More on Christopher Dorner
A number of our members were upset with me for this post, in which I expressed satisfaction that Christopher Dorner, killer of four, attempted killer of many others, had himself been killed. I respond here in this new post rather than be confined to the 200-word limit of a comment on the original one.
First, I did not advocate that the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department resort to extra-legal means so as to ensure that Dorner be killed rather than captured. In my 30 years as a police officer I have been shot at, but I have never shot anyone. In those 30 years there have been no less than five occasions in which I would have been fully justified in doing so; that I did not should suggest that I am not as heartless as some here assume me to be.
In the post I merely expressed a thought that was -- and remains -- commonly held among police officers, most especially those involved in the week-long search for Dorner, which is that in the realm of all possible outcomes awaiting him, the one that came to pass was the preferable one. Interestingly, none of the commenters who took me to task addressed the main point of my post, which is that if Dorner had been captured and brought to trial, he surely would have been placed on the same sort of pedestal on which we today find another cop-killer, Mumia Abu Jamal, who murdered Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner 31 years ago yet lives on while enjoying a perverse kind of fame. That the families of Dorner’s victims will not grow old while seeing so despicable a man lionized in the same fashion is not something to regret.
Second, to those who say the sheriff’s deputies acted precipitously in hastening the final outcome in the Dorner case, how many more people would Dorner have to shoot before you were made comfortable in the decision to take aggressive action against him? Surround the cabin and wait him out, some suggested. This option presented a problem: Any officer who was in a position to keep the cabin under observation could have been seen by – and shot by – Dorner, whose inclination and ability to do just that had already been made manifest. Why give him the opportunity to kill again?
In his Facebook manifesto, Dorner told the world he would wage a guerrilla war on police officers and their families. Then he went out and did just that. What happened on that mountainside yesterday was nothing less than combat, and the incident commander for the deputies at the scene had a duty -- indeed a moral obligation -- to bring it to an end quickly.
Third, the Los Angeles Police Department had no role in the final shootout with Dorner. An LAPD SWAT team was flown by helicopter to the San Bernardino airport, but their assistance was declined by the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department.
Lastly, Christopher Dorner’s death was the direct result of decisions he and only he made. Surely he realized that if he surrendered he would have been offered a grand stage on which to air his grievances. Yet he refused to surrender even when given ample opportunity to do so. He chose his fate. Let the world now forget him.
- Comment (129)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (34)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Thumbs down on the shooting of the newspaper ladies and the rundown of the surfer dude. Thumbs up on burning Dorner to death.
Nov '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Jimmy Glynn
Lance
If the situation was such that we had him holed up with no chance to escape, and that our forces were both secure and armed with rules of engagement ...
Dorner was still taking shots when he could get them off, still trying to kill.
Again, they didn't bomb the house, they "accidentally" lit a fire with tear gas, and he most likely could've left the house to escape the fire. He chose not to. How is that different than waiting for him to present himself for a sniper? · 2 hours ago
How is it different? Potentially not at all. In all my posts I have assumed that he would have been sniped if given the chance. But they didn't wait for that chance. And I am just curious about the mechanism that validated the escalation.
May '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Idad, we prosecuted them, with varying degrees of success.
Nov '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Wylee Coyote
Lance
(I'll try looking it up)
The term was "burners". Which is a term used by some police agencies to refer to tear gas dispersal units like this one, because they generate the CS smoke cloud by combusting a chemical mixture (this is how almost all chemical payload and smoke grenades operate). This burning action makes them somewhat incendiary, but they are by no means designed as a fire starter or Molotov cocktail....
. · 1 hour ago
Thanks for saving me the time and doing it better than I could. Ultimately, I just felt the matter needed to be discussed. Like I said earlier...I used to manage a camp right down the road from that cabin. We used to walk our campers to Jenks Lake for overnights, down Hwy 38 to Jenks Road East...right where all the reporters were. I used to go to the local fire station's pancake breakfasts. Its a beautiful area. I also had a meeting with my boss in Irvine cut short last week as he had to get his kids out of daycare early in light of the manhunt.
Sep '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Bryan G. Stephens
Barbara Duran
Bryan G. Stephens: A really bad man is dead, and people are unhappy about that?
I mean, we are done, no trail, no stupid media crap, no chance some dumb LA jury will let the man off for murder (as they have done before). Less cost to the taxpayer, etc.
What is y'all's problem with this outcome exactly?
In the old days, there was the whole "Dead or Alive" for these sorts of guys. You guys sound like a bunch of old women.
Man up! · 4 hours ago
On behalf of old women everywhere, I take umbrage, Bryan. · 2 hours ago
I think you understand what I mean by the expression. It is no different than saying "you dance like a white man" to me.
My tongue was firmly in my cheek, Bryan. I thought your comment was funny and I couldn't agree more with your point of view. Let's dance.
May '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Barbara Duran
Bryan G. Stephens
Barbara Duran
Bryan G. Stephens: A really bad man is dead, and people are unhappy about that?
I mean, we are done, no trail, no stupid media crap, no chance some dumb LA jury will let the man off for murder (as they have done before). Less cost to the taxpayer, etc.
What is y'all's problem with this outcome exactly?
In the old days, there was the whole "Dead or Alive" for these sorts of guys. You guys sound like a bunch of old women.
Man up! · 4 hours ago
On behalf of old women everywhere, I take umbrage, Bryan. · 2 hours ago
I think you understand what I mean by the expression. It is no different than saying "you dance like a white man" to me.
My tongue was firmly in my cheek, Bryan. I thought your comment was funny and I couldn't agree more with your point of view. Let's dance. · 2 hours ago
Sorry about your feet in advance!
Nov '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
It seems to me that combining criticism of the police officers who shot the ladies and the ones who shot up the young man's pickup truck with the actions of the sheriff's deputies who cornered and put down the gunman is a mistake.
A careful investigation of the earlier two incidents is called for and any disciplinary action appropriate taken against the officers involved.
I cannot find fault with the method of the ending the threat posed by Dorner. Yet, I must say, the tragic ending of the standoff at the Branch Davidian compound at Waco, Texas, caused me to think a long time before before coming to that conclusion.
I came to my conclusion because there was, so far as I presently know, nobody but Dorner at risk in the tear gas attack in California, whereas the presence of children at Waco was itself the justification for ordering the assault; the Davidians were in contact with their besiegers and Dorner was not; and, the Davidians, left alone, were no threat to the besieging authorities or others, whereas Dorner was actively engaged in armed resistance. Under those conditions, I find no fault with the use of gas.
Nov '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
If ever there was a fugitive that deserved to be “Wanted Dead or Alive” it was Dorner, and Dead was preferable to prevent the sick public spectacle his trial would have become. This one ended as it should. The world is a little better off today with one less asshole.
Edited on February 15, 2013 at 8:27amMay '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
M1919A4:
I came to my conclusion because there was, so far as I presently know, nobody but Dorner at risk in the tear gas attack in California,
But how could they possibly know that?
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
This may be one of the more disappointing Ricochet threads ever. I've never seen so many dead strawmen. It's a strawman massacre. We're usally better than this.
The criticisms of Jack's original column did not contain one person who lamented that Dorner was dead. No one did (no lack of machismo at all, Bryan). No one said that the killing of Dorner wasn't justified. He made it that way.
There was only ONE - JUST ONE - criticism of Jack's first column (from me included):
That he DISAGREED with the Commander who said it was preferable to have Dorner reach for the sky and surrender than to have a firefight. Jack disagreed and preferred the firefight.
That's bull. A sheriff's deputy died in that firefight. The Commander was right (and I'm gusessing he lacks no barvery Bryan): Surrender was prefered. Jack was wrong.
Just ask the dead Sheriff's family.
May '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Dorner is not the issue, Tommy. He is but one man. The issue is the rule of law. Without the rule of law none of us are safe.
Jan '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Tommy De Seno:
The criticisms of Jack's original column did not contain one person who lamented that Dorner was dead. No one did (no lack of machismo at all, Bryan). No one said that the killing of Dorner wasn't justified. He made it that way.
There was only ONE - JUST ONE - criticism of Jack's first column (from me included):
That he DISAGREED with the Commander who said it was preferable to have Dorner reach for the sky and surrender than to have a firefight. Jack disagreed and preferred the firefight.
That's bull. A sheriff's deputy died in that firefight. The Commander was right (and I'm gusessing he lacks no barvery Bryan): Surrender was preferred. Jack was wrong.
Well said, Tommy. The only thing I'd disagree with was that -- to my knowledge -- there's nothing to suggest that the final deputy's death could have been prevented by different tactics.
Feb '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Skyler
M1919A4:
I came to my conclusion because there was, so far as I presently know, nobody but Dorner at risk in the tear gas attack in California,
But how could they possibly know that? · 2 hours ago
Now you're concerned with what the cops did or didn't know? Where was this concern when you were throwing around terms like criminal negligence in reference to the paper lady shooting where we don't know yet whether the cops had cause or whether that cause justified their actions?
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Tom Meyer
Tommy De Seno:
There was only ONE - JUST ONE - criticism of Jack's first column (from me included):
That he DISAGREED with the Commander who said it was preferable to have Dorner reach for the sky and surrender than to have a firefight. Jack disagreed and preferred the firefight.
That's bull. A sheriff's deputy died in that firefight. The Commander was right (and I'm gusessing he lacks no barvery Bryan): Surrender was preferred. Jack was wrong.
Well said, Tommy. The only thing I'd disagree with was that -- to my knowledge -- there's nothing to suggest that the final deputy's death could have been prevented by different tactics. · 31 minutes ago
I'm not disagreeing with that at all. That's after the fact. Dorner forced the firefight, not the police.
The issue I took with the first piece was everyone's view from earlier in time:
The Commander hoped for surender with no fight.
Jack hoped for a fight.
A sheriff died in that fight.
The Commander's hope was a better one.
Edited on February 15, 2013 at 4:35pmFeb '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Tommy De Seno: .....
There was only ONE - JUST ONE - criticism of Jack's first column (from me included):
That he DISAGREED with the Commander who said it was preferable to have Dorner reach for the sky and surrender than to have a firefight. Jack disagreed and preferred the firefight.
That's bull. A sheriff's deputy died in that firefight. The Commander was right (and I'm gusessing he lacks no barvery Bryan): Surrender was prefered. Jack was wrong.
.....
Two points:
- People weren't merely criticizing the preference that Dorner meet a violent death from a cop's bullet (though I see your critique was limited to that), some were saying that that preference was the same as having no inclination for taking him alive if possible; much inapt extrapolation and inferring was taking place. Anyway, they're not the same and there's nothing wrong with the preference because....
- There is a difference between cosmic justice and civil law. One can have hopes for cosmic justice while still upholding one's duty to the law. In addition, when Jack wishes for cosmic justice does he really need to explain that that wish excludes further violence to innocent people?
Edited on February 15, 2013 at 4:59pmRe: More on Christopher Dorner
Ed G.
In addition, when Jack wishes for cosmic justice does he really need to explain that that wish excludes further violence to innocent people?
Edited 13 minutes ago
The professionalism includes know that it's better not to have risked the dead sheriff's life, so I'd say yes, he might have some explaining to do to that fellow's family.
May '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Tommy De Seno
Ed G.
In addition, when Jack wishes for cosmic justice does he really need to explain that that wish excludes further violence to innocent people?
Edited 13 minutes ago
The professionalism includes know that it's better not to have risked the dead sheriff's life, so I'd say yes, he might have some explaining to do to that fellow's family. · 4 minutes ago
That is my whole point, Tommy. If someone is holed up, don't present more targets for him to kill. Pull back and nuke the site from orbit, as it were.
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Bryan G. Stephens
Tommy De Seno
Ed G.
In addition, when Jack wishes for cosmic justice does he really need to explain that that wish excludes further violence to innocent people?
Edited 13 minutes ago
The professionalism includes know that it's better not to have risked the dead sheriff's life, so I'd say yes, he might have some explaining to do to that fellow's family. · 4 minutes ago
That is my whole point, Tommy. If someone is holed up, don't present more targets for him to kill. Pull back and nuke the site from orbit, as it were. · 6 minutes ago
Agred.
But what are you hoping for? Surrender, correct?
Feb '11
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Tommy De Seno
Bryan G. Stephens
Tommy De Seno
Ed G.
In addition, when Jack wishes for cosmic justice does he really need to explain that that wish excludes further violence to innocent people?
Edited 13 minutes ago
The professionalism includes know that it's better not to have risked the dead sheriff's life, so I'd say yes, he might have some explaining to do to that fellow's family. · 4 minutes ago
That is my whole point, Tommy. If someone is holed up, don't present more targets for him to kill. Pull back and nuke the site from orbit, as it were. · 6 minutes ago
Agred.
But what are you hoping for? Surrender, correct? · 1 minute ago
Professionally, yes, surrender is better than further dangerous conflict. Personally, however, cosmic justice is preferred - and that's ok. Cops are capable of making this distinction just like the rest of us, right?
Jul '10
Re: More on Christopher Dorner
Tommy De Seno
Bryan G. Stephens
Tommy De Seno
Ed G.
In addition, when Jack wishes for cosmic justice does he really need to explain that that wish excludes further violence to innocent people?
Edited 13 minutes ago
The professionalism includes know that it's better not to have risked the dead sheriff's life, so I'd say yes, he might have some explaining to do to that fellow's family. · 4 minutes ago
That is my whole point, Tommy. If someone is holed up, don't present more targets for him to kill. Pull back and nuke the site from orbit, as it were. · 6 minutes ago
Agred.
But what are you hoping for? Surrender, correct? · 5 minutes ago
I think what is hoped for is ending the threat with minimal loss of life. If Dorner were willing to surrender after expending all of his ammo and killing even more people, then in that situation surrender is not preferable. As long as he was actively trying to kill more people, the preferable outcome is ending the threat as quickly as possible while risking as few others as possible. And he may have taken his own life.