Manhunt in SoCal, suspect is surrounded in a cabin, two officers down.

[prisonermonkeys]

I have zero idea why you keep putting the word of terror in my mouth, you are looking silly in doing so.

Says the man who repeatedly dodges my question to explain his previous comments.

And if I am putting words in your mouth, it's a bitter pill to swallow, isn't it, considering that you've been doing it to me for days.

As for why? Have you still turned a blind eye to the old lady? Of course you have because you like cool aid.

So you are saying that because the two police in Torrance shot up the Toyota, every police officer in Los Angeles will open fire the minute they spot the suspect (or someone who they eblieve to be the suspect)?

In other words, are you saying that the actions of the few are representative of the actions of the many?

If so, what is there to stop me from assuming that all Americans are incapable of rational or intelligent arguments and simply attack anyone who disagrees with them? After all, both you and Azuremen are Americans. You have repeatedly refused to address any argument that I have made, and instead just plow on regardless, trying to make me look like I am irrational and unhinged simply because I didn't agree with your position from the start. Therefore, by your own logic - actions of the few are representative of the actions of the many - all Americans are just like you.

 

[arora]

I'll make it simple for you, whatever previous comment I made regarding terrorism you must have mistook. I don't put words in your mouth, you think the cops shooting old ladies was justified somehow, and now you think the guy will be brought in to stand trial by his peers.

Whatever monkey, you can get away with this nonsense with your students maybe(although the parents should think twice) but not on me 👍

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Whatever monkey, you can get away with this nonsense with your students maybe(although the parents should think twice) but not on me 👍

Why do you assume that I teach ideology? I'm not a political science teacher, and have never claimed to be. I'm an English teacher. I mostly teach the proper structure of sentences to fourteen year-olds, or film techniques to fifteen year-olds. Perhaps the closest I come to ideology is Arthur Miller's The Crucible, which is about McCarthyism, but even that depends on the class that I'm teaching and the school that I'm teaching in because it's a difficult unit of work and not everyone does it.

But, you are, in truth, correct. I don't agree that being labelled a domestic terrorist means that the suspect will be shot on sight, and so I clearly have no idea about the proper and appropriate use of semi-colons.

 

[arora]

O.K., I will commend you for your service then, sincerely.

 

[Tornado]

I'm making that assumption because when we were knee-deep in the debate about the responsibilities of the police in the shooting of the Toyota, everybody said that they expect the police to follow the proper and appropriate procedures. Since those proper and appropriate procedures do not involve opening fire without provocation, it strikes me as odd that the same people who argued that point so vehemently are now the most convinced that the police will open fire without provocation.

I don't see why it strikes you as odd, since they are two completely different things. I expect police officers to act like police officers when dealing with threats rather than Judge Dredd because they are police officers.


That doesn't mean (or even imply) that after Dorver was labelled a domestic terrorist and had a million dollar bounty put on his head to show how dangerous he is that I (or Zenith, or arora, or Justin, or Cody) automatically have to think that various officers of the LAPD won't keep trying to shoot on sight and actually will act as police officers, which means that it is not the massive contradiction that you keep trying to force on everyone's arguments. As for some other things:

I didn't say that. I asked you why you assumed the suspect would be shot and killed whilst being apprehended.

Again, two officers were so concerned with "arresting" him that they managed to "arrest" two other people. You're the only one who seems to think that those were the only two police officers in the LAPD who would attempt to shoot on sight.

I also asked you why you were under the impression that being shot and killed whilst being apprehended would soemhow prove that the suspect is not a terrorist.

He still never said that, so it's very curious that you're still trying to say that he did even after it was already pointed out what he actually was saying (which incidentally was a comment made following a lengthy conversation about what being labelled a terrorist carries towards how important your rights are). I don't know where you got this "if he's killed he's not a terrorist" argument when arora's entire point was that because he's been labelled a terrorist he's more likely to be killed.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Mr. "RIGHT to bear arms" doesn't care about four of the other ten Amendments?

There is a rather larger distinction between the disarming of the general public and the military action against an individual deemed an enemy of the US, of which the President has the power to take any course of action necessary to kill/dismantle those responsible for 9/11 under the AUMF, after which he has fled the country to avoid capture (and linked back up with known terrorists in Yemen) and the "judicial proceedings" you are all trying to grant him.

Just a wild f-ing guess here... but... If he fled the country... and has linked back up with terrorists.... do you think he wanted his "judicial proceedings?" I would say... not.

I'm pretty damn confused by this myself.

Zoo, you are aware that it wouldn't be very hard to just kill possible trouble makers or whistle blowers under the premise that they were "just terrorists?" Without due-process and trials, it simply gives the government far too much power to terminate those with voices or opinions they dislike. This is the kind of logic that leads to military states and, as much as it pains me to say it, V for Vendetta scenarios.

It is certainly not as simple as they're "just terrorists."

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf

 

[Zenith]

Hasn't your argument on that subject always been that those police acted recklessly, and that if they had followed procedure, the incidents would have been avoided?

The incident would have been avoided if those two officers and the officers involved in the second shooting had followed the accepted procedure for dealing with potentially dangerous suspects for law enforcement officers.

Because I countered that the police involved were humans underneath their uniforms, and therefore capable of making mistakes.

At which point you and Justin counter-countered that those in uniform have a standard that is expected of them, one of them should have been observed.

Now, stop me if I'm wrong here, but isn't that a bit of a contradiction? If the police have a standard that they are being held to, and procedures that they are required to follow - as per your argument - then why have you suddenly done an about-face and suggested that the LAPD as a whole will open fire on the suspect the moment they see him?

No it's not.

So far we have two cases where LAPD fire upon people who they think is Dorner. This shows that the police officers looking for Dorner are quick to get on the trigger. Why? There are lots of explanations, but one is that they wish to kill Dorner for revenge.

I'm not saying that the LAPD's procedures are to shoot on sight. I'm saying that's what several LAPD officers have done. This leads me to believe that they might do this again if they really do find h

Furthermore, wouldn't you agree that it is in the LAPD's interests to apprehend the suspect alive, given his accusations that the culture within the department has not changed (or has not changed enough) since the Rodney King and CRASH scandals? By killing him - even if he was genuinely resisting arrest - the LAPD look guilty.

You don't see why officers in the LAPD would want to shoot Dorner in cold blood? Really?

There is a rather larger distinction between the disarming of the general public and the military action against an individual deemed an enemy of the US, of which the President has the power to take any course of action necessary to kill/dismantle those responsible for 9/11 under the AUMF, after which he has fled the country to avoid capture (and linked back up with known terrorists in Yemen) and the "judicial proceedings" you are all trying to grant him.

You mean we're saying the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense? And that this right of his should not be revoked when the POTUS decides that he doesn't want to deal with it?

I would also say that a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

But I guess you believe we can forget these silly Amendments when it's inconvenient for our politicians.

Are you pro-human rights or pro-violence?

Just a wild f-ing guess here... but... If he fled the country... and has linked back up with terrorists.... do you think he wanted his "judicial proceedings?" I would say... not.

How does that matter in the slightest?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

You're stating these rights as if they are absolute and every instance in which they would be considered was predicted by the writers.

I guess I can own nuclear war heads because I have the right to bear arms.

 

[Zenith]

You're stating these rights as if they are absolute and every instance in which they would be considered was predicted by the writers.

The case of Anwar al-Alwaki wasn't even extreme. We was an alleged "terrorist". He didn't go on a murdering spree. He didn't plan any major attacks. He wasn't in the midst of planning the next 9/11. Funny how you dislike people using the term "assault weapon" to relieve you of your guns but when somebody calls a man a "terrorist" his rights disappear.

I guess I can own nuclear war heads because I have the right to bear arms.

Funny, that's the same argument that's being used to try to take those guns in your picture away from you.

 

[Azuremen]

Not what I said...:roll eyes: You seem to mis quote people often:idea: Read.👍

Sorry, your posting style isn't the most clear. I wasn't sure if you were echoing the sentiments of prisonermonkeys or suggesting that resisting arrest would define him as a terrorist. And it seems I wasn't the only one confused about this, so don't attack me over it.

Oh, he does.

Interludes, I'm curious, how petty is it to announce publicly that you're blocking someone, only to then take jabs at them whenever you get the chance?

 

[DQuaN]

In all of the stupid arguing that's been going on, has anyone mentioned that he is currently involved in a shootout with the police?

My head hurts reading the last page. 💡

 

[playnthru]

In a cabin... Yeah I'm watching on CNN.👍

 

[CodeRedR51]

No confirmation yet though.

 

[playnthru]

No..But they seem to have him surrounded, exchanging gunfire.

From what I see and hear on CNN. Two deputies shot is confirmed by CNN. Possible hostages?

 

[arora]

What a mess.

I keep thinking it's an ordinary criminal steeling a truck and getting into way more then he bargained for lol.

Hoping for swift and safe end to it all the same, two more police injured or is that confirmed?

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'm saying it's not confirmed to be him. Every news story I am reading says "suspected to be him".

 

[arora]

Right right, just curious if they've said anything about the injured police. I'm not near a cable tv.

EDIT: ah it was ninja'd in 👍

 

[playnthru]

Police conference: Man matching Dorners description stole a car. Ran from cops. Shot two cops. Fled on foot into a cabin, is now hold up in said cabin.

The injured officers have been airlifted to the hospital, condition is unknown.

All else unconfirmed.

 

[Leonidae@MFT]

Thread title updated. Hundreds of shots? And I thought that imperial stormtroopers had bad aim..

 

[Suzumiya]

One deputy is dead from the shootout. Just came out from KTLA 5 news.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Title isn't 100% accurate though. Still no confirmation that it's actually him.

 

[Patrick]

My god, these news anchors are idiots.

 

[Solid Lifters]

My god, these news anchors are idiots.

Liars, too. Don't believe a single damn they've said about this matter. The truth will most likely never be known.

Late this morning and earlier this afternoon, I saw several black helicopters and two HWY Patrol plans headed that way. All came back around 3:30-4PM my time (PCT). Looks like they fried him to a crisp. Just like the Davidians. That way, the truth can't be known. Dead men tell no tales.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Liars, too. Don't believe a single damn they've said about this matter. The truth will most likely never be known.

Late this morning and earlier this afternoon, I saw several black helicopters and two HWY Patrol plans headed that way. All came back around 3:30-4PM my time (PCT). Looks like they fried him to a crisp. Just like the Davidians. That way, the truth can't be known. Dead men tell no tales.

I was thinking that too. They're not hunting for him around the area (that I've heard) so they must have shot him and burned the place down on purpose just because of what he did.

This is my speculation of course.

 

[Zenith]

I'm behind. What happened?

 

[NotThePrez]

I'm behind. What happened?

Standoff at a cabin between LAPD and possibly Dorners. There was a firefight earlier in which two officers got hit.

 

[otakukid96]

CNN is reporting that Dorner is dead now.

 

[Nicksfix]

An interesting update, IF indeed this is really Dorner.

From the article :

The man believed to be fugitive ex-cop Christopher Dorner never came out of a California mountain cabin, and a single shot was heard inside before the cabin was engulfed in flames, a law enforcement official told The Associated Press.

Full story

EDIT - Supposedly, Dorner is now dead

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Damn, where is Batman when we need him .... another cornered man took himself out, the truth will never come out ...

 

[photonrider]

They will not confirm till DNA tests are done.