Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GlyphGryph]

Oh, I'm pretty sure he was crazy for a while, and probably SHOULD have been fired for that. From all appearances, that's not the case - he was fired for reporting a superior officer.

This doesn't exactly make the LAPD look any better, though.

It's basically Taxi Driver writ large. A crazy guy goes off the deep end, and ends up not looking as bad as he would have by virtue of choosing targets (well, an institution) that's also pretty damn bad.

[Cthulhu]

A cop's daughter and her fiance are pretty damn bad?

He lost any Robin Hood cred he might have had the moment he killed unrelated civilians.

[Loud Whispers]

A cop's daughter and her fiance are pretty damn bad?

They like to call this "collateral damage" to make people feel better.

[GlyphGryph]

This is why I specified the institution rather than individual victims. If he'd avoided going after the families, that narrative would be a hell of a lot stronger and I'd presume the condemnation a hell of a lot less. But even then it's an attack on the institution, and while people can virulently disagree with his methods (killing those people is pretty much outright evil), the intent, the desire to damage the much-hated police officers, is something a lot of people can sympathize with.

It's not like anyone thinks he's a good guy at this point. But the LAPD isn't exactly filling that role either. And people in the US have a long history of enjoying the spectacle of two bad guys going at each other, even if there is "collateral" damage. It's like watching a gang fight or a mafia movie, basically. On one side, a criminal organization, on the other a vigilante who's gone way too far.

[Aqizzar]

It's basically Taxi Driver writ large. A crazy guy goes off the deep end, and ends up not looking as bad as he would have by virtue of choosing targets (well, an institution) that's also pretty damn bad.

The "choice of targets" has so far amounted to the family of a guy related to his firing, and a couple irrelevant patrol officers.

Although the LAPD certainly isn't doing itself any favors, with things like dumping thirty rounds into a random vehicle because it "resembled the suspect's vehicle" (and wasn't even close), and throttling their 911 service because so many officers have been sent out into the hinterlands to find one guy.

[Starver]

Although the LAPD certainly isn't doing itself any favors, with things like dumping thirty rounds into a random vehicle because it "resembled the suspect's vehicle" (and wasn't even close)

Was it the wrong make?  Couldn't have told the difference, myself.

[Scelly9]

Although the LAPD certainly isn't doing itself any favors, with things like dumping thirty rounds into a random vehicle because it "resembled the suspect's vehicle" (and wasn't even close)

Was it the wrong make?  Couldn't have told the difference, myself.

I believe the report said Grey or Blue, so I would think a more light blue, not that. Still, you don't shoot a vehicle because it's the same as a suspect's. Or, at least you shouldn't.

[Cthulhu]

Honestly it doesn't matter.  "The car looks the same" shouldn't lead to "Let's empty a thousand bullets into it."  There were much better ways to handle that situation.

[Scelly9]

Honestly it doesn't matter.  "The car looks the same" shouldn't lead to "Let's empty a thousand bullets into it."  There were much better ways to handle that situation.

Agreed.

[CJ1145]

The man's a crazed-up Froot Loop. He's beyond help and beyond the chance to be portrayed as a victim. He's killed civilians, and I'll be glad when they finally bring him in and get the dangerous fellow off the streets.

Doesn't mean the LAPD aren't a bunch of stupendously incompetent idjits and assholes.

[Starver]

I believe the report said Grey or Blue, so I would think a more light blue, not that.

Oh, so it should have said "grey-ish blue", then?  Sorry, took it literally.  That truck is blue.  Ergo.

Still, you don't shoot a vehicle because it's the same as a suspect's. Or, at least you shouldn't.

I have no idea if there were hands waving around, looking like a threatening action, or something.  I suspect you have no idea, either.  I've already said I don't want to excuse it, but things like this happen.

Truck seen by police cruiser.  Truck (somewhat) matches description.  Cruiser pulls truck over.  Occupants wondering why they're being pulled over.  Passenger asks driver if she ran a light/exceeded the speed limit (or why she did that, if that's what attracted the officers to the vehicle).  Somewhat emotive conversation ensues (we've seen the kind on "Police, Stop, Crash, Aren't We Lucky We Had Access To The Videotapes"-type shows), which can only be half seen by the officers and could very well be weapons being brandished.  Officers, primed for a violent and armed criminal not scared at shooting at police officers, react as we know they did.

One possible way it may have happened.  Again, no excuses, but I could see it being done like that.

I'm too far away from the action (and haven't heard any more news than has been linked to in this thread) to have any actual insights into this, but so far as I've seen everyone's assuming something like that the officers involved in the above are directly involved in the Conspiracy and are under orders (or personally motivated) to get rid of the guy, in the best traditions of over-the-top movie bad-guys.  Please take this reply as an attempt to add balance, although I know it may not be received as such.

[Cthulhu]

That's a good point.  Several of us are giving Dorner quite a bit of benefit of the doubt, it's the least we can do to give the cops what little benefit of the doubt they deserve.  We don't know anything about that situation except that the car got shot up.

[Aqizzar]

That's a good point.  Several of us are giving Dorner quite a bit of benefit of the doubt, it's the least we can do to give the cops what little benefit of the doubt they deserve.  We don't know anything about that situation except that the car got shot up.

Spoiler: This is what they did to the truck. (click to show/hide)

There is no amount of "benefit of the doubt" I can give to make that look like the reasonable course of action.  Excepting that you see a guy hanging out the back window with a machine gun, how could "dump three or four clips into both seats" be the right thing to do?  I'll be very curious to see what the dash cam shows of the incident (if the footage doesn't mysteriously disappear).

[Leafsnail]

I'm too far away from the action (and haven't heard any more news than has been linked to in this thread) to have any actual insights into this, but so far as I've seen everyone's assuming something like that the officers involved in the above are directly involved in the Conspiracy and are under orders (or personally motivated) to get rid of the guy, in the best traditions of over-the-top movie bad-guys.  Please take this reply as an attempt to add balance, although I know it may not be received as such.

I don't think they're involved in any conspiracy, or that they're acting out of malice.  It's more that they appear to be endangering the public even more by using extremely heavyhanded tactics, with the motive presumably being fear.

[CJ1145]

There is no amount of "benefit of the doubt" I can give to make that look like the reasonable course of action.  Excepting that you see a guy hanging out the back window with a machine gun, how could "dump three or four clips into both seats" be the right thing to do?  I'll be very curious to see what the dash cam shows of the incident (if the footage doesn't mysteriously disappear).

Another thing to point out is that all that damage came from officers behind the vehicle. Presumably a fair distance behind, because if they were close, hell, even within ten feet there's no way all those shots would've got into the rear of the vehicle. That looks a lot less like a pull-over gone sour and a lot more like a moment of panic and poor judgment sparking as shooting.

It's true the officers deserve some benefit of the doubt. But there's only so much benefit one can give when that's the evidence you're up against.