This is just a whole new level of incompetent if you ask me, even if
they were to show me a video of this man gunning down someone
it would still NEVER EVER EVER make the actions of the police
in reference to shooting at civilians OK NEVER, this is not a country
where out of fear our police are allowed to open fire on civis, there are
laws that govern that and simply saying i was afraid is not enough,
there are reasons for a police officer to open fire out of fear but
just because there is a guy out there who might shoot at you does
not give the authority to open fire on several civilians with absolutely
no reason other than fear for their lives.

A police officer is required to identify himself for one, to warn you for
another, and unless you actually brandish a weapon these things
must happen before he opens fire, now i can understand in certain
situations that things are not clear cut when it comes to a gun being
seen etc, however in this case it is clear enough that it was simply
either A: they thought it was him and were so afraid they did not
follow procedure or B: they want this man dead and will not follow
procedure..... either way that goes its criminal, if anyone of us were
to ram a blue truck and open fire on the occupants because we
were AFRAID it might be the bad guy and the truck was driving slow.....
do you really honestly think ANY jury would not at the very least
convict you of manslaughter or more likely 2nd degree murder?

The police have rules and guidelines, i know they have a dangerous job
and they do deserve to have a little leeway when it comes to situations
that are very complicated however that leeway does NOT and NEVER
should include opening fire indiscriminately while ignoring procedure
because of fear, they know the job will include fear and extreme stress,
they sign on knowing this and are expected to deal with this in a professional
manner. opening fire on civilians more than once mistakenly is not
professional in any sense of the word.

Originally posted by Judge_Holden
Even if it were true that this had to happen, it does not make his actions justifiable. I know that sounds contradictory, but let me clarify.

If Dorner was dealt a truly severe injustice, which I am in no way ruling out, and the only way to rectify the situation included extreme measures in the form of violence, I do not find it appropriate to bring innocent family members into the equation. Daughters and son-in laws who are are in no quantifiable way involved in the injustice should not be gunned down in the parking lot of their housing complex. It is cowardly, it is cheap, it is immoral, and it violates reason and ethics entirely. He should take his aggressors on directly. That's how it's done. It was done that way when this country began, and it was done that way well before. Inciting terror is the absolute worst route I can imagine.

My thoughts exactly. I feel that the guy had interesting intentions (can't really say good, but you know what I mean), but he decided to target the families of the people who mistreated him. Its absolutely ridiculous.

Originally posted by krossfyter
i think the mentality is that you can inflict the most pain on someone by eliminating their loved one. If your life is terminated you don't suffer (or at least for long). If your loved ones life (especially your childrens life) is terminated you will suffer the rest of your life. Its not right but that is the mentality.

"Unfortunately, this is a necessary evil that I do not enjoy but must partake and complete for substantial change to occur within the LAPD and reclaim my name. -CJD"

I see. Thank you for pointing this out to me, as I have read (skimmed over) his manifesto, trying to figure out what this guy was after. Its said that this is one of the biggest manhunts in the US history, so I want to know what this is about. In my opinion the response from police is always the biggest when police are the victims, but here I think its quite obviously needed, as the guy seems to be very skilled (military and police), and seems fixated on killing lots of people, including many innocents.

I don't think its at all possible for him to surrender. And I doubt that he will shoot himself. I think this will go pretty much how he planned (although with a much lower death toll). There will be a shootout, couple of officers will be injured, maybe killed, but he will definately be shot dead within the next few days (sooner than later).

This whole situation seems like it was taken from the plot of a movie. Part Serpico, part Enemy of the State.

I kind of wish Dorner had a little better reason for doing all of this besides a single kicking incident though, like if he had real information to take big players down or something.

Originally posted by jessejamesxx
This whole situation seems like it was taken from the plot of a movie. Part Serpico, part Enemy of the State.

I kind of wish Dorner had a little better reason for doing all of this besides a single kicking incident though, like if he had real information to take big players down or something.

And if he wasn't targetting innocent children at school...

Well let's see two witnesses to the kicking. One of them a LAPD officer and the victim gets the shaft and the officer who offered testimony is fired.

What a load of BS! I can't say that the ends justify the means, but everyone should stand up to injustice and we would not have these issues anymore.

I hear that the female officer who did the kicking has a nickname that suggests she likes to draw blood. I would be curious to know how many have died at her hand!!

You know the old saying, When the government fears the people there will be liberty and when the people fear the government there will be tyranny.

I've heard that FOIA requests pertaining to open investigations are able to be ignored until the investigation is over. Anyone know if this is true or not?

If true, I would say that reopening the case is a less than altruistic move by the LAPD, and possibly even a further sign of corruption. The LAPD gets a flurry of FOIA requests on a case that has been closed several years now. They barely remember it, and several involved have been promoted. Rather than comply with FOIA and release the info, possibly making a department that has already shot up two civilian vehicles look even worse, why not re-open the case so they can say "Sorry, FOIA does not apply to open cases." It gives them time to scrub any incriminating evidence out of a case they thought was handled years ago.