No love for the 5th Amendment, huh? Hope the LAPD cops never mistake you for a cop-killer, you'd never get to tell your side of the story.

LOL, you talking about ME?

when you shoot at the police, they get to kill you. that's the contract. don't like it, Canada is nice I hear.

When are you going to start a grassroots effort to stop all the urban drug dealers, pimps, thieves, etc. from getting killed by police every single day.

I don't see a change of tune yet.

this seems like the same tune. When are you changing it?

Don't see a source yet.

No source? WTF?

So you are calling rusnak a liar?

C'mon, Shaun, you researched before you trolled, right?

post a link

can't find one?

LOL! You are so far down the rabbit hole that you are calling someone supporting you, a liar.

Depends on where that trial is held. I don't know the politics of San Bernardino County. But if a few LAPD cops were on trial in or around LA, watch out. Plenty of folks in that jury pool would love nothing more than to take a swipe at LAPD.

What if a police sniper had a clear shot and made a "specific choice"? I don't give LEOs a "free pass", nor will I second guess in this case. A jury trial is the only way to settle this imo...let's have one. Put the commander on trial...seriously :rolleyes:

OK, I give up. Dorner got what he deserved. You guys can chew on the 5th Amendment issue and whether or not the police murdered a suspect they could have arrested.

Plenty might Rick, but that's why (right or wrong), it takes 12. Doesn't matter "where" a trial would be held in this incident...ain't gonna be a "conviction", no way, no how (and I think everyone on this thread knows it). Just my .02...

I'm not positive, but snipers are given the ROE before taking up position and those ROE usually specify they can only kill armed adults, not "shoot perp on sight." The sniper doesn't get to decide if it's cool to shoot. The shot has to be within the ROE. At least in this case, a sniper could have saved the homeowner's cabin and spared the gov't. a large insurance settlement and lawsuit.

And the commander could very well be looking at some civil rights charges by the feds. Who knows what Holder will do on this? It's not like he's apolitical in which federal laws he chooses to enforce.

I'm done here too...jury trial...let's have one.

That might still happen. Wait'll the lawyers get involved.

You guys SHOUTING about the LAPD not using the loudspeaker telling him to come out reminds me of a secret weapon of WW2. Unable to find the pic of the German version and I'm not sure if they actually used it. Here's a brief:
NOISE THAT KILLS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Never too busy to pick-up a new idea, or to try out a new weapon, some German scientists in World War II experimented with noise as a means of causing fatalities among troops of the enemies of the Reich. Such was the discovery of Allied observers who investigated the more technical aspects of the Nazi war effort.

Near the little town of Lofer, the Germans had established a small experimental station intended originally for research on problems concerned with mountain artillery. Eventually, however, this station became devoted to experiments in connection with lethal sound.

Experiments were carried on by a Dr. Richard Wallauscheck, the assistant director for technical research. His last and best design for a sound weapon consisted of a parabolic reflector slightly over 10 1/2 feet in diameter, with a sound combustion chamber mounted to the rear of the reflector.

Into this chamber methane and oxygen was fed through two nozzles. The mixture of gases was exploded within the chamber, and the sound of the explosion was intensified and projected by the parabolic reflector. Explosions were continually initiated by the shock wave from preceding explosions at a rate of 800 to 1,500 per second.

The main lobe of the sound intensity pattern had a 65-degree angle of opening. At a distance of 60 meters (198.5 feet) from the generator, the sound intensity has been measured at a pressure believed sufficient to kill a man after 30 to 40 seconds exposure. At greater ranges, perhaps up to 330 yards, the same pressure, while not lethal, would be very painful and would probably disable a man for an appreciable length of time.

The operator of the device is housed in a wooden cabin at the rear of the machine and wears a soundproof helmet.

The weapon has a very doubtful military value, chiefly because of lack of range. The whole machine is large and unwieldy. Unlike some experiments carried on by the Germans, no actual tests were made with human beings acting as guinea pigs. Perhaps this indicates that the Germans themselves did not have too much faith in the device as an effective and practical weapon.

I doubt San Berdoo would even give a jury award in a civil trial. The guy was simply too gruesome. They'll have to pay the cabin owner, but that's it.

What's really troubling about our times is that we're finding out how impermanent our values are. In this case, maybe we're seeing an erosion of our values. Nothing is permanent except for change. That's of little comfort, but probably true.