, or schools are flawed and always will be flawed. They are run by people who do not magically stop having the weaknesses and vices all people have just because they put on a badge, wear a black robe, or have some fancy title. All systems are broken, but just because the system is broken it does not mean we have to make things worse by going out and killing people.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Explanation: Why does there have to be any precedent?

Numbers of combatants mean nothing and soldiers can fight to the last man if they so choose.

Personal Disclosure: And in the modern world it is aok for some faceless souless drone to enage enemy combatants anywhere in the world whilst the pilot sits comfortably in an airconditioned office at the military base just down the road from their suburban abodes without any declaration of war .

Seems to me your complaining about the fairness of this ... he is one against many!

Originally posted by Illuminaughty8
So they'll shoot up a truck just because its blue. What happens when they shoot a man just because he's black?

And blue wasn't even the right color. The truck they were looking for was gray. What happens when they shoot innocent people...oh wait they already did that.

Originally posted by SpaDe_

Originally posted by Illuminaughty8
So they'll shoot up a truck just because its blue. What happens when they shoot a man just because he's black?

And blue wasn't even the right color. The truck they were looking for was gray. What happens when they shoot innocent people...oh wait they already did that.

So did he??

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by mee30

 

As for the being slaughtered part I think the jury is still out on that.

How in your manipulated mind do you figure that??

Every back and forth on the issue has multiple stars for the posts against you and not a single star for your incessant attempts to argue for arguments sake.

If there was a jury you've already been tried and convicted by it multiple times.

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by MystikMushroom

 

I have lost jobs. I have been divorced. I did not go on killing sprees. People are forced to change careers all the time and in this economy many people have lost their jobs and their livelihoods. If everybody that was unhappy went on a killing spree, there would be all out chaos.

You are really having a hard time grasping the concept that this guy was railroaded out of his job for attempting to expose corruption within the department aren't you? You keep posting these analogies, but you are so far off base with them, I'm not sure you even understand the situation. You act as though corruption within law enforcement is an everyday occurrence and it should just be chalked up to being normal.

So when he is done, even if they clear his name, he will still be put to death for the murders. I think he would take his own life, or he knows they never will give in to what he asks so he is going to go till they get him.

You can't look at it like you get fired from a job and go crazy and go on a spree, it's not that simple. He was high ranked in the Navy and Prob the LAPD, and worked his whole lifer being good and honest it seems, and everything was lost in a short period of time to where he had nothing left. I worked at an Applebee's that this guy shot his divorcing wifes new BF and killed himself after, all because he had lost everything. In no way am i justifying any of their actions, from either story, but that is what happens to a human when they are destroyed inside. They go crazy.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by mee30

 

See I live here man. The freeways that lead up to the mountains have camera's everywhere. Bout every quarter of a mile. There's no way a vehicle matching the description of the one that just shot up the cops is going to make it to THEEEEEEE mountains. Am I going SLOOOW enough for everyone. IT's absolutely impossible to do it undetected
because the God damn CHP units have monitors in their vehicles. PERIOD

edit on 8-2-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

So it's ABSOLUTELY impossssssssible to switch vehicles??

Am I making to much sense for youuuuuuuuuuuu?

reply to post by Grimpachi


Thank you for reminding me. Someone on this thread asked whether or not the MSM had released a manifesto previously and the answer is yes, they did. They released the Unabomber's manifesto and it was Kaczynski's brother who recognized Ted's words/style/beliefs and turned him in. I'd say that there are some potential similarities between Kaczynski and Dorner. Both of them perceive themselves as fighting some injustice or corruption within the world, are highly intelligent and had/have a plan. Key difference isn't so much the view of a war-like state (Kaczynski saw those who were injured or killed alongside his targets as being unfortunate consequences or something like that and his manifesto does read like a declaration of war at times) but in focus. Dorner's primary focus is himself, first, and eliminating perceived corruption within the LAPD second. Kaczynski's targets were seemingly random and only a couple had tentative prior connections with him. Dorner is going for those who he perceives destroyed his life. There, the two of them differ fundamentally.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Explanation: Here ... I did find one case ...

Tunisia: Revolution [wiki]

Tunisian revolution

The Tunisian revolution was an intensive campaign of civil resistance, including a series of street demonstrations that took place in Tunisia. The events began when Mohamed Bouazizi, a 26-year old Tunisian street vendor, set himself afire on 17 December 2010, in protest of the confiscation of his wares and the humiliation that was inflicted on him by a municipal official. This act became the catalyst for mass demonstrations and riots throughout Tunisia in protest of social and political issues in the country. Anger and violence intensified following Bouazizi's death on 4 January 2011, ultimately leading longtime President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali to step down on 14 January 2011, after 23 years in power.

The demonstrations were precipitated by high unemployment, food inflation, corruption, a lack of freedom of speech and other political freedoms and poor living conditions. The protests constituted the most dramatic wave of social and political unrest in Tunisia in three decades and resulted in scores of deaths and injuries, most of which were the result of action by police and security forces against demonstrators. Labour unions were said to be an integral part of the protests. The protests inspired similar actions throughout the Arab world as well as elsewhere in the wider North Africa and Middle East.

In response to the demonstrations, Ben Ali declared a state of emergency in the country, dissolved the government on 14 January 2011, and promised new legislative elections within six months. But on that same day Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannouchi went on state television to say he was assuming power in Tunisia. However, the head of Tunisia's Constitutional Court, Fethi Abdennadher, confirmed that Ghannouchi violated the constitution. Fouad Mebazaa became acting President following the Constitutional Court's interpretation of the situation and the Constitution. It was soon confirmed, however, that Ben Ali had fled to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Protests continued in Tunisia to call for banning of the ruling party and the eviction of all its members from the transitional government formed by Mohammed Ghannouchi. Eventually the new government gave in to the demands and a new prime minister Beji Caid-Essebsi was appointed by the acting president on Thursday, 3 March 2011. Two of the first actions made after the appointment of the new government were the decision of the Tunis court to ban the ex-ruling party RCD and to confiscate all its resources, and a decree by the minister of the interior banning the "political police" including what has been known as the state security special forces which were used to intimidate and persecute political activists.

Personal Disclosure: You wanted one ... well you now have one to compare with!

I note that Mohamed Bouazizi was a young man and probably not in the miltary and not under any oaths to uphold and his protest didn't harm anybody but himself at the time ... but it did lead to revolution and not just in his own country!

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by OmegaLogos

 

This is so messed up I do not know where to begin.

Countries cannot just declare war and do whatever they want.

The USA does this as a matter of Foreign Policy, they just go in and bomb other countries!

He has seen this and possibly believes that he is justified because all else failed him. At some point you just have to make a stand for what is right. Perhaps he is just a little ahead of the rest of the population. A job needs doing, some bad guys need to be stopped. Hollywood does it all the time.

P

reply to post by SpaDe_


With all due respect, you are assuming everything he has to say is 100% true. There are at least two sides to every story. The guy mentions in his own manifesto he had head injuries. Maybe the department dismissed his allegations and dismissed him for good reason because he was not all there.

Originally posted by Buffalo2LA

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by mee30

 

See I live here man. The freeways that lead up to the mountains have camera's everywhere. Bout every quarter of a mile. There's no way a vehicle matching the description of the one that just shot up the cops is going to make it to THEEEEEEE mountains. Am I going SLOOOW enough for everyone. IT's absolutely impossible to do it undetected
because the God damn CHP units have monitors in their vehicles. PERIOD

edit on 8-2-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

So it's ABSOLUTELY impossssssssible to switch vehicles??

Am I making to much sense for youuuuuuuuuuuu?

Actually they found his truck without him inside that was burned in a wooded area. Saw it on the news last night from a news chopper. Unless he stole another one and burned it, but it was prob his, and he most likely stole another and left the area or is in a safe spot.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Daedalus

 

No what's unbelievable is your rejection of common sense as if you have some stake in the issue ! Like a pay check ? They way you set yourself up against the truth from the get go with no consideration what so ever. You are unbelievable to the core of it's definition.

edit on 8-2-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

Common sense tells you that absolutes are few and far between in this world. Your INSISTANCE on it being 100% IMPOSSIBLE is where you are failing. That thinking is emotion its not logic, it's the samething as stereotyping.

No matter what the odds maybe it is NOT 100%, the more you cling to it as an absolute the more you just seem like a delusional insecure child who is just arguing for the sake of arguing.

reply to post by SpaDe_


Star for you.

I don't think people here have ever had everything they stand for taken away because they were trying to do the "right thing".

I've asked every friend (minorities included) that has lived in LA about this. They all agree and tell me, "Duh, LAPD is corrupt as hell!"

It's well known, it's even joked about. Why is this so surprising?

I still am calling out all LEO's that are trolling/ghosting this thread. Why are you to scared to post an opinion? Are you not allowed to think for yourself?

If that is so, then we need an entire overhall of the law enforcement community in this country. Mindless drones are what have allowed the worst atrocities in recorded history to be committed. Do you want to be a mindless drone?

Do you care about jurisprudence and honor our system of law?

We pay you our hard-earned money to protect us from those that wish to operate outside the rule of law. When you hide behind your BS "blue line" -- you not only insult your badge, profession and position; but your commitment to your community as well.