They shot ,fired and killed someone in relation to arson in CA.

[The Backlash Cometh]

CNN Headline News: They said a man was caught starting a fire and when he attempted to flee, they shot and killed him.

He got off easy.

[kdmorris]

1. See, now, I thought that's what we had a justice system for

But, who needs it when we have CNN to tell us the truth of things.

How do YOU know that he got off easy? It is extremely disturbing to see something like that. You have no idea what really happened, except what CNN said, and yet, you are cheering for the death of a person who may or may not be innocent. No trial, no judge, no jury, just "CNN said..." so it must be true and it's a good thing that this person was killed.

How old was this "man"? CNN has a short history of declaring barely teenage people be to adults (remember the "woman" raped in Iraq who turned out to be a 14 year old girl?)

[William769]

3. Where is the justice for the people that have died?

Where is the justice for the property lost? Where is the justice for the people putting their lives in jeopardy fighting these inferno's? Just saying.

[xultar]

6. Ahhh I just don't think we go around poppin caps in muthafuckas without trials...

that's all I'm sayin'.

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. Who said it wasn't better to take him to trial?

That's what I meant when I said he got off easy.

(1) A full investigation of the shooting should be conducted to CONFIRM the man was spotted setting a fire AND running from the scene. And I would prefer to know that the likelihood of his escape was high. You also have to assume that a man who would set a fire, would also be armed. If he's cornered, expect him to put up a fight.

(2) That said, in the comfy of our office armchairs, how nice to have the luxury of having clear heads, eh?

[Marrah_G]

32. He was ramming the cops with his car

They didn't shoot him for arson or running, they shot him because he was trying to kill them.

[kdmorris]

40. Justice generally means fairness

Obviously no one can bring back a dead person, but the homes will be rebuilt. I think you are confused here about what justice is. You cannot shoot people who are acting suspicious (more info has come out now, but this morning, that was not the case) to bring justice to those who have lost so much.

Are you seriously saying that a person who starts a fire deserves to be shot with no trial, no nothing? Do you think THAT gives justice to the people who have died or the people who have lost their homes, or the firefighters?

So, if you make a mistake, hit someone's car and kill their child, it would be OK for someone to just walk up and shoot you?

[MadHound]

2. It continues to amaze me how many people in this country

Are becoming more and more accepting of summary, vigilante justice. So much for our American system of justice, and congratulations friend, you're part of the problem.

[xultar]

9. DING! DING! DING! You are CORRECT!

[The Backlash Cometh]

17. The facts are coming in:

The man, described only as a 27-year-old from Topock, Ariz, twice crashed his car and then tried to ram police vehicles, according to authorities. Both times, police responded by firing their weapons; the second time, the shots proved fatal.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-firenumbers25oct25,0,93308.story?coll=la-home-center

[xultar]

22. That I can understand. But, just shooting the guy cuz he is suspected of starting

a fire...then I don't understand that.

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. You assume too much.

I expect a full investigation to confirm the shooting was justified, and if not, then let the shooter suffer the consequences. But I suggest you wake up, because we're all in for hard times during these major events, which I suspect will be getting worse in the event of global warming. And because they will be part of our future, I suggest we start discussing now what is acceptable behavior for someone who is actually out there when they're confronted with this situation.

Let the discussion begin.

[MadHound]

24. You are being a bit disingenous

From your own link above:
"We don't know whether he was an arsonist," said Lt. Scott Patterson of the San Bernardino Police Department, which joined the pursuit. "What was related by the Cal State police was that they tried to contact him as a suspicious person in a brush area. Things being how they are, there was a suspicion that he could be an arsonist."

The man, described only as a 27-year-old from Topock, Ariz, twice crashed his car and then tried to ram police vehicles, according to authorities. Both times, police responded by firing their weapons; the second time, the shots proved fatal.

They shot the man because he was a risk to police officers, not because he started a fire. Please be a bit more honest.

That said, I find your attitude on this matter to be cold hearted, to say the least. We're not living in a Mad Max world where people start taking the law in your own hands. If major catastrophes continue to accelerate as you predict, then it is vital that we not adapt this sort of vigilante attitude, for not only will it spell the end of our country, but the end of civilization.

The only type of "acceptable behavior" in this sort of situation is to continue the rule of law. I find your shoot first, justify later attitude to be abhorent and despicable. I would also be careful for what you wish for, in a Mad Max world it could easily come back and bite you on the ass.

You obviously have never experienced the horror of the scenario who so gleefully embrace. I would suggest that you talk with people that have, Cambodians, Iraqis, Chileans, etc. Perhaps that will change your mind and quell your bloodlust.

[The Backlash Cometh]

26. We'll agree to disagree.

The reality is that a million people were relocated. I'm willing to bet that in that million there were people with secrets as bad if not worse than arsonists.

I've asked myself, at what point is a policeman allowed to shoot where no one can question the shooting. My opinion is, if they barge into someone's home, they have full liability if they make a mistake. Out in the open, however, if someone points a weapon at them, or rams their car into theirs, well, assuming it's "policemen," and not vigilantes, then I don't see how your side will prevail.

Explain how it could. I'm interested in hearing it.

[MadHound]

28. I have no problem with police shooting somebody in self defense,

And that includes when somebody is ramming their car into them repeatedly.

However you are willing to shoot somebody on simply suspicion of a crime. That is quite frankly vigilante justice, and how you can condone this in a civilized country, I don't understand.

If you will please note, once again, that in your article it states that they shot the man not for suspicion of arson, but for ramming his car repeatedly into them. Big difference.

But apparently you want to live in a Mad Max world, being judge, jury and executioner. How fucking pathetic.

[The Backlash Cometh]

29. Have you been reading what I've been writing?

I would have preferred that the man had been brought to justice and suffered the death of a thousand tongue lashes if found guilty. That's what I would have preferred.

And what I originally said he did was based on what I heard a CNN headline news reporter say, not the article, which I uncovered later in the morning.

[LoZoccolo]

34. Would you rather he been tased? n/t

[Dr. Strange]

41. No, that would have been bad.

He might have caught on fire.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. If He was Indeed Guilty I'm Glad

But it would have been nice to give due process a chance...

[xultar]

7. OK...did someone carry me through a stargate last night while I slept?

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. I want to know why it was necessary to shoot?

Personally, if he was indeed guilty, it would have been worse for him to face the public wrath. I'd like to hear from the witnesses who were there, and I suggest we don't let this story die down until we find out.

[cobalt1999]

5. If he was starting fires, I'm glad they didn't let him escape so he'd continue.

[xultar]

8. DU? DU? Paging DU.

[cobalt1999]

11. Maybe reading closer, you'll see the IF part of my post.

IF he was starting fires and running from the police to avoid capture, then I'm glad he's not free to continue.

BTW, DU is a place for many dissenting opinions. Yours isn't any more correct than mine.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. I agree with your assessment

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Where do you live, xultar?

Do you live anywhere where major catastrophes happen regularly?

[xultar]

18. I used to live in NOLA.

[The Backlash Cometh]

19. Well, if you were there during Katrina, I can understand why you're

jaded. You have every right to be.

But my point is still made, that we need some kind of rules hashed out to determine how we're suppose to handle these lawless events in this new era of divisiness, hatred, distrust and animosity.

Thank you, George Bush, for 'nuthin.

[xultar]

20. I wasn't there, but many of my artist friends were devistated. Just like that guy got shot

maybe he was guilty, maybe not. We'll never know. The problem is when people feel free to just shoot folks because they see them doing something that they feel is illegal then often innocents get hurt.

Myabe the guy was trying to put the fire out. Maybe he just stumbled on to it. Maybe he thought he'd do some trash burning and effed up. I don't know. I think we need courts and juries to determine what happened.

But as a black woman, in this country, I see it as a HUGE problem when people start shootin and askin later. It could have been me, a friend, or someone in my family or sphere of influence.

[The Backlash Cometh]

21. Overall, I agree with what you're saying.

In this case, it sounds like it was justified because he used his car as a weapon.

[xultar]

25. DAYUM straight baby. Nice chattin with you on this subject.

:hi:

[Marrah_G]

33. He wasn't shot for that though

The cops shot him because he was repeatedly trying to injure them by ramming his car into them.

They didn't shoot him for arson or evading arrest. If they shot him just for suspicion of Arson then I would be calling for their arrest.

[iverglas]

30. ha

What you've got is what you get at DU, friend.

I'd just like to add my voice to yours and the others' questioning that phenomenon.

A lot of "liberals" just don't seem to have a clue about what the word actually means.

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. If it was the only alternative, it would make the most sense that they did

shoot. But I'm still awaiting the facts.

[slackmaster]

23. Sounds like a good start - Looters are next

:hide:

BTW this is :sarcasm:

[The Backlash Cometh]

27. That's sort of the point I'm trying to get at.

We need defined rules in this new era of ordinary hostility.

It use to be that you never had to question why we'd shoot looters or fleeing suspects. Now because there is so much hatred and distrust, everything is suspect. But that sure doesn't help the person who is out there, having to make snap decisions.

[iverglas]

31. a print report about the incident

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arson25oct25,1,6061487.story?coll=la-headlines-california&ctrack=1&cset=true

Amid worries of new blazes adding to the firestorm already afflicting the region, a man in Hesperia has been arrested on suspicion of arson, and police reported shooting and killing another arson suspect after chasing him out of scrub behind Cal State San Bernardino.

... The confrontation that ended in the shooting death started about 6 p.m. Tuesday when San Bernardino university police spotted a man in a rural area of flood channels and scrub near the campus. University police tried to detain the man, but he got into his car and fled, authorities said. When he began to ram officers' vehicle, they shot him.

The suspect is described as a 27-year-old man with a home address in Arizona. Sheriff's investigators will search his impounded pickup truck pending a search warrant, Lt. Scott Patterson of the San Bernardino Police Department said this afternoon.

... "We don't know whether he was an arsonist," Patterson said. "What was related by the Cal State police was that they tried to contact him as a suspicious person in a brush area. Things being how they are, there was a suspicion that he could be an arsonist."

... San Bernardino police joined campus authorities in pursuit of the suspect. He drove north on Waterman Avenue and up a dirt fire road into the foothills. When officers tried to take him into custody, he began to batter officers' vehicles with car, Patterson said. Officers shot and killed him.

Just some details for the mill.

The shooting appears to have been less a matter of stopping a suspected arsonist from fleeing than of stopping a suspected arsonist from crashing into police cars. I wonder whether something short of killing him wouldn't have accomplished that, but as usual I prefer to wait for more details before having an opinion about the merits of the action.

[The Backlash Cometh]

36. Maybe by five we'll get the full story?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. I hope they go and shoot those downed powerlines too.

And the wind. I wish the cops would go out and shoot into the Santa Ana winds.

[The Backlash Cometh]

37. The Santa Ana winds...

That's going to be woven into a bitter song someday soon.

[Trajan]

38. Egads ..... Some DUers support summary execution .....

I am not surprised ......

Saddened, but not surprised .....

LOTS of twisted language in here, but the bottom line is: Some DUers support the immediate street-side execution of someone who may have started one of these awful fires ..... without the due process of law ....

Some real twisted MoFo's round here .....

[The Backlash Cometh]

39. You would have saved yourself some embarrassment if you had

taken the time to read the threads first.

[Dr. Strange]

42. On the other hand, some of us were provided with entertainment.

[Trajan]

43. Not embarrased in the least ....

I am reading it correctly ....

Stew in your own juices ...

[The Backlash Cometh]

44. Whateva.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

45. If your post were correctly titled: "Police shot and killed man

after he rammed their cruisers" you might have an arguement.
Take the time to come up with a non-sensational headline.

[The Backlash Cometh]

46. Once again, I posted what I heard on CNN Headline News, first.

I didn't know about the cruiser until the article showed up later and the hour grace period had expired.

Even then, things are not clear because the facts seem to contradict themselves. Somebody else posted a clip that said the guy was indeed forced out of hiding in the scrub and then chased and shot. So, I suggest we listen very carefully in the next day or so to find out just what happened. Keep the story alive, because how they proceeded may be shades of things to come.