Slashdot Mirror
Spy Drones Used To Hunt Down Christopher Dorner
Hugh Pickens writes writes "The Express reports that as a task force of 125 officers continue their search for Christopher Dorner in the rugged terrain around Big Bear, it was revealed that Dorner has become the first human target for remotely-controlled airborne drones on US soil. 'The thermal imaging cameras the drones use may be our only hope of finding him,' says a senior police source. 'On the ground, it's like looking for a needle in a haystack.' The use of drones was confirmed by Customs and Border Patrol spokesman Ralph DeSio, who revealed agents have been prepared for Dorner to make a dash for the Mexican border since his rampage began. 'This agency has been at the forefront of domestic use of drones by law enforcement.' Dorner, who was fired from the LAPD in 2008 for lying about a fellow officer he accused of misconduct, has vowed to wreak revenge by 'killing officers and their families.' According to San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon: 'To be honest, he could be anywhere right now. Torching his own vehicle could have been a diversion to throw us off track. Anything is possible with this man.'"
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2135132,00.html
"In June 2011 a county sheriff in North Dakota was trying to track down three men, possibly carrying guns, in connection with some missing cows. He had a lot of ground to cover, so — as one does — he called in a Predator drone from a local Air Force base. It not only spotted the men but could see that they were in fact unarmed. It was the first time a Predator had been involved in the arrest of U.S. citizens."
This comes uncomfortably closely after the latest announcement of the drone authorisation map.
That are equipped with similar sensors.
Guys, this has been making the rounds on Faceplant for the last three days now. While I give that it's news that matters, I'd have thought you guys would be more timely...
Christ, this whole thing is entertaining in a macabre way that I should not be enjoying, but I am. It's like bad guys vs badder guys. I don't know who to root against from day to day.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
They put this much effort into finding and punishing all of the crooked cops in the LAPD.
Sounds like he's killing crooked cops because no one else will handle the issue.
Are we supposed to feel sorry for these people?
Use drones. Keep shooting random civilians until you find this man. Whatever it takes.
Of course, who could oppose using hundreds of drones to hunt down a cop-killer.
And the next suggestion will be, "Wouldn't it be a good idea for the drones to be able to fire, too?" So the next thing you know, you've got weaponized drones.
And after a decade or so, they won't be used to find mass murderers. Merely traffic offenders or people late on their alimony.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
It's not as if police don't break the law, is it.
We can find lost hikers, boy scouts, love struck teenage couples lost in the wilderness with this! Just look the other way when we use it to imprison or kill enemies of the state.
Silence is a state of mime.
....that making guns illegal for civilian use would not prevent evil cops like this one from murdering people.
Have the drones on the border only been going after sub-humans?
I can't help but see Dorner as Guy Montag. With the endless stories of LAPD corruption I don't trust the official reprt that he was lying.
It may be that I can't differentiate fiction from non-fiction, but doesn't the US military have satellites with the capabilities of infrared viewing and detection that would perform the same task but with much greater efficiency, given the satellite(s) is/are in the area required to locate the individual, plus with a much greater scope or area that can be tracked at any given moment? I play Call of Duty darnit, and we all know that the Call of Duty franchise is based 100% in truth and doesn't lie! :P
Dorner kills and posts a diatribe about the LADP's corruption and abuse of the public, citing cases like Rodney King. I wonder if Dorner's plan all along was to create mayhem and then let the LADP step into it and bring their abuses to light through their own actions. Already, the LADP has opened fire on two people in cases of mistaken identity in the search for Dorner.
Helicopters with FLIR systems do the exact same thing.
This is all cool and what-not but he's not there. He drove away in a car he left where the burned out truck was found.
This dude is scary as shit and they're not going to find him this easily.
They probably ask Alex Murphy to give it a try
KERNEL PANIC -SIGFAULT AT ADDRESS #51A54D07
I believe my house was scanned early this morning. Cheers
Using drones that cause "collateral damage" to kill a suspect? What happened to the right to a fair trial, due process... ?
One probably should not use the word, "target," in the same sentence as, "drone," and, "US soil." Even though technically accurate, tension is lowered by saying, "...it was revealed that Dorner has become the first human on US soil which airborne drones have attempted to locate. 'The..." Same thing I think.
Targeting connotates shooting/firing/use of force from the targeting platform. It makes me think of armed drones, not surveillance drones. The latter is not much different from using helicopters, while the former would be an escalation of tactics that would make me think I'm living in Pakistan or Yemen.
If your read the story, the cops on the ground are driving around shooting the wrong cars.
What are the odds the drone has a patriot missile on-board?
Anyone remember the story last week about drone strikes on American citizens abroad: http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-justice-department-memo-reveals-legal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite - which wound up killing a 16 year old citizen?
With events like this surrounding Christopher Dorner, we're only a short hop, skip, away from the above happening domestically.
I wonder what the breaking point event will be for the intelligent Slashdot community, where you will actually get mad rather than diverting the issue and believing nothing will be abused.
Once again, xkcd tells it like it is for would be survivalists.
Proverbs 21:19
http://youtu.be/hY5-j7MjecU
This is wildly inaccurate. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits anyone from using the army or air force for law enforcement purposes without specific legal (Constitutional or statutory) authorization (18 USC Sec. 1385: "Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. "); since the Insurrection Act grants specific powers to the President in this regard (see 10 USC Sec. 331-336), the Posse Comitatus Act, viewed in conjunction with the Insurrection Act, limits the President less than anyone else, not more.
Where's Blue Thunder when you need it!!
Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
You know just over 30 years ago, "The use of unnecessary force has been approved" read over the police dispatch was a laugh line from a comedy. Now its apparent SOP in a completely serious way.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
1. Go to Los Angeles
2. Get shot by the LA Police: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-torrance-shooting-20130209,0,4414028.story
3. Sue
4. Retire
This is just sparkly story stuff to sell Drones in America.
It's fun to watch! It's got a real Bad Guy! It gets your blood up!
It's fucking Running Man/Hunger Games rolled into one.
And when all is said and done, the popular approval for Drones and Domestic Assassinations will be waaaay up.
This is theater and advertising.
And that is sick.
The fact that nobody seems to recognize that this is blatant manipulation is the part which I find most depressing. People so easily manipulated deserve to have terminator drones flying over their lives.
"' Dorner, who was fired from the LAPD in 2008 for lying about a fellow officer he accused of misconduct"
You seems to be drinking the cool aid too easily. Every other source, the lapd over reaction and Dorners manifesto lead to believe that corruption coverups and raw incompetence was the name of the game for Lapd.
Ok Dorner is enemy public #1
but the LAPD looks like a fitting enemy public #2 and not just because they are shooting at anyhthing looking even remotely like a Nissan Pickup truck...
If Dorner's smart, he's already gone. He's kicked the hornet's nest, all he has to do is sit back and watch everything fall apart as the LAPD flies further off the handle in their rabid attempt to get him.
In a year or two, if they haven't cleaned up their corruption, he can come back and hit them again when they're not on alert. Assuming he's not some ego-driven, self-destructive type like all the rest of these types.
The real question is whether this guy will become the first US citizen killed by a drone on US soil. All the keywords are in place. He is a US citizen. He has declared the equivalent of jihad against the LAPD. The reward for information leading to his capture is at the level it is because he has been defined as a terrorist.
So, he is a us citizen terrorist on US soil. Will they kill him if they get him in the sites of an armed drone?
Granted, his motivations, intentions and actions are pretty clear but once you allow this guy to be taken out without a trial, except in the media, then who's next and for what crime?
Likely, they'll start targeting people with MP3 players as they likely have pirated music on their players. :^D
This is about someone using weapons to fight out of control government. In this case, he's the only one who knows the facts, so it's appropriate that he's the one doing the fighting, taking the risks, etc. Before you can co-opt large numbers, you have to do a lot better job of establishing your case than anecdotes. Even if he's 100% right, no one else can really know that.
This is simply not the kind of issue where you'd see a revolt. It is neither serious enough, well documented enough, or of consequence to a wide enough spectrum of people.
It is, however, the kind of thing that will happen from time to time, as the powerful crush the lives and dreams of the (relatively) little guy. When you takes actions that ruin someone's life, you'd better be sure they've got plenty of reasons left not to go off the reservation, as it were.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Grief, talk about a bunch of tin foil hats, this is a spy drone, not a HK drone, and there's a warrant for his arrest.
The problem occurs when the surveillance drones are used without a warrant or HK drones are used as a part of law enforcement avoiding due process.
How about picking intelligent fights and not undermining your cause?
Targeting connotates shooting/firing/use of force from the targeting platform.
No it doesn't - think of the laser designators used by the military to 'paint' targets for airstrikes. The targeting body (laser designator on the ground) is not the weapons platform.
This is basically the same situation, with roles reversed - the aircraft will provide the targeting mechanism, while the 'troops' do the killing.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
"I wonder what the breaking point event will be for the intelligent Slashdot community, where you will actually get mad rather than diverting the issue and believing nothing will be abused."
Wait until one day the civilian national security force in their brown uniforms, armed with 1.6 billion rounds of ammo start marching on the streets the same time the King announcing the suspension of the Constitution.
When Slashdot is full of people like these , you will understand why history keep repeating itself.
New Economic Perspectives
So many cops squatting and pissing like a girl.
pssssssss I can hear that from here too.
Now everyone can see who and what they really are.
Ahh a tyrrany fight.
But just right now we are watching our low I.Q. boys shoot it out.
I just wonder how many more will get shot up in the name of this obviously personal battle. Two last I checked. Does anybody know what the Vegas line on this is?
Adding an armed drone could hike the casualty count nicely, more if it is cops and not military running the show. I don't care how much training you give a rock, it's still only smart as a rock, but with combat training. Police commonly exclude very high above average I.Q.s as independent thinkers and do not hire them.
Mustn't have anyone making decisions and judgement calls on their own now. I notice it doesn't stop corruption though. I think it would be o.k. to hire a few rocket scientists for a change.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
After the successful Patriot anti-missile system, America launches the anti-Patriot missile system.
Corrupt police railroading a cop that tried to expose their corruption, but because the law enforcement itself was corrupt, he uses 2nd amendment solutions.
How does murdering a basketball coach and her fiancé fit into that?
I don't really like gun nuts, but only the loopiest ones would say that Dorner is doing anything other than trying to get revenge for his perceived persecution.
If he'd shot anyone other than cops the LAPD would be yawning rather than spending millions of taxpayer dollars to find him.
I could support this man if he had not started out by killing a cops daughter and fiance.
Killing of the innocent should be avoided when possible.
And they should NEVER the targets.
He fucked up right there in my book.
Hope he takes out a couple of those murdering Fullerton PD cops before he gets killed or get put away forever though.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Sensationalist headline on multiple levels. First, law enforcement has been using drones already, ranging from cattle theft to border patrol. Second, the headline is trying to conflate the image with that of an ARMED drone which is extremely misleading; it's like saying that a law enforcement agency is targeting people with helicopters then posting a picture of an AH-64 Apache. This is not to negate the very real concerns that unmanned platforms introduce for law enforcement and civil liberties, but we shouldn't let hysteria get in the away of creating smarter policies.
I'm 100% against the use of drones, but lets not confuse this guy with someone who's using his 2nd Amendment rights to fight tyranny. Firstly, because even if he was railroaded, corruption in and of itself is not tyranny. Secondly, and more importantly, he lost claim to the moral high ground by targeting the family of those he has a grudge for -- two of the three victims were the daughter of someone he holds a grudge against and her fiancee. There's nothing heroic about that. That's murder, plain and simple.
drones to not belong on usa soil.
What do drone "operator(s)" get paid compared to a helicopter pilot?
Both get paid peanuts; it's the fuel costs that make the difference. http://www.rotoruadailypost.co.nz/news/fuel-cost-hits-rescue-helicopter-training/1523209/
Fighting a government? This guy murdered some cop's innocent kid and the cop's kid's fiancee. This wasn't collateral damage or some kind of mistake. He stalked them and murdered them.
How is that any sort of legitimate fight against a government?
--PM
You guys don't know what you're missing. I love Tea'n'crumpet in the morning.
Are all the gun-nuts going to start shooting the LAPD now? Why not? Are you for or against government tyranny?
Concidering that the "gun-nut" in this case is a liberal democrat, I would say no. I think we need a law against all liberal democrats from owning guns. They are the only ones who go off the reservation and shoot up innocent people.
Cops murder people all the time. And they send innocent people off to their slaughterhouse prisons to die all the time. And they ruin innocent people's lives all the time. Families are hurt by that all the time. How is that a legitimate fight against crime? And why should their families be immune from the effects of their malfeasance, if the lives of the families of the people they abuse are not?
Actions have consequences. That's the lesson here. Not "omg, innocents!" And where were you when the lives of innocents were being ruined by these cops? Eh? Have you been pointing the finger at the cops for their daily, nay, hourly, maltreatment of innocents?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I agree that it is not a fight against the government as a whole, just a very tiny speck of it: a group of corrupt, violent LAPD officers and unfortunately their families as well. The killing of family members is certainly not the part of any "legitimate" fight, but he is probably assuming that the cops in question will be hurt by such killing, which may or may not be true. He certainly isn't just randomly killing people. His overall intent seems to be to fight against the corrupt cops that he witnessed committing cruel crimes and getting away with it. To bring them to justice in the only way he knows how. If it weren't for the targeting of family members I'd personally consider the guy a hero. Killing off all the bad cops is certainly one way to clean up our massively corrupt police force.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
The weirdest thing is that his nutjob manifesto is more anti-gun than any gungrabber group out there. A hypocrite worthy of being employed as a cop.
It has long been established, that the day a drone is used to actually kill an American on U.S. Soil, would constitute as an act of war against the American people.
They better not do it, otherwise people will likely react to it.
Law enforcement in the US has been militarized for a while. Now we have drones that track the average citizen. When are these drones going to be armed? If we don't object to what is happening now, don't be surprised if the local police can take you out from the air.
Why do we have the most people imprisoned in any 1st world country?
Why are we spending $100,000+(at leaset in CA) for each prison guard?
Why are more prisons than universities being built?
Is that all good for society?
Just put them on the street, walking. They get to know their little neighborhood, and vice-versa. The only need for cars is for traffic enforcement, and 99% of that is purest bullshit anyway.
Indeed.
According to New York City Department of Transportation, there are about "6,300 miles of streets and highways" in NYC.
Walking at 3 miles per hour, 6 hour shifts, a two cop team would be covering about 18 miles of street per shift.
That means that, theoretically, you could cover the entire New York city with only 2800 cops working in four shifts.
Which is a hell of a lot less than 34,500 police officers in NYPD today. Clearly, they're just there to get fat on the taxpayer's money.
You'd only have to accept certain compromises of such a "lean local law enforcement".
Like... A police station every 18 miles (I'm sure no one would mind all the taxes to build, equip and maintain all that), a response time of an hour or so (that is unless there is already a crime in progress somewhere down the road - then you'd just have to wait your turn), cops not dealing with cases where there are more than two suspects - until their backup arrives on foot from the next station over, or not responding at all if it is raining or snowing, no actual detective work as these are after all just beat cops and the detectives will arrive (on foot) when they find the time.
And naturally, you could completely cripple your local police force for hours by breaking a traffic light at an intersection. And there are 12000 signalized intersections in NYC.
But yeah, sure.
I see no reason why cops shouldn't still operate the way the god intended them too - like the 17th century Bow Street Runners.
All criminals are pedestrians anyway, right?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
"The thermal imaging cameras the drones use may be our only hope of finding him"
That doesn't say they are using them. Just says they may be their only hope.
Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
why should their families be immune from the effects of their malfeasance
My dad killing your kid does not justify you killing me. Go after my dad, but leave me out of it, or my siblings may decide they need to take you out before they become targets, and your remaining kids go after my siblings, and it just goes on and on and on...
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
Can you prove that? What if it was done by someone intending to frame him? At this point we only have our presumptions about what he may or may not have done.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
You, and all your generations.
Not if there aren't any siblings left. See how that works? Turns out your dad's best bet is not to kill my kid. You'd be the first one to tell him so.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Hmmm... is that why LAPD deemed him a domestic terrorist? To qualify for military support? (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/10/ex-cop-manhunt-continues/1906999/
Making the possible totally impossible.
He certainly isn't just randomly killing people. His overall intent seems to be to fight against the corrupt cops that he witnessed committing cruel crimes and getting away with it.
Then his execution is intolerable. He killed the daughter and fiance of his defending council. Do you think that man is part of the group of cops whose crimes Dorner witnessed?
Your assumption is that a corrupt cop killed the daughter and fiance of Dorner's defending council? To what end exactly? So they can kill Dorner before he exposes the police? He already submitted his testimony. Say Dorner was telling the truth about his supervising officer kicking a disabled man. How does killing those two people benefit the conspirators? It allows them to kill Dorner with less scrutiny? It prevents the closed case from reopening? It prevents Dorner from exposing worse behavior? If there is worse behavior, why didn't Dorner lead with that information during his hearing?
Killing those people if anything made Dorner's hearing higher profile, not lower. How exactly do the nebulous conspirators benefit?
Why aren't you out fighting it? Clearly you understand it exists.
The guy himself is a raging nut against the 2nd Amendment, it says right there in his "manifesto". The sooner he's dealt with, the better. The police are showing their true colours as well. No innocents in this fight unfortunately, only the tragedy of murdered bystanders.
The timing of events suggests that former Lt Dorner was reacting to the trauma of having been forcibly separated from the military, effective 01 February 2013, as a result of having been (fraudulently) cashiered by the LAPD. He lost his security clearance, as well as his pension, I'd guess.
Like many people, he held his legal counsel and coworkers responsible for the abuse he suffered in the workplace and the failure to achieve compensation. It's possible, even likely, that his legal counsel, and peer employees, placed their own career ahead of Officer Dorner's career.
It's not impossible to suggest that a rationalizing mind might conclude, under stress, that these other parties were active threats to, say, the United States, itself... seeing as they were sabotaging the war effort, by robbing The State of one of its assets - a trained warrior - as it were.
Notably absent in this epic are any references to a father. It seems likely that former Lt Dorner grew up in a family with no father, perhaps even a family where the missing father was referred to as 'a liar' ... leading to an obsession with truth, and integrity, on the part of the fatherless son.
If this analysis is correct then it is also worth pointing out that fatherless men are just what the military seeks, because they are easily molded to regard the upper ranks as their - until now, missing - disciplinarian/father figure.
And so we can expect more cases like this, where cops go 'Rambo'.
Hope he takes out a couple of those murdering Fullerton PD cops before he gets killed or get put away forever though.
By that logic I guess you are for Iraqis coming over and killing "murdering Americans" in retaliation for civilian deaths in Iraq. There may be cops on the Fullerton PD that committed murder but that does not justify picking random Fullerton cops and killing them. There are probably some very good cops in Fullerton and a few bad ones.
There are 3 kinds of cops in a bad department.
1) Bad Cops. (Fuck Them)
2) New Cops.
3) Cops who have not done bad things but know of officers who have.
(Fuck them just as hard.)
They take an oath. The cop that Murdered Kelly Thomas is a fuckwad who should die slowly in a fire.
The cops that were there and watched a murder be committed in their presence are just as bad.
The cops on the force who work with any of the above afterward should die quickly in a fire.
Cops murder people all the time. And they send innocent people off to their slaughterhouse prisons to die all the time. And they ruin innocent people's lives all the time. Families are hurt by that all the time. How is that a legitimate fight against crime? And why should their families be immune from the effects of their malfeasance, if the lives of the families of the people they abuse are not?
If you want to be righteous and violent then their families are fair game, and then you'll get a lot of other opportunities to be a hero when they re-escalate in response.
If you want to actually reduce the violence and killing, of both the cops and innocents, then you need to show restraint and fight them within the system. Killing bad cops won't get rid of bad cops so only the good ones are left, it will just turn good cops borderline and borderline cops bad.
I stole this Sig
How long will it take for our Dear Leader to add Chris Dorner to the "Kill List" and just have a drone take him out.
Of course, it's an ethical decision, now isn't it?
My support for the 2nd Amendment is dictated mainly by the utility of guns as self-defense tools. Just because it lists "security of a free state" as a rationale for its existence, doesn't mean that it doesn't cover all other use cases for guns.
I think it would be o.k. to hire a few rocket scientists for a change.
Good luck with that. Who'd WANT the damn job? Oh sure, it's all Law & Order out there, detectives investigating homicide and the case is solved in 44 minutes.
Pfft. As if. The unsolved cases far outnumber the solved ones, and it's not for lack of intelligence. It's for lack of evidence. No amount of smarts can actually zoom in that fucking far. I'm sorry, but you just can't. What is it actually like? Most cops are uniforms, and the highlight of their night is getting called out to deal with Stupid Fucker #1 vs Stupid Fucker #2 outside some bar, and hoping they can keep the peace without getting shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, or run over. Is it really any wonder that so many of them turn so severely cynical and turn into chiseling thieving bullying bastards? It's not an atmosphere conducive to niceness.
When you get down to it, what you want on the job are people with high empathy, and people with high empathy are exactly the ones who just can't take that job.
Oh, and a population gets the police force it creates. If the population goes out of its way to drive every cop with a shred of decency out of the force, what you have left is not going to be very nice. And yet, there's plenty of poor slobs on the job who will still give your sorry ass the benefit of the doubt one more time in your stupid-ass he-said she-said argument with your dumbass cousin. Fewer of those every year though.
This is wildly inaccurate. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits anyone from using the army or air force for law enforcement purposes without specific legal (Constitutional or statutory) authorization (18 USC Sec. 1385: "Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
"); since the Insurrection Act grants specific powers to the President in this regard (see 10 USC Sec. 331-336), the Posse Comitatus Act, viewed in conjunction with the Insurrection Act, limits the President less than anyone else, not more.
None of this matters - flying a drone, observing and reporting is not enforcing state law any more than a mall rent-a-cop is. It's good training for drone operators. Also from what I've read the law does not say "law enforcement purposes" it says "enforce State law". I'm not a lawyer, but I know words are important to one.
That part is just bizarre. It's hard to imagine a motive. Maybe he figures that killing someone you love is worse than killing the person themselves. Something worse than murder. Obviously he must have disliked his defense attorney for some reason and now that he has nothing to lose and considers himself as good as dead is killing off the loved ones of anyeone he's ever had a grudge against. He probably figures none of it matters because he himself only has days or even hours to live.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
"gun nuts"?? -- WOW, you would think VERY differently if you spent your childhood years in a socialist state to really know what is is to be free. Sadly many Americas simply take freedom for granted like its a birthright. That stuff you read in social studies about the 3 branches of gov checking each other is bullshit. Our founders were so concerned about our government swaying to tyranny they chose to put that as point #2 (after free speech) and were very specific about it.
People in the higher echelons of power all fear mass rebellion. That is their #1 concern. Why do you think they constantly have opinion polls? They want to keep you happy to get re-elected and keep power. If they could they would try a power grab or coup, but fear a mass armed rebellion. That will go out of control real fast. So right now they are in check. Do you honestly think they wouldn't try? oh... they just need to slowly rewrite some fundamental laws.... and they are doing that aren't they? Our founders even warned us about the evils of central banks (like 250 years ago, I mean these guys had insight)... and now we are all bitches paying 1/3 of our salary to them.
Right now you have 40% of US households own one and we have the lowest violent crime in 20 years (trending even lower). So thank your neighbors and vets for your freedom. Remember that every country that has banned them, the crime shoots up, people demand authoritative measures and the country goes socialist. It happened throughout history so... so... so... many times.
Besides this guy wrote in his manifesto he loves Feinstein and banning guns.... see for yourself. Yet that solves no problem but creates countless others like higher crime, inability to defend yourself, fear of the state, a huge black market, which introduces mafia, etc... Just look at England along with Russia, China, all have much higher per capita violent crime. Research it yourself. History and government stats are unbiased and don't lie.
http://www.scpr.org/blogs/news/2013/02/11/12506/lapd-manhunt-rumor-control-drones-sightings-and-wh/
Express misquoted Dorner.
"My dad killing your kid does not justify you killing me"
Perhaps you should go back to middle school and learn what a 'blood feud' is.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
No, it actually works like this.
The system doesn't work. As this fellow has been telling you. Also, he tried to use the system. It chewed him up and spit him out, as it tends to do when it is challenged in any way. He's moved on to another methodology now. The system has only itself to blame.
That's an assumption, one that goes counter to the ones this society is based upon. It has its corollary in "executing criminals and the consequent huge collateral damage to their families won't deter crime, it'll just turn others borderline and the borderline into criminals."
But in fact, what it does is breeds restraint and caution, which moves the borderline away from criminality, and keeps those who weren't even borderline well aware that living right is worth the candle. And when we execute the criminal, they stop committing crimes.
What you want to avoid doing is executing the innocent (or doing anything else to them, for that matter) because they and their families tend to get righteously pissed. Whereas the families of murderers and rapists also get hurt and pissed, but generally speaking, at the criminal, not the system. "YOU brought this on us!" "How could you!" and similar reactions.
Now, if the cops know that engaging in fuckery will get them targeted, and that everyone will suffer if they act like jackasses, not just them, and their families know that such fuckery will also likely get them targeted, the most likely result is that they will begin to actually do their jobs as they were intended to be done.
This is the way of war against something. You go after everything to do with the enemy that has besieged you. You take out the infrastructure, you blockade supplies, you drop on cities and you drop on industry and you drop on troops. You make the cost of being your enemy so high that no one wants to be your enemy. You do it until the other side cries "no more, no more" and convinces you they mean it. Then you occupy them and watch them for a while. In the interim, everyone else watches and goes "good grief, I don't want to be their enemy!"
This guy hasn't decided to play tit-for-tat. He's gone to war. And I'm not talking about modern, trained-to-fail warfare designed to use up munitions and equipment and keep the trough full for the military industrial complex; I'm talking about fuck-we're-facing-hitler-and-tojo all-out nuke-em burn-em where they stand war. And just like that war, the boys in blue started this one. He's already done far more damage to them than they can do to him; will he be able to do enough to make a difference in the sick, decayed culture of police officers? Remains to be seen. I rather think he may have already done so. Odds are good there's at least a spark of awareness already circulating among the police (and not just in LA) that when you step on people unjustly, they may bite back in a way the system can't insulate them from. The more so, now that a powerful example is being set.
It's revolution, writ small. Been a long time coming.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I know exactly what a blood feud is. My whole point was that blood feuds are stupid.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
You'd be the first one to tell him so.
Why do you assume I did not already? Why are you assuming I am on his side?
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
That's an assumption, one that goes counter to the ones this society is based upon. It has its corollary in "executing criminals and the consequent huge collateral damage to their families won't deter crime, it'll just turn others borderline and the borderline into criminals."
But in fact, what it does is breeds restraint and caution, which moves the borderline away from criminality, and keeps those who weren't even borderline well aware that living right is worth the candle. And when we execute the criminal, they stop committing crimes.
What you want to avoid doing is executing the innocent (or doing anything else to them, for that matter) because they and their families tend to get righteously pissed. Whereas the families of murderers and rapists also get hurt and pissed, but generally speaking, at the criminal, not the system. "YOU brought this on us!" "How could you!" and similar reactions.
Well I don't think it's well established that executions deter crime, and there's a lot to criticize in the US justice system, but in general punishing criminals with a fair punishment works.
Trouble comes up when people feel they've been treated unfairly. The problem with the bad cops is they don't necessarily think they're doing wrong, they think the public doesn't realize how bad the all the low lives and repeat offenders are so they feel justified in pushing the boundaries and throwing in some beatings, even the ones who get dirty and steal some drug money probably think they're justified for the stuff they're dealing with (and they're still better than the criminals). So when you try to punish them you don't make them afraid and cautious, you just give them more justification to do whatever the hell they want.
I'm sure you've heard of agent provocateurs, the reality is if someone is really looking to take your rights away they're not going to take away your guns, they're going to try to goad you into using them. That was the entire game plan of Bashar at the start of the revolution in Syria, commit atrocities until the revolution turns violent, then all of Bashar's backers dig in because they're terrified of what the revolutionaries will do if they get power. When you fight back violently that gives them the pretext to step up their game by restricting speech, imprisoning borderline individuals, or in this case, letting the cops use spy drones.
He's already done far more damage to them than they can do to him; will he be able to do enough to make a difference in the sick, decayed culture of police officers? Remains to be seen. I rather think he may have already done so.
Except I'm not worried about him, I'm worried about us, we've just lost the right not to be policed by drones, good cops have lost some ability to speak up about abuse without colleagues comparing them to this guy, and we've lost some right to walk down the street without being shot by some crazy cop. Guys shooting cops didn't give me freedom, they took away my right to relax and not worry about my hands if I get pulled over, just like the 9/11 bombers made airports a hell of a lot less free. Police will rightly just write him off as a one-off nutjob, if others pick up his cause and start shooting cops the response from the cops won't be "wow, we better clean up our act", it will be "ok, interact less with the public, and if anyone freaks you out shoot first and ask questions later".
This isn't a war you'll win, the most you'll do is create an enemy.
I stole this Sig
Additionally, what makes you think I even know anything about what my dad has done? Since I am speaking hypothetically, "I" could be a snot-nosed little 2 year old who knows absolutely nothing about anything. You clearly find it despicable when one person ruins the life of an innocent (as do I), yet for some reason you seem to think it ok for another innocent life to be ruined just because they are related to the perpetrator of the initial act.
Blood feuds are always stupid.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
This is simply not the kind of issue where you'd see a revolt. It is neither serious enough, well documented enough, or of consequence to a wide enough spectrum of people.
As a matter of curiosity, what would it take? Rounding up over 100,000 American citizens and relocating them in camps, perhaps?
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Are you an anarchist?
Didn't the government in that book shoot and kill a random citizen on television when they couldn't find the protagonist/who they were actually looking for?
It appears we're just one step from that.
Well, good. They're terrorists.
It is 100% certain that an executed criminal will not commit another crime. So yes, execution deters crime.
So... you figure his trainer was kicking that homeless person in the head in order to goad the (then) trainee cop into later attacking the police department? I have to say, that's a stretch. Not buying it. :)
We never had such a right. After all the flowery verbiage dissipates, rights actually exist only in the context of someone with violent recourse available to them willing to stand up for a claim to a right. Almost always a group standing up for a member; (this case is particularly interesting because it's a member standing up for a group.) That's never been the case with drones; the government has repeatedly said it's ok to use them, and, they were already in use. When people start shooting drones down (and it's an absolute certainty that they will), that's when you'll develop some rights in the matter.
As clearly demonstrated, there was no ability to speak up, to be lost. There can only be a gain in this department.
No, again, we didn't have any such right. Happens all the time. Rarely is there any blowback to the cop. And then there's this.
No, that was your legislature. Had nothing to do with the bombers, other than as an excuse. It'll backfire anyway. I stopped flying then; so did a lot of other people. We keep electing stupid, rich people. We keep getting stupid laws designed to benefit the rich. Eventually the public will figure it out.
Not my war; it's this cop's. And near as I can tell, he's already won. He got his message out, he's generated a huge upwelling of sympathy, there's a lot of discussion of just how bad the cops really are, they haven't even caught him but he's already done more damage to them than remains available to do to him, he may yet do more, and the very, very large number of people who have been handled unfairly by the cops are all watching, no doubt while they take notes. A *lot* of people perceive him as a hero.
Finally, the police have been the enemy for many decades, and we didn't create the situation. They did. From bashing heads in Chicago to the "silent blue line" to beating "suspects", to confiscating people's cameras, money and property, they created the enemy that is them. Now some reaping comes, and in the final analysis, I can't say I'm the least bit surprised, except perhaps only in that it took so long.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
By changing the channel. You really don't know where you are, do you?
Maybe you should ask that question to the organisations that trained him. It wouldn't surprise me that the whole psychological warfare is something that he has picked up. You guys do live in a country that proudly can put their name with nord korea, china,etc regarding torture and other pretty things in "war".
It isn't about this one event. It's about where drone use could go. You can't have even a few helicopters flying over Los Angeles at all times looking for undesirable conduct, but some day you might be able to have dozens of drones or more. They don't require as much fuel as carrying a person with safety gear does. Some day not far, they probably won't even require a remote human controller until they've found something.
It's about the slow normalization of it. Unarmed drones abroad. Then armed drones abroad. Then drones abroad killing Americans abroad. Now unarmed drones domestically. You don't see the road map?
Dorner is perfect for this. His cause would have garnered some sympathy, but now that he has killed innocents, it's not just him but his cause too that are tainted.
And I'm not even the "OMG, the government is out to eat my brain" type. The people that are there now, generally aren't out to get you. Many are incompetent and many are corrupt in that they seek personal benefit, but they're not Nazis and even the incompetent or corrupt still tend to block the truly dangerous sort. But this is the slope we're going down, and when we get to the bottom those tools may prove irresistible to the wrong sort of politician and all we need then is the wrong sort of "cleaning house".
Sorry, but soldiers need to understand that if government told them to shoot a child in the back of the head, they're supposed to do that.
No. They're supposed to disobey an unlawful order.
You think the guy that dropped the bomb on Hiroshima didn't know they were targeting kids? And yet he was completely fine with it.
Much can be said (and has been said) about the motives and morality of that particular event. Nonetheless, the guy who dropped the bomb knew that there was some moral difference between an intended target (the city) and collateral damage (kids).
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
The system doesn't work. As this fellow has been telling you. Also, he tried to use the system. It chewed him up and spit him out, as it tends to do when it is challenged in any way.
He was using the wrong system. He's moved on to another wrong system.
It is 100% certain that an executed criminal will not commit another crime. So yes, execution deters crime.
Non-sequitor. It is _not_ 100% certain that an executed criminal would have committed more crimes.
It is 100% certain that an executed criminal will not commit another crime. So yes, execution deters crime.
It is 100% certain that executed none-criminals will not commit any crime too. I say we take off, and nuke the populace from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
It is 100% certain that an executed criminal will not commit another crime. So yes, execution deters crime.
Well the alternative to execution is generally life in prison (if they're not exonerated) so even if they commit more crimes it will just be against other criminals (which I'm guessing you wouldn't mind).
Yeah... I wasn't saying that. You're saying a violent escalation makes the authorities afraid and keeps them in line, I'm saying agent provocateurs are proof that the government will actually encourage violent escalations against them in order to discredit you or take away your rights.
I didn't mean a literal legal right, I meant a strong social more against them being used regularly, but I could be mistaken and that was already the case.
Uhhh no, that's when boatloads of people will start getting prosecuted for shooting down drones.
Neither are binary problems, you can make them a little better, or a little worse, this dude made both worse.
Nah, your legislature, I'm Canadian (not that much better but we're not the ones driving it). And yes, the bombers were an excuse, just like this dude might be, are you starting to get it.
I stole this Sig
You've suffered several major comprehension failures.
1) "Gun nut" was the terminology used by the post I was replying to. I used it to make a point.
2) I didn't say that Dorner was a "gun nut." In fact, I said that gun nuts generally wouldn't support him.
The fact that you managed to completely misread a two sentence post is beyond me. Maybe you were too busy concocting your drawn out rant to notice that I didn't say any of the things you were objecting to?
I'm quite certain that "the organizations that trained him" could not explain why the person that I replied to thought that Dorner was in any way exercising 2nd amendment rights. I was calling that person out for saying something stupid. I'm not sure how you interpreted my post as anything else, but congratulations on completely missing the point.
First of let me state that all the known facts indicate this guy is a murdering lunatic nothing more and nothing less.
Still in the hypothetically speaking if he or someone one were fighting a government than I would argue that civilian police forces, and government personnel and their families could be considered legitimate targets. That might even include people in roles like teacher or librarian if they are spreading pro government propaganda. These people would be collaborators.
You have to demoralize and terrify when you are fighting a better organized and superior force. We attacked the families of British and Hessian officers during our revolution. What exactly do you think Washington was crossing the Delaware to do on the 25th of December?
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
"Dorner, who was fired from the LAPD in 2008 for lying about a fellow officer he accused of misconduct..."
He ALLEGEDLY lied about the misconduct. C'mon Slashdot, the first thing I learned in my journalism class in college was that you can NEVER outright accuse anyone of anything. Plus, the whole damn reason behind him going postal was because he ALLEGES that he was telling the truth about the misconduct, that he was fired as a result of corruption and ass-covering, and is now taking justice on the corrupt police officers involved.
In Soviet Russia, dot slashes YOU!
Cops murder people all the time. And they send innocent people off to their slaughterhouse prisons to die all the time. And they ruin innocent people's lives all the time. Families are hurt by that all the time. How is that a legitimate fight against crime? And why should their families be immune from the effects of their malfeasance, if the lives of the families of the people they abuse are not?
Trying to defend the actions of a murderous nutjob as freedom-fighting, because you dislike the rule of law embodied by cops, is not a terribly good argument except to appeal to fellow morons.
We all look forward to seeing the SWAT teams prying your weapons from your cold, dead hands.
In a civilised society, you don't resort to shooting people when you get frustrated.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Apparently it's have been pulled out of British press ass. Their tabloids really don't waste time with checking facts.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/02/12/christopher_dorner_manhunt_faa_dhs_say_no_drones_are_being_used.html
Of course this could be false in event that you say that huge amount of people in government are lying about official record.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Sorry dude, but you've got it backwards. This is a war they can't win. Sure, I'd agree if it was us (the world) punishing them. But this is one of their own. He's not some nut job, he's one of them. He knows exactly what they've done, and he's holding them accountable. They can frame that message however they like, but good cops at the end of their rope now have an example. Bet you a dollar he won't be the last to do this. You authoritarians think everyone thinks like you. We don't. For some of us, the principle is more important than the consequences. We will die to free the rest of you. Been that way forever.
Look up recidivism rates. This tells you what will actually happen.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
This is the dumbest thing I've heard today. Civilization does not exist unless someone is shooting someone else. As far as I can tell, humans are not capable of living together in peace without a gun to their head. And yes, dummy, all you amerikans have a gun pointed to your head. Break one of your silly laws and find out.
You, they'll just make kneel down and blow them, cause you don't have any guns. I prefer death to giving blow jobs to cops. There really is only one problem with amerika, and that's that you are all so stupid. It's no wonder you can't control your government. All it takes is one preacher to say blowing cops is good, and you all line up.
You've wandered off topic by following my comparison into a new conversation. You had originally said:
While the point I was making when I said "And when we execute the criminal, they stop committing crimes." was: dead cops will not commit more abuses; they're dead.
Well, in that case, I'm saying that doesn't seem relevant to this situation.
The one does not preclude the other.
Disagree.
Cheers. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Well, there's your mistaken assumption right there. In a civilized society, cops don't kick homeless people in the face; they don't rally 'round the abuser and protect them when someone reports such an act; they don't fire the person reporting the act, and they don't intentionally wipe out their reputation. In a civilized society, all of the above go differently.
But in the society we actually have, this kind of thing, and this, is endemic, and eventually the people being abused, while being told to act civilized by the people committing the abuses, will decline to co-operate, and then the rest of us start having discussions like this one.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
It isn't a legitimate fight against the government. It's his personal fight against those that wronged him who happen to be LAPD or any other LEO that gets in his way. Remember, he said he will fight asymmetrically. That means he won't follow any prescribed notion of fairness and will be of his own time and his own choosing to attack any target on his hit list. I don't agree with him at all and I think he's a coward and a lunatic, but it is what it is. I imagine if he is still alive that he is planning his next attack.
as long as they don't have weapons... they can look, but no touching.
Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company -- Mark Twain
Freddy Kreuger deterrent. It's not enough to go after the cops involved because the point isn't just about physical warfare or violence it's about psychological warfare and about attacking something more abstract. It's about attacking racism and thoughtless cruelty WITHIN the police. If corrupt cops fear that their entire extended family will be put at risk by their actions they may think twice about roughing up a suspect in cuffs.
Cops can't be everywhere at all times, and by making a target out of the only people someone is guaranteed to value (culturally speaking we still assume strong nuclear family bonds) he is creating a seriously visible deterrent towards future police misbehavior. I can't say I really like that this is the way this all is happening but at the same time I'm at a loss to suggest any other way to seriously reform the police. Politics around "Law and Order" are still a paralyzing weakness to many.
Proving my point, it's not 100%.
Mr. Pickens, you have lost most of the respect I had for you.
What if he has a drone?
How is that any sort of legitimate fight against a government?
In a sense, it is worse.
(1) The weapons are the at least as powerful as that of anyone else.
(2) He has vowed to kill the families of specific government officers - but not the country as such.
(3) So the debate, even though he is more of a clear danger.
OK
I wonder about what you said. If Dorner had killed the police officer, who would suffer more, the officer or his family? Dorner stated in his manifesto that he personally wasn't afraid to die anymore, and that the police had ruined his relationships with his family. While I am aware that you are advocating the common view of things, perhaps Dorner thought a bit more seriously about his actions and decided that the family would suffer less if they died and the officer had to live with it. It's pure speculation, but if Dorner survives this then we might find out.
Welcome to old testament morality, just as stupid now as it ever was.
When two fuckwits are shooting at each other they're both "defending themselves".
The LAPD shot 4 innocent people in their vehicles while searching for Dorner. By my count (3 Dorner, 4 LAPD) plus the fact Dorner had a list and the LAPD just shot people, I'd they are more dangerous to us than Dorner.
he's the only one who knows the facts
# alias opinions = 'facts'
FTFY.
No, since one of them had to shoot first.
Fighting a government? This guy murdered some cop's innocent kid and the cop's kid's fiancee. This wasn't collateral damage or some kind of mistake. He stalked them and murdered them.
How is that any sort of legitimate fight against a government?
--PM
It's precisely the sort of legitimate fight waged by the government against it's citizens. It's time to call a spade a spade and let the government reap what they've sown.