Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They do not have the right, or the legal authority to render such judgement. You are rationalizing acceptance of their actions.
according to several court cases, a cop can use force (even deadly force) if there is a reasonable belief that a dangerous felony has been committed by the suspect
They already knew that:
Dorner held hostages
Stole their car
Accosted a Game Warden
Stole his car.
Shot at two officers; killing one of them, injuring another
Fled to a cabin, and shot at officers from there.
Can you please tell use what isn't dangerous in any of the felonies committed above?
If you want to know why this country's freedom is degrading just look at everyone who actually thinks Mr. Dorner started that fire. That amount of "head in the sand" is what allows politicians to sell you a bridge that you won't end up owning.
The same people think that the Davidians started the fire in Waco.
The only person who sent him over the edge was himself. there is no one else to blame in this but him. Deliberately? Please he was caught lying about what a training officer did.
You think that law enforcement firing upon two trucks that they believed contained someone who had already killed multiple innocent people in cold blood was worse than the crimes of hunting down and killing those innocent people?
Wow.
The women delivering newspapers and the surfer were innocent too.
It scares the hell out of me that people would so blindly support such an action. Do they really want our law enforcement to apply 3rd world practices?
Liberals - turning the United States into a third world country one day at a time.
1) you kill cops kids
2) you kill cop A
3) on the day of the event you kill another cop
4) you have sent a manifesto that details your willingness to die in a fight with police
5) you shoot at SWAT, and you are a trained SNIPER. . .and you seem very well armed.
Now I don't see how/what is so odd with an escalating response from police department. Judge/trial/jury is always a best outcome. . .but there is no reason to risk the life of one police person to get that outcome? If you are shooting, you will be shot. Its not trial/jury/judge at that point, its stopping the threat without risk to police or people.
I'm not exactly sure why this is so hard to grasp.
Starting a fire in the middle of a populated forest isn't "stopping the threat without risk to...people".
so kidnapping, stealing a car, shooting and killing an officer while fleeing and shooting from a cabin, is not justification?
The police were not justified in shooting the surfer or the newspaper delivery woman. As far as the cabin. I'm not at all surprised that Dorner was killed by police there. I think it would have been difficult to get him out alive. I take issue with the police burning the cabin down mainly because they did not know if Dorner was alone. They could have killed innocent people in the process. They had the place surrounded, he was not going to get away. The cops could have given the situation more time. Based on the audio of the police yelling, "burn the mother effer down" repeatedly, it sounds like they were practically frothing at the mouth in excitement at the impending opportunity to kill him.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
