Skip to comments.Police Appeared To Shout 'Burn This Mother' Down Before Fire Engulfed Rogue Ex-Cop's Cabin
Posted on 02/13/2013 3:00:36 PM PST by Repeat Offender
click here to read article
Do you work for NBC news? Cutting out parts to slant its meaning!
Try the entire quote: "When, after a black has already killed many, and is in the act of trying to kill some more, it becomes the job of the ACLU, the Communist Party and the Black Panther Party to defend the Constitution. It is the cops' and every other patriotic American's duty to kill the SOB."
The longer this thread goes on the more I feel that FR has leftist moles posing as being libertarians.
There is no specific law to which I refer. It may be rooted in Common Law, but there is no case law that says the police can only defend themselves with guns. As for executions, yes that has been ruled on numerous times by the supreme court, but it’s also a completely different scenario. Self defense versus a contemplated execution by the State, in which the duty of the State is to not inflict unnecessary suffering. That logic has never applied to any self defense scenario.
You have no idea what "American" means. And this one sentence of yours proves your every reference to leftist organizations nothing but rhetorical camouflage.
Look in the mirror, I support the Constitution here, not emotional trades over un proven accusations.
Look, the man was probably a nut, he deserved to be taken down if what he is accused of is true, but this is a dangerous precedent. We have courts to decide who is guilty and who is not, not the media.
I suspect, in a few days, months, some other villain will appear and it will be deemed necessary that he be taken out by an armed drone. I see a very precarious slope here and what worse is I see support of it here when the prpopler emotions can be riled up.
Not good IMO, call me paranoid if you wish but before you do, consider who and what we have as a POTUS.
Which is another reason you don't go Fahrenheit 451 when attempting to capture someone if you're an officer of the law.
I think the issue of using handloads in self defense comes from civil case law, not the police, specifically. In other words, an attorney will find some way of attacking your actions, no matter what they were. They also do that to the police, but that is a very different matter from what I stated. There is no case law, or statute of which I am aware that says the only allowable means of self defense is a gun, or any other specific means. One is entitled to use whatever means are available when faced with a deadly threat.
Say, I know this is off topic a bit on this thread, but since you're an ex-badge, do you hold your brethren who fired on innocents to the same standard?
It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!
I hear tin foil is effective for blocking our brain rays.
I can’t argue with that, either. And I don’t argue that the authorities had only one choice in the situation with Dorner, merely that it was certainly a deadly force situation, and given the previous actions of the suspect, any manner of deadly force would be considered legal. But as a public relations issue, they certainly didn’t take the high road, and are going to spend considerable time defending their actions. I think there were other ways the barricaded suspect could have been handled, and in the end a civil court may agree with that assessment.
Who said anything about being anti-police? I’m glad the guy was offed, but he was murdered.
Would you expect the cops to do the same if some people you worked with were the victims? Nope. that would not happen. I get really ticked that cops act like they are more special than civilians. That doesn’t mean I’m “anti-police” either.
Yes I do. As a former firearms instructor I am well aware of the training police officers receive, and I am offended by the actions of some officers today.
So, apparently, does sticking their...
I’m not a lawyer, either, but agreed on statutory law. The neglects of public affairs considerations are mounting up, though—not only in police agencies but also in other government offices, branches, business, etc. Each of us should try to be impeccable. Leaders and public servants, more so.
Oh, well. It’s a young man’s game—a game that I was involved in for a very short time, long ago, and left behind. I’ll read about the excitement and adventure from my little peaceful place.
Make sure you wipe the boot polish off your chin before you hit the sheets, your wife might get mad.
Feds only deployed 2 in Waco.
Thanks for your honest reply, I’m happy to hear you feel that way.
No it doesn’t. I said the remains are Dorner. However, it is the PD that is saying they still have not confirmed it is......which poses the question if they can’t confirm it why were they shooting up and torching an individual if they couldn’t confirm he was their suspect?
Ain't THAT the truth.
There is little more ironic than an idiot that denies the charge of being a "perfectionist," by insisting he "just wants it done 'right.'"
what complete BS. He was evil and a murderer that totally got what he deserved, a conservative principal. You spew left wing BS.
Insurance will pay for it.
Anyway what would you rather lose to take this perp down -- a cabin in the woods or another's officer's life???
Because the individual had stolen two trucks at gunpoint, ambushed two officers, killing one, and was firing hundreds of rounds at them.
And they torched the building not him. He chose to remain in the burning building when he could have come out with his hands up.
"Burn this mother++++++ down" refers to the building that he is hiding in -- not him.
How many hostages were in the building when they torched it?
I’m sure that department was equipped with thermal imaging devices to determine if there was more than one person in the building. It would be easy to determine.
The people at Waco had done no clear wrong, at most paperwork violations.
Nobody doubts this guy killed innocents and cops to no good reason, and was capable of, and intent on, killing even more while being “waited out”.
Yes. Peasants must crawl before the faces of the King's men...
I'll let you argue with yourself:
drpix wrote: This thread is about the cops at Dorner's cabin holdout. It's not about the cops who shot the 2 women.
Notice how you change the subject "every time your arguement on the original subject or case colapses".
The subject is the police hosing down everything in sight with lead and fire...
The problem that the conservative Statists refuse to acknowledge is that the state wardens are EVERYWHERE.
You used to be able to escape their reach in the beginning of the Republic. Now, they pursue you to the death like the very Furies, anywhere in the land. There are no sanctuaries any more.
And the conservative Statists cheer on...
What is an "unconfirmed video"?
Isn't a "burner" a tear gas canister?
The man was denied due process.
Like another poster said, from my cold, charred fingers.
“They saved California tax-payers Millions of dollars “
Maybe not. If he was executed by fire then his family has untold riches coming.
>> I no longer wonder how the inhumane tragedies of history happened.
A sad revelation for me as well.
Whose rights were being negated in this incident?
He was NOT denied, he refused to participate. Big difference.
Drat! I've evaded the Viking Kitties with ease for over 10 years on Free Republic, but now I've been outed by drpix in one evening...
>> Looks like some anti-cop “libertarians” on FR are revealing themselves to be comrades of the leftwing want-to-be revolutionaries that are targets rather than posters on FR.
An argument you’re making in defense of sentencing the suspect?
So you’re happy to make a judgment based on a report of a report of the media? Seriously?
>> He was NOT denied, he refused to participate
I partially agree with that statement.
I just read an article indicating the burn was intentional. If it’s true, then the question of vigilante justice must be addressed apart from, but not indifferent to, the legitimate concern of the LEOs’ safety.
Put them in place around the suspect's location, and wait them out.
That is, if they're not really interested in murdering them....
Or an electric fence.
CS gas canisters are often referred to as "burners".
This one, but I’m not convinced the reports accurately reflect the actual events. I’m not in a rush to judge.
>> CS gas canisters are often referred to as “burners”.
Good to know.
You mean this? "Multiple unconfirmed audio clips appear to show police officers talking about burning down the cabin in which the alleged cop-killer was hiding."
Few initial reports are accurate or factual. What we do know is that the fugitive refused to peacefully surrender.
Can anyone explain what an "unconfirmed audio clip" is?
“”Seven burners deployed and we have a fire,” says the first voice.
“Copy. Seven burners deployed and we have a fire,” responds a female voice.
‘Burners’ is SoCal cop slang for tear gas canisters. They were talking about the tear gas they were pumping into the house.
You mean am I willing to make a judgement call after hearing police transmissions played on tv?
You seem willing to allow govt officials to shoot and kill at their whim without question.
Actually, I’m willing to wait until the proverbial - and actual - smoke has cleared instead of jumping to conclusions based on incomplete or improperly presented information.
You are familiar with selective media editing of tapes and photographs, as in the Zimmerman case, right? You heard that recording of Zimmerman and the police dispatcher as presented on TV, didn’t you? And, of course, you knew it was accurate because it was a police dispatcher. Oh, wait... there were parts left out, weren’t there? Oh, yeah, then there were photographs that weren’t shown. And contrived witnesses. All served to stir up the mobs, the undereducated, gullible mobs.
You might want to reconsider how you make your judgments.
I couldn’t resist
In other words gice the cops time to fix the evidence. Well be lucky if there arent riots out of this.
Yet another case of you guys preaching due process to protect cops who have denied due process to others.