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.
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
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.
He's killing family members too. Any level of sympathy or understanding for his position went out the window when he declared war on presumably innocent bystanders. He might have had a cause but he damned it by his own actions.
I'd like them to investigate police abuse in the LAPD when no one is shooting.
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.
/. aggregates, it doesn't report. I get annoyed too, but then I have to take a deep breath and remind myself...
Have the drones on the border only been going after sub-humans?
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.
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... ?
I presume you have taken the same stance on the 'war on terror'.
You can be sympathetic to the position without being sympathetic to the person. If Hitler said he loved cats i'd be sympathetic to his position.
The body count in the war on drugs is pretty high too
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Once again, xkcd tells it like it is for would be survivalists.
Proverbs 21:19
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
He's killing family members too. Any level of sympathy or understanding for his position went out the window when he declared war on presumably innocent bystanders.
FUnny, what you write above is EXACTLY what the US Military has been doing with drone
strikes for some years now.
But you have sympathy for them because you were TOLD to have sympathy for them,
don't you, you fucking halfwit.
"' 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...
He's killing family members too.
Allegedly, but is there any proof beyond the word of the LAPD? Not that I've seen.
RE: the point - Would you consider Eva Braun innocent of Nazi atrocities, because she was "just" Hitler's girlfriend/wife? Why/why not?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
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.
If Hitler said he loved cats i'd be sympathetic to his position.
Unless you are german. In that case showing the slightest sympathy for cats would be prove that you are a nazi.
"we are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."
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.
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... are you trying to derail the point by arguing semantics, or are you just that stupid?
Honest question.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
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!
And the families damaged by false arrests, unjust accusations and punishments? The individuals who can never get a decent job again, anywhere, what about their families?
Seems to me that's what the cops think is ok for them to do, is ok to do to them.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
After the successful Patriot anti-missile system, America launches the anti-Patriot missile system.
2.5 Don't die
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.
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.
No. It wasn't collateral damage. He was intentionally going after the families of the crooked cops. Not only is it an exceedingly cold-blooded thing to do, but it ignores the fact that most cops are sociopaths and probably wouldn't even care all that much if a family member gets shot. As long as it isn't them.
I was on his side until I read that he was targeting family members. That is both sick and pointless since it won't even hurt the cold-blooded cops all that much. At least nowhere near as much as it would a real human being with normal feelings. I would have supported a bad cop killing spree, leaving only the few honest, law-abiding, non-sociopathic, cops alive, but how can anyone support the killing of family members?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
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.
None of that is nearly as bad as actual murder. And I don't think most cops will care all that much if a family member is shot. It may be hard for us to imagine not caring about such a thing, but it is important to remember that most cops are sociopaths. Sociopaths only truly care about one person: themselves. They don't even understand the idea of empathy. People are just things to be used to their advantage. Even their own family members. So all you have really accomplished by killing a family member is remove a strategic asset of theirs. And one that is replacable. There is no way that murdering the families of the corrupt, sadistic cops is justified in any way.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
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
I think that's rather a matter of individual perspective. A life of misery compared with a quick death? It's not cut and dry.
I think you're being more than a little disingenuous there. One of the things being accomplished, or at least how it looks from here, is that it is unsafe for everyone involved when a cop is being evil. Not only are they at risk, but their families as well. Now, while a cop may be a sociopath, the family now considers themselves at risk if he or she misbehaves, and additional pressure to behave may come out of that. And if not, well, good riddance to them anyway. Anyone who figures cops, legislators and lawyers should be free to do anything they want -- or who supports them in such fuckery -- should probably die in a fire anyway.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
and there's a warrant for his arrest.
Are you serious? Unless this guy is unusually good at being on the lam he may as well already be dead. Did you fail to miss the vehicles the LAPD have already shot up? They aren't seeking to capture him. They are an assassination squad. This is about revenge for killing members of their gang. That is in addition to the crime of violating the Blue Wall of Silence, of trying to rat them out. Dorner has no chance of ever seeing the inside of a court room. Unless he has already fled the country at best he will take out more cops before he dies. I certainly hope he does at least.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
You guys don't know what you're missing. I love Tea'n'crumpet in the morning.
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.
He's trying to show how corrupt and incompetent the LAPD is, them shoot up random citizens because they are driving a similarly shaped and colored (not, not the same make, model, or color - just similar) is doing a pretty good job of it. As for him being a dead man walking... yep, but then, he knew that when he started out, said as much in his 'manifesto'. If the guy hadn't started killing the families of those involved I might almost have a modicum of pity for him... instead now I just pity the innocent people who are getting caught in the crossfire by both Dorner and the LAPD.
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.
Why aren't you out fighting it? Clearly you understand it exists.
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.
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
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.
If the guy hadn't started killing the families of those involved I might almost have a modicum of pity for him... instead now I just pity the innocent people who are getting caught in the crossfire by both Dorner and the LAPD.
Agreed. For me he went from hero to zero when he started killing innocent people. Once a cop always a cop I guess. For cops or ex-cops killing innocent people is like catnip to a cat.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
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.
RE: the point - Would you consider Eva Braun innocent of Nazi atrocities, because she was "just" Hitler's girlfriend/wife? Why/why not?
I would consider her not guilty, because 1) there is no evidence that she was aware of the atrocities, and 2) even if she were, she was not a part of the chain of command, and could not have issued an order to stop them.
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});
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.
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".
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.
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
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!
Look up recidivism rates. This tells you what will actually happen.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get 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.
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
Proving my point, it's not 100%.
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.
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.
No, since one of them had to shoot first.