Why do (some) people support Christopher Dorner? page 2

36 posts

Flag Post

I have a pretty straightforward question. Assume the LAPD intentionally lit the cabin on fire that Dorner was in. Is this a legal course of action? A little less clear – assuming it is legal, is this an ethical course of action? (In general I’m pretty supportive of the police. I believe they have a tough job and take a lot of flak unnecessarily. However, after the LAPD literally shot at random civilians without anything close to justified cause in the hunt for Dorner, I think it’s good to take a look at this too. )

 
Flag Post

No they don’t John. wow buddy, you really have a warped idea of self-defense. It comes down to you or them and law abiding citizens have a right to life. You can’t seem to wrap your head around the idea the bad guys are really bad. People don’t want to kill, even the bad guys, but they are not going to forfeit their lives because they are pacifists. What Dormer has done is commit murder.

Yet, yet, he still has managed to kill less people then the LAPD did in hunting him down. Incompetency shall always remain a greater threat to public safety, and my personal safety, then stray psychopaths ever will. It’s not a message that is encouraged, as it sows doubt and discretion, but it is the little devil in the details, the banality of evil.

Edit: Actually the body count since I last looked. So, urm, may not be technically true. Hurrah?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

No they don’t John. wow buddy, you really have a warped idea of self-defense. It comes down to you or them and law abiding citizens have a right to life. You can’t seem to wrap your head around the idea the bad guys are really bad. People don’t want to kill, even the bad guys, but they are not going to forfeit their lives because they are pacifists. What Dormer has done is commit murder.

Yet, yet, he still has managed to kill less people then the LAPD did in hunting him down. Incompetency shall always remain a greater threat to public safety, and my personal safety, then stray psychopaths ever will. It’s not a message that is encouraged, as it sows doubt and discretion, but it is the little devil in the details, the banality of evil.

Edit: Actually the body count since I last looked. So, urm, may not be technically true. Hurrah?

Yeah, I don’t think the LAPD actually killed anyone did they? But they did act recklessly.

 
Flag Post

Why do people supporter Dorner?

Well.. why do people support holmes for shooting up the theater?
Why do people casey anthony?

Well.. why do people support holmes for shooting up the theater?
Why do people casey anthony?Cause people are anti-american whack jobs. Even if they live in the same country as us, they support people who killed 1 or more innocent life for no reason. People who support these psychos should be killed just like perpetrators.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by BobTheCoolGuy:
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

No they don’t John. wow buddy, you really have a warped idea of self-defense. It comes down to you or them and law abiding citizens have a right to life. You can’t seem to wrap your head around the idea the bad guys are really bad. People don’t want to kill, even the bad guys, but they are not going to forfeit their lives because they are pacifists. What Dormer has done is commit murder.

Yet, yet, he still has managed to kill less people then the LAPD did in hunting him down. Incompetency shall always remain a greater threat to public safety, and my personal safety, then stray psychopaths ever will. It’s not a message that is encouraged, as it sows doubt and discretion, but it is the little devil in the details, the banality of evil.

Edit: Actually the body count since I last looked. So, urm, may not be technically true. Hurrah?

Yeah, I don’t think the LAPD actually killed anyone did they? But they did act recklessly.

The LAPD did kill innocents. In two separate instances they fired at trucks because they looked similar to Dorner’s. In one of the instances nobody was harmed but in the other two innocent civilians died.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pokarnor:
Originally posted by BobTheCoolGuy:
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

No they don’t John. wow buddy, you really have a warped idea of self-defense. It comes down to you or them and law abiding citizens have a right to life. You can’t seem to wrap your head around the idea the bad guys are really bad. People don’t want to kill, even the bad guys, but they are not going to forfeit their lives because they are pacifists. What Dormer has done is commit murder.

Yet, yet, he still has managed to kill less people then the LAPD did in hunting him down. Incompetency shall always remain a greater threat to public safety, and my personal safety, then stray psychopaths ever will. It’s not a message that is encouraged, as it sows doubt and discretion, but it is the little devil in the details, the banality of evil.

Edit: Actually the body count since I last looked. So, urm, may not be technically true. Hurrah?

Yeah, I don’t think the LAPD actually killed anyone did they? But they did act recklessly.

The LAPD did kill innocents. In two separate instances they fired at trucks because they looked similar to Dorner’s. In one of the instances nobody was harmed but in the other two innocent civilians died.

Link? I just can’t seem to find that. I know they shot at two random vehicles as you said, but I can’t find where it says the victims died.

 
Flag Post

Nevermind, I was wrong. I remember reading somewhere that two people had died, but it appears they were just injured. It was pretty ridiculous of the LAPD to shoot at random pick-up trucks just for being similar to Dorner’s either way.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by BobTheCoolGuy:

I have a pretty straightforward question. Assume the LAPD intentionally lit the cabin on fire that Dorner was in. Is this a legal course of action? A little less clear – assuming it is legal, is this an ethical course of action? (In general I’m pretty supportive of the police. I believe they have a tough job and take a lot of flak unnecessarily. However, after the LAPD literally shot at random civilians without anything close to justified cause in the hunt for Dorner, I think it’s good to take a look at this too. )

Actually, you are probably right. When a cop is killed, the killer is never put on trial as he always seems to be killed by the police. Do you remember Waco, Texas? When that was going on I lived in Texas. I watched the whole thing on television and one night they showed a tank breaking in the side of the building and guess what….it had a flame thrower blowing fire into the building. Our government killed all of those people. It was murder, yet they were never held responsible for what they did.

This was done to send a message to the American people, that they would kill us if they felt it was appropriate. They could have arrested the leader of that group anytime as he went into town every day. Instead the made it a spectacle. I put nothing past our government or police anymore. We have let things slide too long.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by BobTheCoolGuy:

I have a pretty straightforward question. Assume the LAPD intentionally lit the cabin on fire that Dorner was in. Is this a legal course of action? A little less clear – assuming it is legal, is this an ethical course of action? (In general I’m pretty supportive of the police. I believe they have a tough job and take a lot of flak unnecessarily. However, after the LAPD literally shot at random civilians without anything close to justified cause in the hunt for Dorner, I think it’s good to take a look at this too. )

Actually, you are probably right. When a cop is killed, the killer is never put on trial as he always seems to be killed by the police. Do you remember Waco, Texas? When that was going on I lived in Texas. I watched the whole thing on television and one night they showed a tank breaking in the side of the building and guess what….it had a flame thrower blowing fire into the building. Our government killed all of those people. It was murder, yet they were never held responsible for what they did.

This was done to send a message to the American people, that they would kill us if they felt it was appropriate. They could have arrested the leader of that group anytime as he went into town every day. Instead the made it a spectacle. I put nothing past our government or police anymore. We have let things slide too long.

Woohoo!
Viva La Revolución!

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Piple:

Why do people supporter Dorner?

Well.. why do people support holmes for shooting up the theater?
Why do people casey anthony?

Well.. why do people support holmes for shooting up the theater?
Why do people casey anthony?Cause people are anti-american whack jobs. Even if they live in the same country as us, they support people who killed 1 or more innocent life for no reason. People who support these psychos should be killed just like perpetrators.

You think people who support murderers should be murdered? Doesn’t that mean you support murder and should be killed by your own logic…

 
Flag Post

If we didn’t have the drug war, we wouldn’t have such a hostile relationship with our police.

I also entirely agree with JHCO’s comparison to how the LAPD has reacted to Wako. I still think it’s going to be easier to sell this as a revenge story considering how bonkers this LAPD guy is.

By the way, I spent some time thinking about it, and there’s no world where what he did is just. If he held up in a copshop with the people that repeatedly abused their positions and sat everyone down and demanded people explain themselves and explain situations they lied in or be shot, I might at least have some sympathy for him, and suggest that his actions may have some lasting effects beyond his outburst. Now they’ll be able to keep being corrupt after he’s a pile of bones.