So, is everybody cool if they burned the cabin down without even trying to negotiate?

[Crowbob]

Originally Posted by scottmandue

Totally agree... if we give the PD the green light to be judge and jury we are giving up due process and our rights as Americans.

You folks remember our rights as Americans?

I remember them quite fondly.

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by Crowbob

A fire can erupt into a full blown conflagration in less than 15 seconds.

Especially when you throw 7 canisters with red-hot magma shooting out of them into a wooden cabin.

[ZOA NOM]

"Burn that F**kin house down!"

They had no intention of ever letting him see a jury.

[KaptKaos]

Dorner wasn't getting out of this mess alive. His only chance of living would have been to turn himself in at a TV station, so they could film the whole thing. Even then, jailhouse accidents happen.

Knowing that, I think it sucks that they burnt that house down. I would be furious if it were mine.

Dorner likely received Justice. Let's see if the homeowner does too.

[Baz]

Hey if you were a cop who got embarrassed by this ex-cop - wouldn't you pull out all the stops?

They were just protecting their reputation, that's all.

Who can blame them for "an eye for an eye" mentality?

"To protect and serve!"

[sc_rufctr]

OK... They got him but it stinks like "Waco".

Do you remember the fire at Waco? Fuelled by CS (tear) gas!

[rusnak]

They used enough material to burn the entire structure literally to the ground in minutes, as I said....after they had control of the cabin. This was their way of taking him out. The cabin was already destroyed by ramming at that point. They could see into the house and I assume they shot incendiaries through the holes in the walls.

Were they justified? I don't know. Good police tactics? I really don't know, and can't second guess.

[sc_rufctr]

Originally Posted by rusnak

They used enough material to burn the entire structure literally to the ground in minutes, as I said....after they had control of the cabin. This was their way of taking him out. The cabin was already destroyed by ramming at that point. They could see into the house and I assume they shot incendiaries through the holes in the walls.

OK but what was that "material"?

[Macroni]

1985..... Osage Avenue in Philadelphia..... Move.

History is riddled with driving them out with flames....

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr

OK but what was that "material"?

I don't understand your question. They said to deploy burners, as talked about beforehand. They shot 7 canisters into the building, and confirmed they had started a fire. Radio comm says prepare for him to run out the back (side 4). He never does. The building caves in minutes later, and burns completely.

Whatever you call it, the fire was a tactic that they used. Additionally, fire truck was on standby. They told it to wait at the staging area, which I also assume was well away from the cabin.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Even a worthless bag of $h!t deserves due process under our law. The cops forgot about the law a week ago. How anyone can look at their actions and not see that the sole purpose was to kill Dorner is beyond me. Judge, jury, and executioner.....

[Shadetree930]

Originally Posted by ZOA NOM

Is that how we want our authorities to deal with suspects who haven't had their day in court yet?

Yep, pretty much got what he deserved.

[Hydrocket]

I think the shooting off the blue pickup truck in a nutshell pretty much describes that they had no intention of letting this guy live...

[scottmandue]

Originally Posted by Baz

Hey if you were a cop who got embarrassed by this ex-cop - wouldn't you pull out all the stops?

They were just protecting their reputation, that's all.

Who can blame them for "an eye for an eye" mentality?

"To protect and serve!"

Uh, no... cops are not supposed to be vigilantes... or was that supposed to be in green type?

[onewhippedpuppy]

Quote de ZOA NOM

Is that how we want our authorities to deal with suspects who haven't had their day in court yet?

Yep, pretty much got what he deserved.

Agree, but it's not up to Officer Friendly to decide that.

[ZOA NOM]

They've just set the stage. The authorities denied setting the fire intentionally, and in the same response, confirmed that the tear gas canister that was used was commonly referred to as a "burner". He said they started by using "cold" tear gas canisters, and then chose to use "incendiary" or "burners".

Sounds deliberate to me, especially when your hear the scanner audio.

[VaSteve]

If that guy in Alabama didn't have a kid with him and was alon ewould they have done similar?

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr

OK... They got him but it stinks like "Waco".

Do you remember the fire at Waco? Fuelled by CS (tear) gas!

Better yet, they piped through loudspeakers while punching holes in the house and inserting the gas canisters, "This is not a raid!" Yes, really.

[rusnak]

There is no way the fire was accidental. That is why they used enough to make sure the fire started fast and burned completely, and that's also why they already had called the fire truck beforehand.

They also knew he was down before the fire. They intended to kill him in that fire.

[ZOA NOM]

It's an interesting issue that needs to be discussed. We see the effects of adrenaline-filled chases on the cops when suspects are finally captured, and the cops tend to unleash their frustration and anger on the suspect, many times resulting in brutal assaults, as though they aren't accountable. I've always wondered why the training doesn't focus on that moment when the officer finally has the upper hand, and should be at his most correct and professional, in order to preserve order and protect the rights of the accused. It is precisely at that moment that most of them go off the reservation and become the very thing they are charged with protecting society from. Why is that?