So, how should cops have taken Dorner alive?

[nobodyspecial]

Lots of criticism of how events played out, but I would like to know what a realistic plan of taking him alive without further loss of life would have been?

[randome]

1. Surround the cabin with a cordon of 5,000 officers more than 1000 yards away.

Have military-grade night vision equipment and satellite surveillance put into place.

Do not sleep.

Wait for seventeen days and then creep gently inside to see if Dorner might be sleeping.

Case closed.

[LisaL]

24. He'd die from hunger eventually.

[CAG]

28. yes, and then the police would be castigated over not delivering pizzas and beer to his front

door each evening.

[LisaL]

37. Exactly.

And if they were delivering pizzas, DU posters would be complaining police is not concerned that he is getting adequate nutrition.

[kestrel91316]

45. You sure seem to have a general dislike of DUers.

Why do you torture yourself hanging out with us???

[LisaL]

50. Not all DUers. Only some.

[CAG]

47. Too many transfats!!!! Don't you CARE how that pig DIED so they could put

pepperoni and sausage on that pizza!!!!

Why only italian!!! Where's the diversity!!!! Feed the poor man some thai food, for god's sake!!!

[KittyWampus]

119. No, the complaint would be the pizza was cold. I remember when a prison was going to cold lunches

-not cold dinners or breakfast- lunches. And many DU'ers freaked out about how eating cold food is bad for ones well being.

[cliffordu]

181. And don't forget travel money.

[BainsBane]

55. and how many die in the process?

And how many people in California go unassisted, allowed to be shot, robbed, and raped while these 5000 cops were in the mountains?

Edit: If you didn't mean that seriously, I apologize. It's hard to tell around here.

[randome]

127. That WAS sarcasm but you make an excellent point also.

[DreamGypsy]

94. Chanting to raise the cabin off the ground ...

...until it lifts up, away, and gently moves off into the void.

And settles onto the plains of Tralfamador.

[randome]

128. Hey, that might work.

[baldguy]

2. The Monday morning Quarterback has it easy.

Especially when they have no knowledge or experience.

[CAG]

5. +1000; lots of tactical armchair experts around here who just KNOW that they could have

convinced this murderer to change his "rational" mind about the deadend he was heading towards.

[2pooped2pop]

131. I think most of us can agree that Dorner would not be taken alive

if he could help it. No one thinks they could have done a damned thing.

But we've seen this "unfortunate fire" thing before.

ANd we just don't have any reason to believe them.

And we are getting tired of the police brutality to wards the poor, the lies, the set ups. Not just what they did to Dorner or the other victims of not being Dorner, but the everyday life that some people have to live because of the fucking corruption.

They are suppose to work for the people and I hope the people rise up and demand it.

[geek tragedy]

3. One could argue they could have tried to wait him out.

Or use non-incendiary tear gas.

But, it was a very dangerous situation that was best resolved quickly and before night came and gave him cover to slip away or cause further mayhem.

Ended as well as could be hoped for.

[2pooped2pop]

132. right because non-incendiary tear gas

would not have done the same thing as they were suppose to be trying to do? (smoke him out)

They wanted him dead.

[geek tragedy]

134. He shot himself rather than leave the building, so for all practical purposes

same effect.

He was going to surrender by openly submitting to the authority of the cops, or he was going to get shot. His only third option was suicide, which he chose.

[2pooped2pop]

136. The problem I'm having is the increasing incidence of violence

lies and corruption of the police. Maybe if they had not also shot up more than one vehicle previously, then the fire thing would be easier to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I think the poor and especially black poor people in this area have been telling the truth all along. I think they have been abused repeatedly by the police. That's FN scary. Think about if you had no police protection, only police harassment. There are many many people saying that questionable deaths of the citizens at the police hands is not uncommon. The hell with Dorner. He's gone. It's how he went that confirmed in many peoples minds that the police are indeed out of control.

I think that is what most here are reacting to. It's the ever widening spread of police corruption and abuse. It's a scary thought when it is turned on you. I do know people that it has been turned on. Everyone lets it go coz you can't fight it.

But considering what the police reaction to occupy was, I'd say we all have something to be scared about. Big Brother? Hell no, worse. Big brother's army.

We need our police to protect us, to help us. We should not have to be afraid of them.

[geek tragedy]

141. Police reaction to Occupy was 10000 times worse than

anything regarding the way they disposed of Dorner. Occupy was nonviolent protest. Dorner was an extreme risk to the general public.

[2pooped2pop]

148. I think Dorner just brought more to light is all.

Like I said, maybe if they hadn't shot up the elderly womans truck, hitting several houses and other vehicles, then the fire would have been easier to swallow.

I doubt that there are many on here that thinks Dorner was innocent. The problem is they knew he would be killed. What if he had been set up? I'm not saying he was and I doubt few believe that, It's just that some live in a world where the police are free to do just that.

I think Dorner just reopened old wounds and brought the situation to light a bit. Some police do beat up people in handcuffs. Some police do entrap. SOme police do totally plant evidence. SOme police do take bribes. Some police do send innocent people to jail. The main thing that all those police have in common is that they are doing it to the poor, the helpless. They don't pull that shit on the rich.

Dorner just reminded us. It's not support for Dorner, it's support for the people and the rights they are suppose to have. It did very much appear that the police never had any intention of letting this go to trial. I think that this is where our feelings are touching on, not Dorner himself.

[geek tragedy]

150. We know that Dorner was determined to avoid a trial.

We don't know that the police would have killed him had he disarmed himself and surrendered.

While he was armed, shit yeah they were going to shoot him. Nothing wrong with that.

[2pooped2pop]

153. nope, but setting the cabin on fire was a bit premature.

IMO

[geek tragedy]

165. Maybe/ But given how dangerous this guy was a bit premature

is not going to raise my hackles very much--especially since it resulted in no further loss to innocent life.

[Light House]

154. You're right.

Dorner had every opportunity to surrender during his week on the run, he could have and should have contacted a lawyer, the media and trusted friends to escort him to a police station of his choosing to surrender in front of all those witness's, he chose not to and instead, he chose to continue his killing rampage.

I will shed no tears for this murdering monster, my tears are reserved for the people and the families that he has forever destroyed.

[Light House]

147. Great post.

And you make some very valid points.
There's no doubt that the police in the country are becoming more militarized and that's a very bad trend that should be stopped.
Several police depts. were guilty of brutality towards peaceful Occupy demonstrations, the NYPD, Oakland PD, LAPD, to name a few, but Dorner was not peaceful, he was a violent criminal intent on killing as many cops as he could before he was taken down. The commander on scene made the decision, for whatever reason, to use that particular type of cannister, also known by the slang term, burner, to end the dangerous situation before more officers were wounded or killed.

There needs to be a Federal top to bottom investigation of how this nations Law Enforcement Agencies are operating and maybe new Federal guidelines of what they can and can't do.

[2pooped2pop]

151. thanks, and I get what you are saying

It's just they kind of played their hand when they shot up the wrong trucks. We all knew Dorner would not be allowed to get to trial.

Yes, Dorners fault. Yes, murderer. Yes bad guy. But if he had only killed your family, or mine, he would not have been toasted. He would not have had this kind of manhunt. They would not have shown how desperate they were to kill him. They themselves make it look like they had something to hide. And we have seen this "unexpected fire" show before.

Those devices are called burners for a reason. They knew what would happen.

[Light House]

159. You're right about how he was treated as opposed to how he would have

been treated if he'd just killed Joe Citizen, the reason for the massive LEO response is because when someone shoots and kills police and makes known their intent to kill more police, then they have no qualms about shooting anyone and are considered especially dangerous.

Let me correct you on the reason those devices are called burners, the slang name comes from the fact that they burn the mucous membrane, the eyes and the nose, not because they can cause a fire.

Other than that, I pretty much agree with your post.

[2pooped2pop]

161. ah, thanks for the correction on burner name

[seabeyond]

133. or the doner could have walked out of the burning house and not shot himself

and allowed dead body to burn.

[CAG]

4. yes, I am particularly interested in the "without further loss of life" part, because out of all

of the outrage against the police that I've seen on these posts, I haven't seen an attempt to answer this part of the equation. Dorner had plenty of opportunities to turn himself in over the several days (and thus have that trial that everyone keeps talking about), there's no evidence he was remotely considering it as of yesterday, particularly after he created yet ANOTHER WIDOW with ANOTHER set of kids losing a parent for JUST DECIDING TO DO THEIR JOB THAT DAY.

[Light House]

19. That's what I've been saying all day.

Dorner had every opportunity to surrender during his week on the run.
He could have, and should have, contacted a lawyer, media personnel, and any number of people he knew to escort him to a police station, didn't have to be an LAPD police station, any police station would have sufficed, and surrendered himself in front of all the witness's, instead, he CHOSE the course of action, he CHOSE not to surrender, he CHOSE to shoot it out with the police, he CHOSE the method of death.
Dorner is responsible for Dorner's demise.

[CAG]

23. Exactly. He put himself into this situation. If you walk into a bank

armed with the intent to rob it, don't cry to me if a teller takes out a 22 from under the desk and blows your brains out.

If you kill a bunch of police, are evidently intent on killing more, and haven't turned yourself in to the authorities in the week that you've had the opportunity to in order to have the trial that your legally within your rights to once in the hands of the authorities, you put yourself into this situation.

Are we supposed to be thrilled if this murderer had killed a couple more police officers over the next few days and THEN given himself up to the authorities for his trial?

[Warpy]

6. Until they develop a knockout gas rather than tear gas

there was no way he'd have been taken alive. He'd told them he would never be taken alive. People who say things like that generally keep the last bullet for themselves, which is what it looked like happened in this case.

Taking him alive would have involved pulling back, letting him go, and putting a lot of their families' lives in danger while they waited for him to get overconfident and make a mistake so they could pick him up on the street.

[robinlynne]

11. I'm sorry. my response was rude. didnt mean it the way I said it. response to reply 7

[sir pball]

183. They have "knockout gasses"..

The Russians used an incapacitating agent to end that theater hostage situation a few years ago...and it killed like 180 people due to unexpected reactions to the essentially aerosolized heroin.

[Warpy]

193. Exactly, dosage has always been a problem

You'd have to adjust it according to cubic footage, meaning you'd need a hundred or so different sizes in stock and ready.

Doing it with drugs is not going to work. We're going to have to wait for neuropsychiatry to come up with another solution.

[rightsideout]

7. Since when did "Bring to justice" become "Burn motherfucker?"

[nobodyspecial]

8. OK, bring him to justice

What is your game plan? Specifics, please.

[EOTE]

144. Ummm, use regular tear gas, not the kind that burns the motherfucker down?

I know it sounds insane, but it just might have worked. Of course, they couldn't have even tried that. Just like they couldn't have attempted to pull over that car of the wrong make, model, color and year instead of loading it up with bullets and traumatizing and wounding two elderly ladies. That's just not how PDs do things nowadays.

[randome]

146. The FBI, the U.S. Marshal's Service and the San Berdadino PD made these decisions.

With that many LE agencies in one place, I'd be willing to give them the benefit of a doubt.

Now what the LAPD did in Torrance is inexcusable, no doubt about that.

[EOTE]

157. I never said that the LAPD made those decisions.

Just that it was a piss poor one, especially after all those other piss poor, nearly fatal decisions that the LAPD made.

[Light House]

149. I thought that I saw a report

that they tried to use the cold cannister with no effect.
The bottom line is that Dorner made it crystal clear that he wasn't going to be taken alive and that he had already proven that he would shoot any LEO that tried to capture him.
The police on scene, for whatever reason, deduced that they needed to end a very dangerous situation as soon as possible and they probably figured that the tear gas cannisters used was the best option available.

Until the official inquiry is done, I'll withhold judgement on whether or not it was the correct decision.

[EOTE]

155. And the LAPD made it crystal clear they wouldn't take him alive.

They made that clear by shooting up cars that looked absolutely nothing like Dorner's whether they contained a young, white surfer dude or old ladies. And who is the group that's SUPPOSED to have the moral authority here? "for whatever reason"? Yeah, that's good enough for me.

[randome]

156. The LAPD had nothing to do with the cabin confrontation.

It was the FBI, the U.S. Marshal's Service and the San Bernadio PD.

On edit: Sorry, you already responded to this info above.

[EOTE]

158. I never said that they did.

Just that they never had any intention of taking him alive. Those other groups made sure that the LAPD would get their wish.

[Light House]

162. I respectfully disagree.

Dorner made sure that he wouldn't be taken alive, that was his intent from the very beginning.
Dorner was an ex-cop, he knew what was going to happen if he started to kill police, he knew it would end very badly for him.
Dorner could have surrendered anytime during his week on the run by contacting a lawyer, the media, trusted friends and have them escort him to a police station of his choosing to surrender himself in front of all those witness's, instead, he CHOSE to continue his murderous rampage, he CHOSE to have the final stand in that cabin, he CHOSE badly.

[EOTE]

164. Those two thoughts are not mutually exclusive.

But the LAPD made it known very early on that they had no intention of taking Dorner alive. For fuck's sake, did you forget about those two old women who were shot up? They weren't even in a vehicle of the right year, color, make or model. I keep on hearing all this talk about what Dorner could have done. This is NOT about what Dorner could have done, it was about what the LAPD and other PDs SHOULD have done. Dorner wasn't the only one who chose badly here, the PDs handling this chose very badly as well, and an even further lack of public trust is the price they'll pay for that.

[Light House]

173. Those LAPD officers that shot up vehicles willy nilly

should be severely punished and Los Angeles should have to pay out hefty settlements to those citizens.
I doubt that you'll find, other than on this board, many Americans who are going to fault the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Dept., the U.S. Marshal's Service or the FBI for the way they handled a very dangerous fugitive who murdered 2 cops, murdered 2 innocent civilians, wounded 2 more cops, took hostages, carjacking, shooting at LEO trying to capture him.

Does there need to be an inquiry into the whole mess? Yes, but I'm not, at this point, going to second guess the on scene LEA for what had to be a very stressful and extremely dangerous situation.

[EOTE]

174. It's the lack of second guessing that has turned PDs across the country into travesties of justice.

And yes, there are PLENTY of people outside this board who find plenty of fault with the way the Dorner standoff ended. Plenty. Cops must make sure that they do everything in their power to ensure a suspect is taken alive. Plenty of people involved in standoffs received far less lethal measures even when they were considered to be armed and dangerous. The PDs knew that they were going to kill Dorner from the start, they were utterly sure of it. That's why their offer of a million dollars for information leading to the "capture and conviction" of Dorner was a pathetic joke. Those fuckers will get what they deserve the next time there's a manhunt and nobody is willing to help the murderers catch another murderer.

[Light House]

176. We'll just have to see things differently.

Thanks for a reasonable and civil discussion despite our different opinions.

[EOTE]

177. Likewise. NT

[geek tragedy]

9. It was tear gas that set the place on fire. He punked out and shot himself.

He wasn't going to allow himself to be taken prisoner regardless. Best policy was to ensure no further loss of life would occur.

[backscatter712]

12. Ah, the police of America have no experience with standoffs!

So obviously they never should have considered it!



Really, is there anything about "Form a perimeter around the house, make sure nothing gets in and out, cut off all utilities, toss in a phone, hold off for a few days, let the negotiator try to talk him down." that law enforcement agencies all over the country haven't done? If Dorner refused to come out after several days, or kept firing at officers, I have no problem with the police doing what they've got to do at that point.

But what was actually done? Between the burned-down house, and the two women delivering papers that were nearly killed, the police in this case were extremely reckless, and should consider themselves lucky that they didn't kill anyone except Dorner.

[kestrel91316]

43. [phone] 000 000 000

[Mojorabbit]

110. + a gazillion. nt

[EOTE]

145. Thank you. NT

[Politicalboi]

13. The LAPD is already lying

About how the fire wasn't something they did on purpose. Fucking LIARS!. Just like with 9/11. The day of 9/11 A LOT of people talking about bombs, the next day, oh, your full of shit "Truther". The countdown for WTC 7 but hey, what does that prove? Ghouliani talking about the towers collapsing edited out of that video for good.

Just because I compared 9/11 to yesterdays debacle, doesn't mean I don't believe Newtown. I may be into conspiracies, but that one is too far a reach even for me.

[Light House]

27. This wasn't even an LAPD op.

This was a San Bernardino Sheriff's Dept. op with input from the U.S. Marshals Service and FBI. The "burners" they used were pyrotechnic tear gas cannisters which probably ignited the wooden cabin.
It really doesn't really matter, Dorner made it crystal clear that he wasn't going to be taken alive and had no intention of surrendering.

Dorner CHOSE the course of action, Dorner CHOSE not to surrender, Dorner CHOSE to shoot it out with police, Dorner, and only Dorner CHOSE his method of demise.

[Light House]

14. Bottom line?

Dorner had no intention of being taken alive, he made that crystal clear in his manifesto and his actions.

[kestrel91316]

40. There's always the argument (not that I agree with it) that

he might not have written that manifesto. If there is the slightest possibility that he didn't, then there was some duty to refrain from outright murder of the guy. And as far as his interactions with LEO in shootouts, there is always the serious possibility that nobody afforded him the opportunity to surrender.

NEVER forget what they did to those women in the truck. THEY got no opportunity to identify themselves or "surrender". And then the white surfer dude - they tried to kill him AFTER they identified him as not being Dorner. THIS is why I take what the LEO say with a very large grain of salt right now.

[Light House]

52. Dorner had every opportunity to surrender during his week on the run.

He could have, hell, should have contacted a lawyer, the media, friends, and have them escort him to the police station of his choice, not even have to be an LAPD station, some other agency station, and surrendered himself with all the witness's present, instead, he made it crystal clear that he had no intention of being taken alive, he CHOSE the course of action, he CHOSE not to surrender, he CHOSE to shoot it out with police, he CHOSE the method of demise by engaging police with gunfire even after barricading himself.

As far as those officers that shot the innocent people, the officers involved should be severely punished and Los Angeles should pay a hefty settlement to those civilians.

[kestrel91316]

71. He was not acting rationally - that much is obvious.

After hearing that he told that couple he held that he wanted to clear his name AFTER he had already killed at least 3 people, it's apparent that he was completely delusional.

We'll never know the true extent of his mental problem or his psych diagnosis. LEO made sure of that.

[Light House]

74. I think you just hit on the problem.

He was so consumed by rage at what he perceived as an injustice by the LAPD, whether justified or not, that he just snapped and figured that, what the hell, I've got nothing left to lose.

Unfortunately, innocent people have been devastated by his actions, including the innocent people shot at and wounded by over zealous LAPD cops,and you're right, we'll probably never know what demons were tearing him apart, although I respectfully disagree with you about LEO making sure of that, IMHO, Dorner himself made sure of that.

[MADem]

118. The "they" that shot up the women in the truck were not the "they" who used an APV to tear down

the walls of that cabin, break the windows and toss in a couple of incendiary canisters.

Different "theys."

What "they" had in common was that Dorner had murdered members of their forces.

[JI7]

15. i think some feel it was worth the loss of a few other lives to take him alive

[BainsBane]

58. those are only cop's lives

they don't count.

[backscatter712]

75. Some of us feel that the tactics that the cops did use put lives at risk.

Using those incendiary teargas canisters did burn the house down, and very possibly could have turned into a much bigger fire that put neighbors at risk. Also keep in mind that the fire department had to be kept back for hours because of the potential for another firefight, so they couldn't do anything if the fire spread.

The police were reckless and trigger-happy, and could have gotten themselves or others killed.

[RedCappedBandit]

16. How would they have handled it if he had a hostage?

[stevenleser]

67. SWAT would have been sent in to storm the house. That usually involves shooting the suspect.

Most of the times I have read about SWAT team actions in those situations, the perps are shot as soon as possible to try to prevent them from killing hostages.

[RedCappedBandit]

72. Thanks for the answer

I wasn't sure. Guess that path would not really have been an alternative, then.

[nobodyspecial]

138. What happened in the standoff where the boy was being held?

They try to save the hostage but usually, they kill the hostage taker.

[jerseyjack]

17. There are two different, but related issues.

One was Dorner's determination not to be taken alive -- if that actually was the case.

The other was the cops' decision to help him with his determination. They became the judge and the jury and the executioner.

Low tech drones, anyone?

[onenote]

21. Does the name Timothy Dale Johnson ring a bell?

On August 13, 2008, an asshole walked into the headquarters of the Democratic Party of Arkansas and shot and killed the head of the state party, Bill Gwatney, in cold blood. That asshole was identified as Timothy Dale Johnson. He was spotted by police and led them on a 30 mile chase. Finally, according to the police, they forced Johnson's car from the road and when he refused to surrender, they shot and killed him. They shot him six times. He never fired a round. In fact, his rifle was still in its case. The police claimed that he had grabbed it and was trying to open it and that's when they opened fire.

I may be wrong, but I don't recall anyone here calling that an execution. I don't recall anyone here questioning the cops version of events. And you know what? I'm perfectly good with that. I don't doubt the police version and I don't shed a tear for Timothy Dale Johnson. He could've surrendered but he fled. He was armed and dangerous. I don't think the police are obligated to put themselves at extreme risk in that situation. No, he didn't get a trial which, according to some posts I've seen over the past couple of days, means that police were judge, jury and executioner. Well, that's the way it works in situations like this. If you want to decry the cops' decision in that case, go ahead. I don't.

[CAG]

26. +100. nt

[kestrel91316]

33. The point is, Johnson was given the opportunity to surrender and did not.

I have seen no hard evidence that Dorner was afforded such an unequivocal opportunity. Perhaps he was. I just haven't seen proof. LE claims of that ring hollow to me right now.

[onenote]

39. The guy was on the run for days. He made no effort to surrender.

The cops approached the cabin he was in and he opened fire and killed one and wounded one. A loudspeaker was set up blaring out a demand/request that he surrender. He did nothing. I'm sorry, but the idea that he was given less opportunity to surrender than Johnson is ridiculous. What "hard evidence" do you have that Johnson was given the opportunity to surrender other than the police saying that they demanded he surrender and he didn't.

Seriously, there is far more evidence that Dorner had the opportunity to surrender than Johnson. Personally, I believe Johnson refused to surrender and he went for his rifle case. But there is no "hard" evidence of that.

Yet you would trip all over yourself to come to the conclusion that killing Johnson was okay but that it wasn't okay for the police to kill Dorner (which they may not even have done since he may have shot himself for all we know).

[kestrel91316]

68. Dorner was not right in the head. He believed that he

could still "clear his name" even after murdering that young couple in cold blood. If that's not completely delusional, I don't know what is.

So if he failed to act rationally with respect to surrendering, I'm not surprised.

[uppityperson]

87. so you do understand now that he WAS given plenty of opportunities to surrender, right?

Just want to make sure you are clear on that point.

[geek tragedy]

95. So, the fact that he was fucked in the head means they deprived him of due

process?

Man, you're flailing now.

He fucking killed the cops who tried to take him into custody. He gave them his answer.

[TorchTheWitch]

188. they threw loudspeakers into the cabin asking him to surrender

All week long they were doing pressers in which they asked him to surrender. But whether or not they asked him to surrender (though they did many times) is a moot point seeing as Dorner's words and actions made it absolutely clear that he wasn't going to surrender. He had all week to surrender. He could have surrendered at the cabin, but HE chose not to. Asking him to surrender is just a formality, and though they DID ask many times he already knew that he didn't need to be asked at all and could have made the decision to surrender on his own. HE made the decision not to and continued evading police, shooting people, stealing peoples' cars and taking them hostage. HE made the decision at the cabin to respond to requests to surrender by shooting at them.

I don't know what in the world would possibly satisfy you as proof that he was asked many times to surrender. You don't believe the media reports, there's no specific footage of the goings on at the cabin other than helicopter overheads of the fire. What "proof" other than what's out there already could possibly satisfy you that he was many times asked to surrender, and why in the world does such a petty question even matter when he could have surrendered himself at any time instead of continuing his rampage? He doesn't NEED to be asked to surrender in order to surrender. Any time all week he could have negotiated to turn himself in. Even at the cabin he could have surrendered by throwing out his weapons and waving a white flag or shouting out that he was giving himself up. But HE chose to do none of those things, and he didn't need to be asked in the first place even though he WAS asked multiple times which you just refuse to believe.

[geek tragedy]

65. No, they stopped him from killing other people.

You are confusing the cops job to stop him with the courts' job to punish him if he gets arrested.

If he was determined to not be taken alive, then their killing of him was the absolute right thing to do.

[Taverner]

18. They shouldn't have set fire to the cabin

Lots of ways to handle that one

Hell, snipers would have been an improvement

[onenote]

22. Setting fire to cabin (possibly after he shot himself). Sniper. What exactly is the difference?

[jeff47]

32. Sniper doesn't have the chance of starting an enormous wildfire. (nt)

[onenote]

41. So that's what all the outrage is about? The risk of a wildfire? Good one!

[Light House]

83. It was during winter with lots of snow around.

Wild fires don't do well during winter and from what I saw, it looked like they had a pretty good firebreak around those cabins.
There wasn't much risk of a wildfire happening.

[tinrobot]

102. The sniper sees who he is shooting and can shoot to incapacitate.

The police did not know for certain who was in the building before they burned it indiscriminately.

[Light House]

109. Burned it indiscriminately.

What utter dishonesty.
They knew who was in there and they knew it was Dorner.
Dorner, and only Dorner, is responsible for the demise of Dorner.

[tinrobot]

137. They still haven't identified the body.

As of now, the police still can't say with 100% accuracy that the charred remains are Dorner's.

Dorner had previously taken hostages. During the incident, the police could not say for certain that no hostages were inside.

But they still burned it.

[Light House]

140. There's not much doubt about it being Dorner.

Cops aren't searching for him anymore, that's a pretty good indicator that they are confident that the body is that of Dorner.
Cops already knew that the cabin was empty when Dorner entered it for his final stand, they had no fear of killing any innocent people inside.
As far as burning the cabin, until the inquiry is finished, I'll withhold judgement on whether those type of tear gas cannisters, should have been used.

[onenote]

121. Seriously? How often does that happen? Do you have some examples?

And not from movies.

[NCTraveler]

25. I am not an expert.

But I am smart enough to know that there was only one outcome with the tactics they used.

[damnedifIknow]

29. Sound cannons?

I don't know but I'm thinking that would have worked to at least drive him from the cabin and as soon as he's out pounce and arrest.

[nobodyspecial]

35. "as soon as he's out pounce and arrest."

Do you realize how crazy that course of action would be? He easily could have killed more people. He already had demonstrated that he was ready, willing and able to kill cops. Cops already risk their lives. They are not obligated to put themselves in harm's way to save the life of a killer. And, no, there is no question that Dorner is a killer.

And, if you think it is that easy, why don't you be a cop and show them all how it's done?

[damnedifIknow]

76. From Wikipedia

"Extremely high-power sound waves can disrupt and/or destroy the eardrums of a target and cause severe pain or disorientation. This is usually sufficient to incapacitate a person."


He might have been hard of hearing at his trial but I'm sure the judge and jury could have worked around that.

[nobodyspecial]

139. Well, you and Wikipedia know more than those in the field

You should sign up so you can start saving the lives of criminals trying to kill the cops who are trying to take him into custody.

[kestrel91316]

30. Surround him and wait for him to get hungry and thirsty and come out with

his hands up. It wouldn't have been hard. It would have been inconvenient.

[onenote]

49. Do you know for a fact that there wasn't food and water in that cabin?

My guess, and its only a guess, is that there supplies in that cabin that could have sustained him for days. Even one day would be too long since preventing him from escaping at night would have been a difficult and risky endeavor. If you put officers close to the cabin he can pick them off. If you put them a safe distance away, you need a massive force to surround the area sufficiently to prevent him from possibly eluding capture under cover of darkness.

Its pretty standard procedure: you want to convince someone who is holed up, armed and dangerous to give themselves up. But you don't want them bursting out of their shelter at a time of their choosing with the possibility of surprise that will get someone killed before the bad guy is taken out. You want the upper hand. You want to make the first move.

[kestrel91316]

70. It was a commercial rental cabin in a group of same.

I doubt it had anything more than condiments in the fridge, and probably not even that. Water could have been shut off by cutting electricity to the property (up there I assume they are off a well rather than a main).

I am not saying absolutely they should have gone for a siege. I am just arguing that it seems like there were OPTIONS for dealing with him and once again, LEO's have to choose the big, deadly showdown for the cameras.

Thank you for not getting nasty or insulting, BTW.

[Sissyk]

160. He was not going to come out

with his hands up. He was not going to surrender. He had time from the first innocent person he killed until the time of the last innocent person he killed.

[CAG]

31. Well, nobodyspecial, an hour has passed and I don't see anybody answering your excellent

question. I would guess that that means either 1) a realistic plan doesn't exist, 2) Maybe there is some apathy about this particular question among those out to demonize these hard-working, sacrificing, union-dues-paying police officers, or 3) a combination of the two.

I guess the police are only supposed to be supported by us in those situations we can use them to prop up our own political agenda?

[damnedifIknow]

44. Sound cannons

are extremely disorientating and produce nausea and can incapacitate a person from 500 metres away. There were other ways.

[CAG]

54. S o u n d c a n n o n s......

[damnedifIknow]

57. laugh it up but

it would have worked.

[CAG]

62. but then there would be endless threads about the torture he was enduring.

Maybe next time the trained authorities with years of experience should just send an emergency post to DU for all of the monday morning quarterback armchair experts to put their two cents in on how to handle it.

While we're at it, I'll go by the hospital in the morning and ask my neurosurgeon friend if she could ask for some procedural help on DU for the next craniotomy she has to perform.

[EOTE]

182. Way to move that goalpost!

There have been several options offered up in this thread. And rather than admitting you were wrong, you just move those goalposts. There were MANY ways that they could have taken Dorner alive. But they sure as hell weren't going to try any of them.

[onenote]

122. Really? You think he would have come out with his hands up?

From everything we know, if he came out, he would have come out guns blazing. Hopefully, he wouldn't hit anyone before he was taken out by a fusillade. The dozens of bullets hitting him would make him every bit as dead as he is now. Or he wouldn't have shot himself -- which is what apparently he did.

So you don't mind his being dead, you just want him dead after increasing the risk to those trying to deal with him.

[nobodyspecial]

46. Well, I only ask this because I have loved ones in law enforcement

so I guess that means I fraternize with "the enemy." I have seen what these situations look like from the other side. There was no way this was going to end well. And Dorner, being a cop, knew this going in. And, no, they are not blood-thirsty, psycho bullies. They give scared kids stickers, help an elderly couple change a tire, and give a truck driver a break on a speeding ticket. They also bust a couple driving around with windows up, smoking pot with a toddler in the backseat, break up a meth lab and haul off a guy who just hit his mom.

Cops are not required to sacrifice their own lives just so someone who already has killed can have his day in court.

[CAG]

69. Interestingly, there was yet another OP at 10:53 tonight once again heavily

criticizing the police because don't they know the good Mr. Dorner just wanted a fair trial despite the fact he would try to kill any officer coming up to take him in, and wouldn't you just know that there have been DOZENS of posters applauding this OP'er, but hardly ANY of them have taken any effort or time to come over here to your post to answer this really rational, key question.

[backscatter712]

81. Several people have answered.

Maybe not sound cannons, but what's particularly unworkable about setting up a perimeter and waiting him out?

Oh wait, you've already dismissed that solution, so you're not going to consider it. What's more important is rationalizing the Burn-The-Fucker strategy, right?

[jeff47]

34. They had control over his supply of food and water

Cut those off, wait for him to surrender, shoot himself or pass out from dehydration. If he tries to run, shoot him.

[LisaL]

36. Then the same posters would be screaming that police are starving Dorner to death and demanding

he was provided with food and drinks.

[jeff47]

38. Only in your head. (nt)

[LisaL]

42. Really? So you would be just fine if they cut off his supply of water, he had no food, and

sat in the house for a month slowly dehydrating and starving to death?

[jeff47]

48. Dehydration takes about 3-4 days to kill.

And is fairly easily reversed before that.

And yes, I'd be just fine. Because during that time he would have the option, and now the motivation, to surrender. Or shoot himself.

[LisaL]

53. I am absolutely positive one can last quite a bit longer than 3-4 days without water.

Based on actual examples of humans lasting longer than 3-4 days.

[onenote]

56. He didn't have the motivation to surrender when he was trapped in that cabin? What do you think

he thought would happen. Everyone would go home and let him go his merry way? He was a former cop. He knew that if he didn't surrender he would die. And he chose not to surrender.

[AgingAmerican]

112. They would have killed him no matter what.

It's what American cops do.

[CAG]

59. He had had that option for about a week, but decided to kill innocent people instead.

Suppose in his bored, hungry condition he stuck his rifle out of the window and shot a few more officers in those next few days of waiting?

[onenote]

61. Information on how long one can survive without water.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-long-can-the-average

And your assumption is that he had no access to water or food in that cabin. Maybe that's true, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if there was a supply of bottled water in that cabin. Maybe not a lot, but enough to keep him going for a time. I don't know, you don't know, and maybe the police knew or didn't know. They were in touch with the owner of the cabin and presumably the owner knew.

[SidDithers]

123. Did the cabin have a toilet? There's 5 gallons in the tank...

How about a hot water tank? Maybe another 30 gallons there. And if he knew he was laying in for a siege, he could have filled the bathtub and sinks, and pots and pans, and anything else that could hold water. Maybe another 50 to 100 gallons there.

Even on a gallon a day, he wouldn't have been thirsty for a very long time.

Sid

[onenote]

124. agreed

[TorchTheWitch]

189. He would have had plenty of water anyway

There's water in the toilets and a whole tank of it in the water heater in the basement. There also might have been some food and water emergency supplies already in the cabin as there often are in rental cabins.

[nobodyspecial]

195. Yep, I don't know why people keep depicting this as some remote cabin

Rentals are usually well stocked and they police have no way of knowing what he had available or what weapons he had.

[uppityperson]

90. It takes a week to 10 days to die of dehydration, not 3-4. And he had lots of times and motivation

to surrender. He chose not to.

[onenote]

51. How do you ensure he doesn't escape during the evening. How many days do you surround

the cabin from a safe distance with a force sufficient to contain him and without putting officers at risk of being shot?

It seems like you don't seem to mind the idea of killing him. You just seem to think the police should put themselves at further risk before that happens. That's not required in these situations.

[nobodyspecial]

60. I think for some, it really doesn't matter if more cops died

it was their duty to capture Dorner against his will. Justice demands it.

[SidDithers]

63. How long 'till he runs out of water?...

I'm not sure what the cabin was like, but I could probably come up with 150 to 200 gallons of water and other liquids right now in my home. Hot water tank, a toilet tank or two, maybe he filled the bathtub and sinks, plus whatever other misc bottled and canned drinks are around the house and in the fridge.

Even if he could only scrounge half that - say 75 gallons - how long could he last with that much to drink? 50 days? 75? 100?

Are those numbers unrealistic?

Sid

[Glamrock]

64. It's not up to the "armchair strategists" to have an answer

That's why we have trained "professionals". They have armor, armored tanks, night vision, helicopters, stun grenades, smoke grenades, non-incendiary tear gas, and, of course drones. Not to mention the ability to cordon the entire area, cut off utilities, contact his family, etc. With all of this and more at their disposal, the only solution they could come up with is burning the house down?

I'm sorry, I don't see this as anything but murder. You will never convince me it was anything but. There are voice recordings. There are two latina women with gun shot wounds. There is one caucasian male with bullet holes in his truck. These guys were looking to make a revenge killing from day one, in my opinion. I think their actions speak louder than words.

Now, while I shed nary a tear for this prick, we are supposed to be a nation of laws. And the law says that the courts sentence people for their crimes. Not the police. That's the point. Democracy may not always be pretty, but it beats the hell out of Judge Dredd walking the streets.

[DrewFlorida]

66. They could have set up a perimiter and simply waited, there was no where for Dorner to go!

Police use the siege tactic all the time. These police didn't want Dorner's story to be told any further and they had every intention of murdering him. We know that by the behavior or previous police actions on unidentified innocents who happened to be driving a vehicle similar to Dorner's!

There is no excuse for Dorner's violence, and likewise, there is no excuse for policemen to murder a suspect!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

73. Wait him out. Even lunatics get hungry.

[backscatter712]

78. Watch your suggestion get ignored.

Isn't that the cycle of this thread?

"OK, armchair quarterbacks, what would you have done? I would have wasted the fucker!!!"

"Um, setting the house on fire was a bad solution. I would have set a perimeter, set up a communications line with a negitiator, besieged him and waited him out."

"HURRR! They're not giving us an answer! I'm glad they wasted the fucker!"

"We said form a perimeter and wait him out."

"DERP! They don't have an answer."

"We. said. form. a. perimeter. and. wait. him. out."

[LisaL]

79. Since he had a gun, setting up a perimeter

doesn't sound like a particularly safe solution.

[backscatter712]

82. Lots of perps with guns have been contained and captured or killed with conventional tactics.

What's special about this case?

[LisaL]

84. So it's perfectly fine for a perp to be killed, as long as tactics are conventional?

What is it that you are objecting to?

[backscatter712]

91. Setting the house on fire. Reckless endangerment in general.

Using those incendiary teargas canisters was stupid, burned the house down, and could have started a larger fire. Officers were at risk from the fire as well as Dorner, as were firefighters, as were the neighbors.

And Dorner could have had one more chance to surrender and face trial - you're right in that there comes a point where cops have to do what they have to do and use lethal force, but do they need to rush it just because they're in maximum rage mode?

[mythology]

135. And how many resources go into keeping him there?

Additionally there is the possibility that he could escape and the increased chance that he can kill additional people, plus the additional publicity that Dorner gains in this approach. Look at how the some of the right wing still talks about Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Especially given how Dorner had killed another police officer that day, the only assumption is that he was still more than happy to continue to kill cops any chance he got.

[lynne]

77. All these threads about Dorner -

- but I've not seen one about his victims. Or their children and families. What were their names?

The OP is an excellent question. I've not read one answer that doesn't further endanger the lives of the officers involved as well as the general public should he have escaped.

[jberryhill]

92. Yeah, let's get the names, so Dorner truthers can harass them

[Cha]

105. Here's a post about the latest victims in reply to one

that was talking about Monica Quan and her fiance.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=222158

[Union Scribe]

80. Did they bother trying?

We saw them trying to kill anyone they even THOUGHT was Dorner. Then they got caught talking about how they were going to torch him, then they did.

Maybe the first step to taking someone alive is not setting out to kill them.

[LisaL]

85. Well, if that someone wasn't setting out to kill them, maybe they would be more inclined to try.

[Union Scribe]

86. And it's clear you're fine with them not being inclined to at all. nt

[LisaL]

88. I don't believe that it could have been done in a safe manner.

Or that Dorner would allow himself to be captured alive.

[Light House]

96. And it's clear that you're fine that Dorner

had made it very clear that he wasn't going to be taken alive and he would kill any cop that tried to apprehend him.
Dorner is responsible for Dorner being dead.

[geek tragedy]

89. Dorner had murdered a cop that morning rather than surrender.

Married father of two.

How many more of those were necessary, in your eyes, before you'd be satisfied that Dorner meant it whe he said he intended to go out killing as many cops as possible?

[Union Scribe]

93. Stop trying to paint DUers who disagree with you

as heartless fans of cop-killing and orphan-making. Such tactics are offensive and disingenuous.

[geek tragedy]

99. People are claiming that he was deprived of due process when

he was shooting at anyone who tried to arrest him.

Tell me how it's anything but idiotic to suggest that a person who resists arrest with bullets is the victim of due process violations when the authorities use lethal force against him.

[Union Scribe]

101. "idiotic" is probably the kindest thing you've called DUers lately. nt

[geek tragedy]

103. People are proclaiming him a murder victim.

Claiming that somehow the police had no right to take him down by force.

For a whole host of bogus and false reasons.

[dkf]

98. He had already tried to leave the cabin but they pushed him back in, I guess using guns.

So he would have tried again and been shot or escaped. If he had been shot then same argument...LAPD just wanted to kill him.

If he escapes then everyone at risk again and heads roll over incompetence. And back to the manhunt.

It lands up in the same place.

Probably we will find Dorner killed himself anyway.

It's unrealistic to think this ended with his capture.

[Union Scribe]

100. And if he did kill himself

as most thought he would, then it goes even further to show how unnecessary the immediate offensive action was.

[dkf]

104. Well if you think there is no downside to his escaping then I guess so.

[Union Scribe]

107. That doesn't follow at all

from what I said. But I'm getting that a lot with this topic. nt

[dkf]

113. I'm incredulous that you don't see they had an urgency because he could have escaped.

I guess I needed the sarcasm thingy.

[geek tragedy]

108. He killed himself only because he realized he couldn't kill any more cops.

Once he realized that he had killed his last cop, he punked out.

But he wasn't going to off himself while there was an opportunity to kill more cops.

Ask Mrs. Mackay.

[Union Scribe]

111. So why torch him?

You've said yourself they surrounded him and weren't giving him a chance to shoot them with their positioning. So why actually make it MORE dangerous for themselves by moving in when basically every commentator said he was going to "punk out"? (That's IF he did, btw.)

No, they said they were going to do it, and they did it. It wasn't necessary; it was revenge.

[geek tragedy]

115. They didn't move in. Instead of sending people, they sent tear gas cannisters in.

They weren't going to go in, they were going to force him to come out.

Force him to surrender his position, without surrendering theirs.

Their goal was to take down a guy on a killing spree. That's their job--they took him down so that he couldn't kill again.

I'm sure they're not shedding tears over his death, but if they just wanted him dead they could have just machine gunned the place.

[Canuckistanian]

97. The police used to have people called "negotiators"

The cops would secure an area (which they did. No civilians were at risk)

And the negotiator would talk the person into surrendering.

Because killing should be the absolute last resort for law enforcement officers, not the desired result.

It's the COURT'S responsibility to mete out punishment, ideally.

Did the cops shoot Jeffrey Dahmer down like this? Charles Manson? John Wayne Gacy? They killed far more people and were likely too again.

Everyone should get their day in court, whether they have a death wish or not. Society demands it.

[onenote]

180. Did Dahmer, Manson, or Gacy resist arrest by shooting at officers when they approached?

No.

[AgingAmerican]

106. Well...

Their 'Burn baby burn' plan didn't flush him out too well.

[Bucky]

114. Maybe the cops should hire, I dunno, hostage situation & seige experts.

Maybe they could take, like training courses--and I'm just spitballin' here--but maybe the FBI could offer classes or something in how to talk down dangerous felons and help the police learn advanced techniques like "waiting out a perp" or "psychological warfare" for "wearing down a suspect's patience". Maybe this is all science fiction today, but maybe one day, like by the middle of the 20th century say, they could learn ways of resolving stand-offs like this with a greater chance of recovering the killer for the actual administration of justice.

[damnedifIknow]

116. I dunno

but if i just had my eardrums blown out by a sound cannon I don't think I could function to use a gun on myself or anyone else. Ouch is an understatement.

[Fire Walk With Me]

117. Siege.

[99th_Monkey]

120. I'll bet they have gas canisters with sleeping gas in them

if they don't, they should, for cases like this.

like tear gas, only where it just puts people to sleep.

[onenote]

125. Moscow Theater siege

I don't think there are "canisters" of "sleeping gas". A form of "sleeping gas" was used in the 2002 Moscow theater siege. The gas was pumped into the ventilation system. The problem? In order for sleeping gases to be effective under those sorts of circumstances, it has to be used a nearly toxic level. Over 100 of the hostages in that situation died because of the sleeping gas.

[99th_Monkey]

191. It would be difficult to administer a precise dosage

I can see that may pose a problem with the idea of sleeping gas canisters.

Those closest to it or who don't cover their mouth/nose with cloth, would get
a much larger dose than others, so what you say makes sense.

[Macoy51]

126. Taking him Alive Would Mean a Trial

He said the killings would stop if the police publicly apologized and said they were wrong to fire him for reporting abuse in the LAPD. That would have been a good start. Of course taking him alive would mean a messy trial and run the risk of some ugly truths seeing the light of day.


Macoy

[randome]

129. His 'allegations' were bullshit.

They were made 2 weeks after they allegedly occurred. They were made the day AFTER his partner asked for him to be reassigned, thereby effectively ending his police career.

His 'allegations' were in retaliation to his partner wanting to be rid of him.

'Messy trial'? He left a 'messy trail' behind him. He did neither himself nor his 'allegations' any good.

[nobodyspecial]

142. Are you serious?!?!?

"He said the killings would stop if the police publicly apologized and said they were wrong to fire him for reporting abuse in the LAPD. That would have been a good start."

Yes, that would be perfect. Let's encourage people who believe they have been wronged by the system to go on killing sprees. If they terrorize people enough, they will get their apology. I fully support an investigation of the LAPD and cleaning house if necessary. I don't approve of giving terrorists what they want.

[onenote]

169. +1

[onenote]

167. If he wanted a trial

He could have laid down his weapon after the first shooting and given himself up.

His manifesto made it clear that he intended to keep killing until he was killed.

[99th_Monkey]

190. You can't say that on DU! .. haven't you been warned?

The LAPD had EVERY right to summarily torch that mofo.


I'm jesting, but only slightly.

[2pooped2pop]

130. He had limited food, ammunitions

They could have just stayed out of line of fire and waited for him to die of thirst, shoot himself, or give up. Or hell how about a couple of those negotiators they use when the perp has only killed civilians and not cops.

He could not have carried that much in supplies. He was running at the time.

If he had only killed you and your family he would not have been toasted.

Different laws and rules for different people apparently.

[onenote]

166. So you don't mind his dying

you just don't like the particular way it was achieved?

He had ample opportunities to give himself up. He apparently killed himself. I doubt very much his body cared about the fire.

As for different rules for differnt people, I can spend the rest of the day citing examples of police standoffs with all sorts of criminals without any links to the police that ended with the "suspect" dying either at his own hand or at the hands of the police. So could you.

You have no idea what supplies were in that cabin. It takes days for someone to die of thirst. And he probably had access to some water (at least that in the toilets in the cabin). The longer he stayed there the longer the period at which law enforcement officers were at risk and the risk of his escaping.

[2pooped2pop]

170. I don't like the idea

of the police offing people and acting like it was something else.

[Capt. Obvious]

143. Frozen in carbonite

to be displayed at Jabba's palace

[ZombieHorde]

152. They could have waited him out.

Seems like he would have killed himself in that situation too, but we did not know that for certain then.

[onenote]

163. For how long?

Waiting him out not only would have increased the risk that he might escape, it would have given him the opportunity to booby trap the cabin. It also would have put control of the situation in his hands, something you never want to do since it increases the risk to the police.

He had made it clear he wasn't going to surrender. Weighing the risks, going in to get him, dead or alive, was the standard, and proper, law enforcement option.

[ZombieHorde]

168. I don't know how much food he had.

I doubt he could have escaped. He could have been watched with thermographic surveillance. The firefighters in my Montana town have handheld thermographic devices, so I imagine LAPD has them too.

[onenote]

171. So it would be okay if he kills himself after getting really hungry

but its not okay that he killed himself after the police started knocking down the walls to the cabin? Its okay to kill him if he leaves the cabin, but its not okay to kill him if he's in the cabin.

[ZombieHorde]

175. Well, I don't know if "okay" is the right word.

Because of the people he murdered, no outcome would truly be "okay."

The question for me is: How do we want police to conduct police work?

I don't feel comfortable with what happened at the cabin, especially after the three people the police shot at while looking for him.

Side note: I don't think those who disagree with me on how police should conduct police work in this situation are immoral or wrong in any way. This was a very complicated situation, and I respect differences of opinions.

[Light House]

178. So far it seems as if this whole thread has been pretty

respectful despite the differences of opinions and that's a good thing.

[ZombieHorde]

179. I agree. I think we all understand that we are missing many details,

and the situation was very difficult, so some humility on our part seems wise.

[Progressive dog]

172. Oh, you said without further loss of life

Never mind.

[damnedifIknow]

184. Without further ado I proudly present the answer.

"Human discomfort starts when a sound hits 120dB, well below the LRAD's threshold. Permanent hearing loss begins at 130dB, and if the device is turned up to 140dB, anyone within its path would not only suffer hearing loss, they could potentially lose their balance and be unable to move out of the path of the audio."

http://gizmodo.com/5860592/what-is-the-lrad-sound-cannon




Sorry, I have a sound cannon fetish.

[BlueStreak]

185. Simple answer -- that was never Dorner's plan

I think we will find he took his own life before the fire.

In any case, he was a psychopath who was intent in going out in a blaze of glory.

Second-guessing the police handling of the final stage is ridiculous unless we find that Dorner tried to surrender.

There are other questions that legitimately should be asked about the LAPD. The fixation on the cabin incident is misguided and distracting. Frankly it makes those arguing that this was some big injustice look pretty foolish -- even on an ostensibly liberal forum.

[nobodyspecial]

186. "There are other questions that legitimately should be asked about the LAPD."

Definitely agree on this. Pursuing it as somehow "justice for Dorner" will get any findings pretty quickly.

[Aerows]

194. Particularly

what in the hell they were thinking (or not thinking) when they shot up those two ladies in the truck.

[Light House]

187. Great post.

If I could rec. this, I would. Instead, here's an applause.

[michigandem58]

192. By him surrendering

But he chose not to. Oh well.