"Sheriff's transcripts released Friday indicate deputies didn't fire a single shot during the final two hours of a standoff with Christopher Dorner, a former Los Angeles police officer who authorities said killed four people in a nearly weeklong rampage."
While I'm at it, has there been any debate forum outcry over Tamerlan's being killed by police, like there was about Dorner ?? (Edit: Dorner wasn't literally killed by police.)
Originally posted by JS357 http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dorner-transcripts-show-deputies-held-fire-end-19001906#.UXQ0K8rhes0
"Sheriff's transcripts released Friday indicate deputies didn't fire a single shot during the final two hours of a standoff with Christopher Dorner, a former Los Angeles police officer who authorities said killed four people in a nearly weeklong rampage." ...[text shortened]... police, like there was about Dorner ?? (Edit: Dorner wasn't literally killed by police.)
No he was killed in a fire that reports say was set by the police. 🙂
Are you not just looking for conspiracy theories? 😛
Originally posted by johnnylongwoody No he was killed in a fire that reports say was set by the police. 🙂
Are you not just looking for conspiracy theories? 😛
No, I am looking to see if there are inconsistencies between the causes that people get fired up about on this forum. I suppose there are reasons for people who were bothered by the Dorner situation, not to be bothered by the Tamerlan situation, but I'd like to hear them.
Originally posted by JS357 No, I am looking to see if there are inconsistencies between the causes that people get fired up about on this forum. I suppose there are reasons for people who were bothered by the Dorner situation, not to be bothered by the Tamerlan situation, but I'd like to hear them.
The two situations are completely different. Tamerlan was killed during a shootout with police. Dorner, on the other hand, died about two hours, apparently, after the shootout with police had ended. Plus, the police had reason to know that Dorner was injured because they observed heavy blood splatters in the cabin. Moreover, the sheriff transcript suggests that they suspected that Dorner was hiding in the basement before the fire had started.
Essentially, it is a means analysis. Were the means used by the police to capture the suspect reasonable? Certainly it is reasonable for the police to shoot a suspect while the suspect is shooting and throwing bombs at them. It is not reasonable for the police to burn a suspect out of a building when they have reason to believe that the suspect is bleeding out in a basement.
Or take this WWII example. Was it reasonable for the US to force Japan to surrender by nuking their civilians? Or should the US have invaded Japan?
Originally posted by MoneyManMike The two situations are completely different. Tamerlan was killed during a shootout with police. Dorner, on the other hand, died about two hours, apparently, after the shootout with police had ended. Plus, the police had reason to know that Dorner was injured because they observed heavy blood splatters in the cabin. Moreover, the sheriff transcript s ...[text shortened]... US to force Japan to surrender by nuking their civilians? Or should the US have invaded Japan?
Originally posted by MoneyManMike The two situations are completely different. Tamerlan was killed during a shootout with police. Dorner, on the other hand, died about two hours, apparently, after the shootout with police had ended. Plus, the police had reason to know that Dorner was injured because they observed heavy blood splatters in the cabin. Moreover, the sheriff transcript s ...[text shortened]... US to force Japan to surrender by nuking their civilians? Or should the US have invaded Japan?
There was blood on the boat tarp, so the police had even more reason to believe Tamerlan was injured. Dorner killed himself and the police did not deliberately burn him out though you and others continue to make that false claim.
The officers at the Dorner scene reported that he continued to fire whenever a target presented itself. Your continued distortion of the facts is noted, but a lie does not become true nearly by repeating it no matter how many times it is done.
Originally posted by no1marauder There was blood on the boat tarp, so the police had even more reason to believe Tamerlan was injured. Dorner killed himself and the police did not deliberately burn him out though you and others continue to make that false claim.
The officers at the Dorner scene reported that he continued to fire whenever a target presented itself. Your c ...[text shortened]... oted, but a lie does not become true nearly by repeating it no matter how many times it is done.
"Dorner killed himself". Where has that been established?
As to who keeps repeating stuff expecting it to become more true, I'll let others judge.
Originally posted by JS357 http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dorner-transcripts-show-deputies-held-fire-end-19001906#.UXQ0K8rhes0
"Sheriff's transcripts released Friday indicate deputies didn't fire a single shot during the final two hours of a standoff with Christopher Dorner, a former Los Angeles police officer who authorities said killed four people in a nearly weeklong rampage." ...[text shortened]... police, like there was about Dorner ?? (Edit: Dorner wasn't literally killed by police.)
Apparently Tamerlan was killed in an active gunfight (exchange of gunfire).
Dorner was killed in a seige.
The Watertown gunfight involved a few local officers, whereas the Donner seige involved a large number of officers from a variety of jurisdictions.
Originally posted by normbenign "Dorner killed himself". Where has that been established?
As to who keeps repeating stuff expecting it to become more true, I'll let others judge.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=8995140
Others judging is fine by me so long as they reference the facts rather than reaching a conclusion first and then ignoring all facts which conflict with it (your MO as taught to you by Mises).
Originally posted by no1marauder http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=8995140
Others judging is fine by me so long as they reference the facts rather than reaching a conclusion first and then ignoring all facts which conflict with it (your MO as taught to you by Mises).
Feb.15th is after the fact, and at the time, nobody knew he had taken his own life. That being the case, it might be argued that burning the cabin down was totally not required, too risky, and destructive of private property.
This fact is irrelevant to the claims made at the time, which were he was shooting. If he was dead, he wasn't shooting.
Originally posted by no1marauder There was blood on the boat tarp, so the police had even more reason to believe Tamerlan was injured. Dorner killed himself and the police did not deliberately burn him out though you and others continue to make that false claim.
The officers at the Dorner scene reported that he continued to fire whenever a target presented itself. Your c ...[text shortened]... oted, but a lie does not become true nearly by repeating it no matter how many times it is done.
Tamerlan wasn't in the boat. Stop being careless with the facts. 🙄
Also, the sheriff transcript seems to indicate that no shots were fired for two hours. I am sure that if Dorner had taken potshots at the police, the police would have returned fire. I am not inclined to believe that an army of police would bend over and take it from one man. Note that, No1. XD
Originally posted by normbenign Feb.15th is after the fact, and at the time, nobody knew he had taken his own life. That being the case, it might be argued that burning the cabin down was totally not required, too risky, and destructive of private property.
This fact is irrelevant to the claims made at the time, which were he was shooting. If he was dead, he wasn't shooting.
This has been covered ad nausem. There was a single gunshot heard AFTER the sheriffs fired the tear gas into the cabin and the cabin caught fire. There was no intent to burn the cabin down though it was deemed an acceptable risk given the dangerousness of the subject and the possibility of escape after darkness in a heavily wooded area where he had avoided capture for weeks. Those judgment calls seem more than reasonable under the circumstances; if kin of Dorner feel differently they may file a lawsuit.
Originally posted by MoneyManMike Tamerlan wasn't in the boat. Stop being careless with the facts. 🙄
Also, the sheriff transcript seems to indicate that no shots were fired for two hours. I am sure that if Dorner had taken potshots at the police, the police would have returned fire. I am not inclined to believe that an army of police would bend over and take it from one man. Note that, No1. XD
You're always sure of a lot of things that wind up being untrue. But:
The transcripts show law enforcement officers poured in and deputies were told not to fire unless they saw Dorner.
Dorner redux, and Tamerlan parallel?
21 Apr '13 18:521 edit
Back to Top