This isn’t true for Honesty however who seems interested in reviving the Black Panthers.
Even in Toronto, a city not known for its crime, I know for a fact police officers are trained to shoot the suspect repeatedly to ensure they don’t get back up. That’s just common sense.
“Just shoot the bejeezus out of some random vehicle” is not, however, part of the training.
I, too, am curious as to why attempted murder charges aren’t being sent to a grand jury.
Just can’t help it, can you? A perfect opportunity to shut the fuck up, and you just can’t manage it.
Only driven by an old lady on Sundays. Never been shot.
Seriously?
In case you’ve been absent from the planet for the past.. well since forever, the answer is:
BECAUSE THEY’RE COPS.
I’m talking to the posters who think the man is an instrument of well-deserved justice, of which there have been a few. Hate on the LAPD all you want, but don’t talk up this guy as some kind of action hero.
By “curious” I was ironically understating my position.
A police officer can pretty much just up and murder a helpless person in cold blood and will usually get away with it, or will be very lightly punished.
What? A rightfully angry thread about police officers making a huge mistake devolving into law enforcement bashing and hatred for the police? On the SDMB?
I’m shocked, shocked I tells ya’.
You said that with authority!
While it’s true he killed innocent people, didn’t the cops hunting him come dangerously close, but for dumb luck, to doing a similar thing, by shooting a couple of innocent old ladies who’s only crime was being near the police.
If the LA police are wanting to count on the community rising up to defend them, when accused of brutality, unfairness, and racism, maybe they shouldn’t openly practise such things. They are making a hero out of a murderer, in my opinion, because the numbers of persons who have experienced unfairness, racism or brutality at the hands of the LA police is legion.
I suspect this guy may well have accurately gauged that such an attack would bring to the fore exactly the type of behaviour, he was charging and they are now exhibiting. With the media providing 24/7 coverage there is little room for the police to spin such events as shooting up a couple of innocent old ladies delivering newspapers. Every body is watching intently what will happen to those shooters, and decide whether paid leave is an appropriate response.
Marley23, let me ask you something else. Assuming for a moment the “work situation” is as Dorner claims, he was let go of the police and navy for doing his duty by reporting abuse by a fellow officer:
Is it possible that something good will come out of this killing spree? Like punishing bad cops and putting some accountability back in the department?
Is it possible Dorner was a Good Man™ before the LAPD kicked him around?
Police are trained to shoot but not especially rigorously, and they are not frequent dischargers of firearms in life or death situations. I think the average LEO will discharge his weapon on duty under 2 times in the average 25 year career, many never will.
I don’t know about police training, but in the military you don’t stop shooting the enemy while they still have the fight left in them. From a practical perspective that means you’ll want to have multiple rounds in their torso. From a training and performance perspective you do not want infantrymen unloading 30+ rounds into one hostile. But police aren’t trained infantrymen nor are they combat veterans (usually) who have been engaging the enemy regularly for weeks on end. So what you tend to get is police who do combine their training to shoot center mass and essentially to shoot to kill (they may use a different phrase, but the underlying concept is shooting center mass until the threat is “gone” which is typically synonymous with killing someone) with innate human panic at what they perceive is a life or death situation meaning instead of firing until the threat is neutralized they fire until they are out of bullets.
Many studies exist showing both police and inexperienced soldiers waste tons of ammunition firing off everything they have primarily due to panic, and I’m sure that is what happened here.
I remember when the book Black Hawk Down came out, I was still in service at the time, and there was some criticism of a scene portrayed in the book. Basically a militia member was shot several times by FMJ rounds that basically pierced holes straight through him. While that’s not good for anyone’s health, it doesn’t tend to have the stopping power of a round that breaks apart inside the body. So this militiaman was crawling across the road, gun still in hand, clearly mortally wounded, and as the author of BHD reports the American soldiers light him up big time while he’s crawling on the ground. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, someone still moving with a gun is still an enemy combatant and you don’t give them the opportunity to keep fighting.
Where the LAPD really ran off the rails is more of what I’d call a “rules of engagement” problem, the excessive discharge of their weapons is just expected from people inexperienced in such things, but isn’t intrinsically ‘wrong’. In a situation where firearms use is justified it’s half-expected you’ll have people unloading lots more than they should need to in order to hit something. But any rules on the use of deadly force that police departments have that I’m aware of would prohibit opening fire in the first place in the situation with this truck, so that’s where the real problem is.
The officers involved definitely need to be brought up on disciplinary charges for violating their departmental use of force guidelines. As for attempted murder, at least in my State I do not think we have any such crime, but maybe the closest cognate would be “aggravated malicious wounding”, which is basically wounding someone with malicious intent. The problem would be demonstrating malice, this was basically a “mistake” or a “fuckup” in which the officers thought their lives were in danger, so it’d be hard (especially given who the defendants would be) to prove malice and get a conviction on that crime (which is a Class 2 felony.) What this seems a lot more like to me, is some sort of crime of negligence, reckless endangerment, reckless handling of firearms etc. All felony crimes here, and rightfully so, but not as serious as an “attempted murder” type crime. In most jurisdictions that have attempted murder it does usually specify that you’re attempting to commit a malicious, unlawful killing. In a scenario where you can raise a plausible argument that mistakenly thought they were engaged in valid police activity I think it makes that a harder sell to a jury.
There are definitely crimes that fit what they did, though. I suspect they will not be charged with any crime, and probably will only suffer internal discipline and will not lose their jobs.
In cases like this, I think the officers definitely should lose their jobs, but on whether they should be convicted of a crime I’d need to know a lot more of the specifics of the situation.
You mean the “A car?! Shoot it!!” policy? No, that’s not justified. It’s a botch job. I don’t know that there was any misconduct in the handling of his case.
That’s what it is. In non-crazy world, if you have a problem with the people you work with, you go through whatever procedures your job offers to fix it. If that doesn’t work, you sue. If that doesn’t work, maybe you’ve caught a shitty break but you get on with your life.
Maybe. Why is this such a big concern at this stage?
I doubt it. I think that when Good People get bad breaks, they don’t go off on murder sprees of people who didn’t do anything to them several years afterward. I know it sounds like a crazy theory, but I’m reasonably confident in it.
And this is what has led some people to speculate that the LAPD has decided to execute Dorner, and they don’t really give a shit how many innocent citizens get in the way.
Grey truck? Blue truck? Who cares - shoot it up.
Black guy? White guy? Hispanic women? 70 year old? Whatever - shoot them and sort it out later.
I have a question for those who have carried a weapon on the police force or in the military.
Have you ever been witness to a fellow service person or superior, use too much force, brutalize someone, or overstep their authority such that it would be considered an infraction of specifically defined procedure? Did you ever look the other way, fail to report, decide not to because it wouldn’t be prudent?
I would guess that they pretty much all do, in varying degrees, almost daily, in some way. I suspect they fall into abusing power in tiny little steps after lots of exposure. Once they are complicit it’s a small step to participation, and only a couple more tiny steps it being ‘their due’. I can understand how hard it must be to turn such a culture around.
Such employment takes a terrible toll on those who undertake it, it seems to me. I sort of feel the same about lawyers. This thread reminds me of something a judge once shared with me. He said the lowest form of life were criminals, victimizing others. The second lowest form of life was police because they dealt with nothing but criminals. The third was lawyers because they are caught between cops and criminals. The fourth were judges because they dealt entirely with, criminals, cops and lawyers!
This sort of logic is used to try and cow dissent. republicans used it when people objected to the invasion of Iraq (why are you trying to protect Saddam Hussein?). Democrats are using it right now with gun control (why do you want more Sandy hooks to happen?). And we will probably continue to use it as long as there are weak minded but useful idiots out there who will be swayed by these sort of arguments.
I suspect you get more of the second kind in LA than you do in other large metropolitan areas. I don’t know why. And they tend to cover for each other as well.
I’d be surprised if he wasn’t framed.
And how much do you want to bet they don’t lose their jobs while the black cops that ratted out dirty cops did.
If that happened then at least some good will have come from this.
It is possible that he was at least as “good” as other members of the LAPD.
With ALL that said, it doesn’t justify killing anyone but the LAPD is so screwed up, I don’t think anything less dramatic could make any sort of difference.
Because some people see everything in black and white, when the world is full of shades of grey. And it makes for more interesting conversation than “Murder is bad, mmmkay?”
I disagree. I empathize with Dorner, he exhausted whatever legal means were available to him trying to do right. However I won’t defend his actions and when he dies that’ll be that. That’s the path he chose. Life imprisonment or death, I don’t see much of a difference from an individual’s point of view.
Good people don’t kill innocent people, period. Killing one’s enemies can be good or evil, depending on the circumstances (chiefly why they are your enemies), but killing the families of one’s enemies is always evil.
I’d reserve judgment on things like that, you have no available evidence to suggest he was framed.
Not sure how much race has to do with it. Most big city police departments these days have a lot of black officers and a lot of black officers in leadership positions. If Dorner saw inappropriate behavior and reported it, and was then retaliated against, it’s because he broke the “code of silence” endemic to some of our more troubled police departments in the country and probably not because he’s black. I don’t like to engage in police bashing because I think it’s childish and stupid, and I’ve never seen any reliable evidence to suggest a large portion of police are corrupt. However, if we can assume some large police departments that have had serious corruption problems in the past (and LAPD is one of them) are still corrupt, then we can assume that ratting on other officers would be treated similar to how a snitch would be treated in an organized criminal gang. You get rid of the snitch (the police choosing to use disciplinary action instead of rubbing someone out.) And that’s probably why Dorner was retaliated against if he was retaliated against, not because he was black.
He murdered two people who were not in any way affiliated with LAPD, so I think it’s inappropriate to even suggest his actions could be justified.
What a touchy-feely way to look at a guy who has murdered strangers because he’s mad at the LAPD. Black and white may be boring, but bullshit is bullshit. He may have been wronged, but there’s a pretty good reason to believe he’s a paranoid nut.
If that’s what he was doing.