Plenty of time to give himself up before anything happened. It was HIS call.

At least one of those shooting up episodes was in Torrance. I'm not clear if it was Torrance or LAPD that did the actual shooting. I think LAPD was on watch, and they did the shooting.

There is no way you can throw a blanket on all of California and say that all PDs are the same here. For one thing, LAPD deal with the most absolutely worst of the worst, and you get so much idiocy out there, even among the elite in that portion of California.

Absolutely agree, and I would say the emotional ones are the exception rather than the rule, but they are out there, and they do work for us, and we do have rights.

Or you, hopefully neither of us will ever have to find out. Curious, How do you think a Law enforcement officer should confront someone who is wanted for killing three people and is obviously trained?

I don't know if he killed the Captain's daughter or not. but I do know he was a suspect in the killing. If I confronted him, I would approach him the way I would approach any suspect of murder (Cop or civilian), The way I did several times in the last week....with extreme caution and prepared for the worst. If he complies, no issues.

His manifesto was posted to a password accessed account, and it says that he will kill the people who later turned up dead. Now that's not open and shut, I understand, but it certainly lends probable cause to arrest him.

I was stopped once for speeding, and my little cocker spaniel got out and barked at the moto cop. I thought he was going to shoot her. I was like "don't you watch Chris Rock?! Be polite to the Po-Lice or you'll get shot!" The absolute best thing is the most common sense thing. Don't provoke the cop because he can't read minds, and doesn't know if you're an armed psycho or a law abiding citizen. That's just common sense to me.

Let that sink in.

Hopefully, before gunplay commences, you'd ID the guy and/or confirm he's armed. The two trucks that were shot up obviously didn't get either courtesy.

And if I were Dorner and had seen these shot up trucks on the news, neither drivers of which came close to fitting my description, I'd take it to mean I had no chance of surrendering and would be shot on sight. So why not then go out in a "blaze" of glory?

Did the cops burn down that cabin on purpose? Probably. Or if not deliberately, they certainly should have had good reason to expect that fire was a possibility of the type of tear gas they used. To claim otherwise would be disingenous.

But is that the equivalent of murdering Dorner? Hardly. The dude had plenty of opportunity to give himself up in peaceful fashion in the days leading up to the event. Even after he was holed up on the cabin, even after the cabin was set on fire, unless one of those tear gas cannisters plonked him on the head and knocked him out cold, he STILL had opportunity to make an effort to leave the burning building. But he didn't. On purpose. That was his choice.

Maybe there was no nice and neat judge, jury, executioner scenario. But to say that it's the fault of LEO isn't fair. The guy effectively chose his sentence. He certainly didn't act like an innocent man.

Like I wrote in post #6 or so of this thread, I'd be pretty pissed if I was the cabin owner. Glad they got the dude, but somewhat pissed nonetheless. Somebody would owe me a new cabin--whether it's Dorner's estate or the LAPD (or whichever agency made the executive decision to blow up the place and torch it).

How do we know he wasn't injured inside the cabin, unable to come out, and burned alive? The reality is that the police had the upper hand, and could have chosen another path, and the fact that they didn't isn't necessarily an indictment, but it creates doubt and concern.

I suspect the autopsy will show that Dorner had a bullet in him and could not come out.

Why are we suddenly assuming tear gas when they used terms like burn him out on the scene. Are we certain that true incendiary devices were not used?

Quote - "who don't know what the hell they are talking about and really don't know the facts"

Including many on the LAPD.

The bottom line, I'm sure you and most of the sane are just glad its over. Thanks for your part and be safe.

Doubt? Yes. Concern? That's a bit more debatable.

When you start shooting at cops (and he plunked two of them right before he fled into that cabin), I think it's fair to expect cops to shoot back at you. And to a certain degree, it's a de facto admission of guilt. Guilt for all 3 murders of which he had been alleged to have committed? Or just the lone cop? I suppose therein lies the question/doubt of how much guilt. But how else would you interpret his actions? Innocent guys don't initiate gunfights with cops. At that point the cops don't have to send some formal invitation with a politely-worded request that he come out with his hands over his head. He's an ex-cop. He knows the drill. When they start bashing in walls of the cabin, that's the time to come on out because they're coming in.

The families of the deceased should be so lucky to have had the guy incapacitated, and consciously burned to death.

I'm not so keen on the deliberate burning down of the cabin. Seems a bit draconian to me. But I wouldn't pin the guy's death on the LEO on scene. He had ample opportunity to have a courtroom outcome.

I don't think you and I are very far apart. I only raised a question about what I felt was action taken by the authorities that I felt was beyond necessary. I am certainly glad it's over, and I'm glad Dorner is dead, frankly, although it would have been interesting to see him have his day in court, but alas, the San B police took care of that problem.

As I mentioned before, I was listening to the live feed from San B system 7/8. The pd had put eyes on the inside of the cabin by smashing in 3 of the walls of the cabin. They saw a trash bag behind the front door, and blood spatter on one of the walls. They did not see Dorner inside the cabin anywhere. At that point, they said they were going to deploy the "burners" "as we discussed". The cabin was on fire within minutes after that, the fire dept was told to stay back, and shortly after ammo explosions were heard. Cabin was fully involved in fire by then. They had already tried to smoke him out, and drive him out with loudspeakers, so fire was an escalation. I think they thought he posed a danger to the community as well as to LE, which is logical since he had shot at them and hit two.

Did they have upper hand? Yes, I think so. Did Dorner still pose a threat? Yes, since they couldn't find him and he was obviously still moving around inside the cabin.

I don't think it was unreasonable to burn the guy out because I think it is probably logical given the extreme nature of the whole case, and you do have to look at the whole context of what was going on to understand it. Very little of what happened is analogous to what we normal citizens will ever encounter when we come into contact with PD.

It was Torrance PD that did the second shooting.....

On the transmission, you could hear an officer saying he could see blood on the walls as they were lighting the fires.....

"San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon said deputies did not purposely burn down the cabin." Dorner manhunt: 'Hot gas' that burned cabin was last resort - latimes.com


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NCljkh38xMs?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Cops say "burn it down!"

Worse than making the decision to burn it down, is to then lie about it. If you're hoping to burn the guy out, at least have the guts to admit it. It was an aggressive, but not necessarily unjustified show of force.

What a crock of crap....LOL You can clearly hear them saying "burn it down". LOL


Is lying a prerequisite for being a sherrif or running a police force in LA or something??

Good Call