Why isn’t it ok to burn the building though to flush him out? I mean the guy could have came out. They might have shot him but who knows. I think it is a fair way to flush him out and not endanger more lives via a more direct approach.
And lets not forget, this wasn’t some in the heat of the gun fight decision. It was 2 hours of no shots being fired when they made the decision to toss in the incendiary gas canisters.
With that amount of time it was pretty clear he was hunkering down. You bring in the big flood lights to blind him to your movements and try to establish a line of communication. The police have people who train all the time to deal with situations like this, they call them negotiators.
EDIT: RE the flush him out thing… Why do they need to? In all the standoff situations have you ever seen the police move to such drastic measures in so short a time? He’s surrounded, probably low on ammo considering he mad dash on foot after two vehicle crashes, and alone.
Potentially burning people alive
And that goes back to my comment made on the last page: They knew what they were doing and the probable result of tossing the “burners.” I wont deny they most likely circumvented bureaucracy by doing so, but in this case it was in a very justifyable means. If youre going to assume they would have blasted him away when had he stepped out of the house unarmed, this explanation wont work for you. But otherwise, they basically gave him the choice. Step out or potentially burn alive. Thats a pretty fair deal for a rogue madman.
Yeah I guess they could have waited him out. JayS how familiar are you with CS canisters? We used them pretty often in the Army and while they are incendiary I wouldn’t say they reliably start a fire. I guess it maybe could have been a better decision to be made but having experience with these things I doubt they figured it would burn the place down.
LAPD shot at civilians twice while looking for this guy.
You think if he would have walked outside after they called off the police helicopters he wouldn’t have been shot?
There was no way the LAPD was going to let this guy live no matter what he did.
With that much media around, no.
Yeah they called off the helis, they still had to assume cameras were on… and they were.
HAHA fair argument. Amateur hour
Just what I’ve read recently about them. Bottom line though, they have option A that isn’t incendiary and option B that is. After a bunch of cops say “lets burn the fucker” they go with option B, the place catches on fire, then they claim it was an accident. Riiiiight. I don’t think that one even passes the plausible deniability test.
It is California that we’re talking about. Option B was probably on sale.
No, I mean they had them on hand. They used the non-incendiary ones first.
---------- Post added at 03:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:08 PM ----------
Here’s an interesting one.
That $1 million reward… it specifically said for information “leading to the capture and conviction of Dorner”.
So lighting him on fire saved someone a million bucks.
I agree with lz mostly
He should have had a fair trial…then should have been placed in a house and set on fire. The LAPD just screwed up the order.