First U.S. drone target

[SR4]

the LAPD can do anything they want. next week lyndsey lohan will get another DUI or j.bieber will get caught shoplifting a candybar and most of america will forget about this

 

that said, i would think this guy has/can build a safety network of people willing to help get him out of the country

 

 

yeah. why even bother getting upset about corruption within systems of authority, right?

 

I wouldn't be surprised on your second statement...but then it would be even more convenient to switch from "domestic terrorism" to "international terrorism" and then use the drone strikes.

 

The guy supposedly murdered innocent people, he should still be brought to trial. He should be brought to fucking trial already. But most likely he will be cornered and shot to death, and everyone will be scorned for overreacting, and business continues.

[SR4]

i havent had my cup of coffee yet, so ill go to work and see what responses are brought up to this.

[Guest Aserinsky]

I think the fact that the usage of drones suggests that the LAPD has a pretty big ulterior motive rather than just trying to track him down to put him (justifiably) on trial is what concerns me. I can't help but feel that this whole move is largely psychological; that we're slowly going to be in a future where drones are a normal thing to observe and that's going to change our behaviour. I know we already have police helicopters in the sky and that probably doesn't bother too many people, but with drones it's impossible to know who or what they're observing, never mind the reasons why. Combined with the fact that drones have been specifically used to kill people as opposed to finding someone in hiding, I just feel it's going to guilt trip a hell of a lot more people into thinking they've already committed crimes whilst also falsely convincing them that they're 'safe'. It may not be that drones used nationally have any form of weaponry on them, but you've got to admit just by what we already have been told about the possible usages of drones instantly they seem far more invasive and threatening. Even if it's made public they're used for nothing more than tracking someone down, I personally will still think instinctively that they're capable of much more and consciously change my behaviour because of it. Maybe I'm just anxious about the issue, but I wouldn't be surprised if a high percentage of people did the same.

[Guest isaki]

I personally will still think instinctively that they're capable of much more

[Guest Enter a new display name]

[lumpenprol]

damn, a million terabytes of video a day on that argus rig...

[Guest A/D]

 

I personally will still think instinctively that they're capable of much more

holy balls

[Guest zaphod]

Can't you evade thermal sensors by throwing off your heat signatures?

 

also, I dunno how reliable a news source this is:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/la-police-shoot-women-in-hunt-for-copkiller-christopher-dorner-8485900.html

 

[youtubehd]XCG_ETMZvyg[/youtubehd]

[MisterE]

Is a drone attack really necessary for this? if you are able to locate him just go there with 100 swat guys and shoot him/arrest him there, its not like this guy has an iron man suit.

 

Also, like the comments on that article said, why doesn't this guy get a trial? (i dont know enough about this case, maybe there is video of him killing a bunch of people i dont know)

is this a half-assed troll attempt? "maybe there is video of him etc" is that a law somewhere that says if there is video it's ok to blow someone away without a trial? are you being serious with this? i understand some of the sentiment that the LAPD is corrupt and has done questionable things, but i don't get why so many people seem to have this mentality that all cops, and that the police in general are just some big evil organization. why the hell would anyone even want to be a cop when so many people view them like that? do you people want total anarchy instead? if not then maybe, just maybe, you should learn to give the police force just the smallest shadow of the doubt? ever? i've had run-ins with prick cops before, and in general i think it's a job that attracts power trippers, but i'd have much respect for an honest cop who understood that their place was to protect and serve US. i'm sure some of those must exist, even in the LAPD. but as expected, a guy goes on the run after a little killing spree, and i guess since it was cops that were killed this time, people are actually coming to the killer's defense or trying to concoct conspiracy theories, trying to find any possible way that he might be the victim, AND assuming that he won't be brought in alive and that this drone will probably blow his ass up. amazing.

 

what if he were a white conservative leaning individual who had shot some muslims or occupy protesters or obama campaign workers? would i be reading calls on the drones to blow him up? i have to wonder. maybe not, but i'm sure there wouldn't be all these conspiracy theories flying around against the LAPD, or people fretting over him not getting a fair trial (which still remains to be seen). the guy wrote a manifesto against police brutality, so he's getting support across the nets. what was it when he killed the one cop's daughter, then called the guy up to taunt him about it? if he has done these things, then he is a horrible scum bag. and yes even he deserves a fair trial. people are saying he won't be brought in. well, is it at all possible that he might not want to be brought in? if he does get gunned down, is it not at all possible that it will be due to a situation he forces? and being a known cop killer, does that not justify a little more of a 'if he looks like he's about to attack, shoot him' mentality on the cops' behalf? they aren't wizards who can just wave a magic wand and bring a guy in with no incident, who looks to be a muscular, almost surely well-armed dude, who has killed before and probably won't hesitate to do so again. but lets ignore/not consider these points. it's scumbag cops we're talking about right? sometimes it's not hard to understand why it takes them so long to respond when you call some shit in and need their help... maybe they should just all go on strike and let LA deal with it's own shit for a while and see how long it takes for everyone to start crying for them to come back? as an outsider, i would almost love to see it. except i know lots of people would get hurt, some of whom maybe actually appreciated the things cops do for them.

[SR4]

if a KKK guy shot up a mall full of minorities and was on the run, yes, I would still demand he is detained with as little violence as possible and put on trial.

 

people don't seem to understand that trials aren't the "pussy" way of dealing with a murderer. its a demonstration to the constituency that our democracy works (at least partially). grievances are aired to a LIVE, still-breathing perpetrator or accused, and we get to see justice done ourselves.

 

and I would tend to agree with you, that the guy probably isn't in his right mind and would engage in a firefight before peaceably turning himself in.

 

but dude, seriously, did you not read the part about LAPD opening fire on unarmed elderly woman because they drove the same car model as Dorner? Has there ever, ever been a precedent during a manhunt where this behavior was seen as tolerable, or at the very least not raising a suspicious eye?

 

I don't think there is any innocent party on this. I wouldn't be surprised if Dorner was involved in whatever corruption he accuses the LAPD of being involved with. Doesn't excuse his abhorrent behavior, like you said.

[MisterE]

if a KKK guy shot up a mall full of minorities and was on the run, yes, I would still demand he is detained with as little violence as possible and put on trial.... Doesn't excuse his abhorrent behavior, like you said.

tbh no i did not read that about them doing that, smetty. that definitely doesn't look good on the LAPD. but the drone thing shouldn't be tangled up with that aspect. i tried to express, and probably did a poor job of, i actually kind of do undersand the sort of blanket distrust of the police that a lot of people have. my last comment WAS kind of defending them, ever so slightly. but i do believe that, say, if a cop is caught breaking a law or abusing their power, then their sentencing should be harsher than what a civilian gets, if the cop was using their position of authority to do something crooked. that's how i feel. if a cop is caught descriminating based on race, or abusing their power, it should be a super harsh penalty. i haven't read about the incident you mentioned, but i still feel pretty certain that even if it hadn't happened a lot of people would have been against the LAPD on this, and the drone story with all the misinformation (articles letting on like the drone is being sent to assassinate this guy) was adding to that. but ok, with shit like what you're pointing out happening, it does make them look bad. i was just trying to express that our only hope is that there are good cops and that hopefully in the long run, decency will win out against corruption. maybe it will never happen, but if people are only vocal about the bad things cops do, and not about the good, then i think it definitely wont.

[YO303]

They heard my suggestion and used swat team to kill this guy, apparently they burned down his cabin but i can be wrong.

[lumpenprol]

yeah, seems he's a marshmallow

[Guest Drahken]

Anyone else notice that the news was saying they found his wallet/id in the cabin? They found his wallet/id earlier in the week near the border of Mexico too.

 

*tinfoil*

[lumpenprol]

 

News broke Tuesday afternoon of a chaotic showdown between law enforcement and the rogue ex-LAPD officer. After hours and hours of suspense, the cabin went up in flames, and many are believing the police started the fire after an alleged recording from a police scanner leaked, saying:

"All right, Steve, we're gonna go, er, we're gonna go forward with the plan, with, er, with the burn. We want it, er, like we talked about. […] Seven burners deployed and we have a fire."

And apparently news station KCAL picked audio up that recorded voices yelling:

style="padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">"We're going to burn him out!"

"Burn this motherf*cker!"

[Meadows and Labyrinths]

my imagination got the best of me and i imagined a floating sphere with gadgets, then i looked it up... still pretty cool looking.

 

[MisterE]

 

 

News broke Tuesday afternoon of a chaotic showdown between law enforcement and the rogue ex-LAPD officer. After hours and hours of suspense, the cabin went up in flames, and many are believing the police started the fire after an alleged recording from a police scanner leaked, saying:

And apparently news station KCAL picked audio up that recorded voices yelling:

"All right, Steve, we're gonna go, er, we're gonna go forward with the plan, with, er, with the burn. We want it, er, like we talked about. […] Seven burners deployed and we have a fire."

 

style="padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">"We're going to burn him out!"

"Burn this motherf*cker!"

that's precious how it simply says "After hours and hours of suspense, the cabin went up in flames,"

instead of "After a gunfight where the fucker killed another deputy and shot another, the cabin went up in flames".

i'm sure that fact being omitted was entirely unintentional.

[SR4]

yeah everyone was absolutely right. how crazy of me to think this was a highly suspect instance in LAPD history.

[MisterE]

no, if the story you posted is giving accurate information then it could indicate some possible 'conspiracy' in the LAPD to quickly find and shut up this guy who they, for some reason let live for 5yrs after firing. it could also be an isolated incident where either trigger-happy, or less experienced cops, or who knows what their background is, were assigned to protect a person on a list of targets, some of whom had already been killed. so those assigned cops knew the guy had already killed some on his list, and they are assigned to protect another person on that list. now they think they see his vehicle in their location, where they are protecting people he intended to kill.

 

imagine you are them.

 

and then honestly tell me that them shooting the women in the vehicle like dorners was 'probably' because they are in on some cop plot to silence this guy before he, what exactly are you even saying? before he can get some word out about something or, what? it's already in his manifesto isn't it?

 

ok and even having said this, i agree that yeah, all of the things combined are at least eyebrow raising. i just need something a bit more substantial than separate incidents which could be explained by the fact that they were after a killer with a manifesto declaring war and who openly said he wanted to kill more, and.. DID. and even called a guy to brag about how he killed his daughter. that's not going to rattle you if you're a cop? ok, they had an extra big hardon for catching/maybe killing this guy, why can't it just be chalked up to the fact that he killed cops and cop's daughters and was out to kill more? why do you have to assume its because somehow this dorner had some kind of info that he sat on for 5yrs that would bring the whole shithouse down? where's the logic in that? i think it's fucked that cops are more aggressive about catching cop killers than they are about catching killers of non-cops, but instead of debating that we have people coming up with these unfounded, non-defined conspiracy theories, that really just amount to knowing 'in your heart' that the cops are 'up to SOMETHING FOR SURE'. like what? catching a cop killer?

 

i see a guy who got fired, was bent out of shape about it, wanted revenge, got it by killing the daughter of a guy who represented his appeal for termination (which is a TOTAL bitch move, kill a dude's daughter instead of the dude? and a dude who was trying to help you? total fucking bitch move. but hey i'm sure he was a crusader for justice), and a bunch of people going out of their way to figure out how it's actually all the LAPD's fault. ok they shot some people. they're trigger happy or were anxious or were a few asshole pigs. where's the conspiracy though? earlier, the fact that an automated flying camera was being used was part of the conspiracy. if you really want to sell this conspiracy theory, first you are going to have to describe it. what do YOU actually suspect the cops were up to here, and why?

[SR4]

Nice moving the goalposts. Look at what I posted right before this incredibly long ramble where you constantly shove words into my mouth.

 

What did I say? Its right there. Read it slowly. "Highly suspect."

 

Read it again. What does that mean? it means something of high suspicion, meaning out of place, odd, arousing suspicion or skepticism in the events that played out.

 

So once again, let me lay this out:

 

I find that the shooting of unarmed women in a similar car make "highly suspect."

 

I find the million dollar bounty on Dorner "highly suspect."

 

I find the official designation of Dorner's acts deemed "domestic terrorism" while the Ft. Hood shootings and the Alabama hostage taker were deemed "workplace violence" and "random acts of violence" "highly suspect."

 

I find the drone usage "highly suspect."

 

I find the tactic of setting fire to Dorner's cabin and the words found on neighboring audio "highly suspect."

 

Have I defended this man's actions? Please, point that out to me in this thread. Find one example of it. I'll help you out: you won't. You won't because I never defended the fuck. It seems to me that there are others in this thread for more willing to jump to irrational and emotionally contrived conclusions.

 

I'm not even going to argue further, it's clear you are looking for a kneejerk emotional argument.

[goDel]

Sorry, Smetty. I don't think you've actually understood misterE's post. He's, imo directly addressing the "highly suspect" bit you thinks he's misreading. There's a difference between being concerned about some events and thinking some events are "highly suspect". MisterE's post simply addresses this by acknowledging that yes, events like this should make us concerned. But to call them highly suspect is taking it a couple of steps further. Read misterE's post for further explanation of why even events like this shouldn't automatically leave the impression of being "highly suspect".

 

And perhaps I'm missing the obvious (haven't read the entire thread), but highly suspect of what exactly? What are we talking about here?

[MisterE]

thank you godel! yes, i was specifically trying to get at the "highly suspect" comment. it has BIG implications. the implications, whether smetty wants to admit it or not, are that there is some kind of conspiracy. you can even see that more clearly in his last post. it's funny that he's trying to say i'm somehow putting words in his mouth at the same time as he's making it more and more clear that, yes, he does think there is some kind of conspiracy here. he lists all these different elements, suggesting that they are tied together by the same motive, and that = conspiracy.

 

he just doesn't want to actually have to come up with any more detailed ideas on the conspiracy and i think that's a total cop out (excuse unintended pun). it would be like if i just said 'i'm pretty sure smettingham rutherford IV is up to something heinous.' and just left it at that. excuse me that i think conspiratorial accusations require some kind of... backing. in this country it is completely a 'hip' thing to side against the police at all times so to him i seem like a bad guy just for expecting a little more detailed evidence or reasoning.

[goDel]

There's no need to label Smetty as a conspiracy nut yet, imo. But I'm still interested to hear about the "highly suspect of what" thing. But if there is no "what" thing though, I'm afraid the nutty label will stick to him like a fly does to shit. ;P

[awepittance]

pretty surreal they burned down the house he was in and so many cops were involved in it. that alone should give people pause on the state of the american criminal justice system

[MisterE]

if listing the drone, the bounty, the designation of terrorism, the shooting of the wrong vehicles, and the fire as all being 'highly suspect' is not the same thing as suggesting that they are tied together by a singular motive, which would 100% be a conspiracy by definition of the word, then i'll eat my...

the rest of these potato chips.

i was going to anyway.

 

having a conspiracy theory does not instantly make someone a nut. conspiracies exist. maybe he's right. but i just expect there to be more of a reason to tie these things together rather than a hunch, when some or all of them could be explained separately very well.