LMAO
Slippery slope?
Why let people appeal traffic tickets?
Why let people have trials for murder?
Guilty or not he is guaranteed the right to face a jury of his peers. For now at least.
Well that is debatable since we have a current war on terror and he was labeled a domestic terrorist…
yeah yeah, I know. I don’t disagree for the most part.
I was more interested to see if taken alive what else he might bring up in a court case.
I’m more interested to see how those people were reimbursed for having their car accidentally shot up.
and their cabin burned to the ground lol
Are there Dorner T-shirts for sale yet?
for someone who wanted to “clear his name”, you’d think he want a nice lengthy trial so he can try and do that, instead of going out in a blaze of glory, taking his secrets with him…
Don’t worry I am sure Anderson Cooper has the scoop. 
Sorry but a man “Heavily armed and extremely dangerous” with “Military Training and a sharp shooter” and has been taking down police officers and others… Shot first, ask later when you are dealing with a guy not caring about the peoples lives outside. Had they try to storm and keep him alive, he would have gone out with a gun blazing battle anyways. He was quoted saying he was bringing a war on the police. I’d say that constitutes for take him dead or alive.
I don’t think he had a choice lol
---------- Post added at 11:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 AM ----------
Police don’t get to make that decision it’s the entire concept of due process
Last I checked, they have the call on taking “Deadly Force” if they see it nessessary. With that said, How many cops were shot? How many died? How many civilians were harmed? Don’t think Deadly force will get them introuble on this one.
If an officer’s life is in imminent danger when attempting to make an arrest, he is well within his rights to use deadly force. At the moment that they were smoking him out, it didn’t appear that he was firing at them or threatening to fire, so they weren’t in imminent danger.
Even if they were in imminent danger, burning the building down is the entirely wrong way of doing so. They may not have known if there was hostages inside or if there was even confirmation of Dorner’s identity. So they really should have either sniped him after confirming identity in their scope (but even then, they probably weren’t within their rights to shoot him), or busted in there and gone face to face with him (probably would have been the best thing to do). Then if he fires on them, they can kill him.
I was never arguing not shooting someone shooting at you.
My point was people saying just shoot him if he comes out/whatever
yeah i wasn’t disagreeing, just sort of elaborating… carry on
Cops don’t get to decide someone’s punishment regardless of what they have done
You said “shoot first”
I realize if someone is shooting at you lethal force is called for
This is exactly what happened with the 3 civilians who got shot at by the LAPD opening fire and not even identifying a threat
Oh hell no. A man walking out unarmed with hands up is not someone you shoot no matter the crime. But the method they did, his call on not coming out… houses just dont go up in flames in 5 seconds and you cant escape…unless an explosion. So they gave him an option and he didnt take it.
Now your an expert on cabin fires? Lol
You seriously believe if he walked out they wouldn’t have lit him up?