California Killings Spark Massive Manhunt

[PracticalMac]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

You forgot one ...

Largely ignorant about their true motivations and living a life of largely based on habit and social convention.

I'd say most.

done

[unlinked]

Originally Posted by Technarchy

Is that right?

I think people just extrapolate incorrectly from the UK and Ireland but even there there are plenty of armed police even if the average policeman on the street isn't.

[bradl]

Originally Posted by Kurwenal

Leading what? The two incidents were not calls about Dorner, they were just LAPD officers out on patrol. So you want to pull all 10,000 LAPD officers off the streets and replace them with FBI and BATF agents?

If there is a Dorner-specific call, you (might) have time to call in other agencies, but that was not the case in either shooting incident yesterday.

I said nothing about the two incidents. I was referring to the search for Dorner himself. See, he knows, too much about his peers:

• as ex-LAPD, he knows how the local LEOs operate. He knows what they'll do and how they'll do it.
• as ex-military, he knows how they operate (at least his branch of the military). He'll also know how they will do what they do.
• As he has targeted families and children, he knows that there is no way out of this alive for him. He knows he is going to die one way or another. Knowing that and disregarding that makes him all the more dangerous.

With respect to the Dorner-specific search in Big Bear, that is being led by the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

Local Sheriff's office may operate the same way as the LEOs. So to top that off, he knows how LAPD, LA County, San Bernardino and Riverside, counties, and Clark County will operate. Navy is outside of this jurisdiction. The only body he wouldn't know about would be FBI and BATF, so the others would be a great resource to consult and use as backup, but the FBI and BATF may operate differently to what he knows, and may have a better chance at nailing him.

Or...

Better yet, maybe some of the extreme pro-gun lovers could talk some sense in to Nugent and get him to spend less time 'owning' talking heads on TV, put his money where his mouth is, and exercise his precious 2nd Amendment right, and take the government up on the $1 million bounty on Dorner's head and nail him.. unless he doesn't feel man enough to do it; otherwise, they'll just call in Dog the Bounty Hunter.

BL.

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by nebo1ss

It is often the case that these types of stops are for "DWB" Driving while Black. Unfortunate, but seems to be part of the system.

The thing is, my physical appearance does not warrant any kind of "suspicious behavior". In other words, I hardly look like a suspect for anything.

If this is a part of the system, why not fix the system?

Originally Posted by likemyorbs

It's not just about these types of specific incidents. Cops in general seem to talk down to the citizens who pay their salaries and absurd benefits. Often times even in casual settings like in a line at a store, they speak to you as if you've already committed a crime. Not all are like this of course, but it's irritating. I noticed that most of the young cops in my area were the douche bags in high school. When that bullet proof vest is put on, they grow six feet.

Does the said government thug with a gun grow horizontally? Making up for something best measured in millimeters right?

Joking aside, I agree 100% with your post.

This reminds of me another instance where I was treated like a criminal instead of someone who needed help. Late one night on my way home, I had to pull over on the freeway due to a mechanical issue with my car. Not even a minute after I pull over, a highway patrol car pulls up behind me. The officer gets out and comes to my vehicle and asks why I'm pulled over. I say that my car was having an issue and I needed to give it a restart. The next thing I know, pig starts asking me if I've had anything to drink. Seriously, I'm pulled over because of an issue with my car and I'm asked if I had anything to drink?!?!?!?! Long story short, I take a quick sobriety test (follow the finger), which I easily pass and get on my way and as quickly as I can get out of there.

It's experiences like this that leave me with an utter disgust for police officers. What happened to protecting and serving the public?

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

Wasn't he fired for making false statements?? Wonder how many others out there that make false statements still hold their jobs. While there may be quite a few good police officers out in the force there is definitely a bunch of bad ones working for the government as well.

If you heard that on any of the mainstream media channels, I would be very skeptical. Keep in mind that LAPD is also playing good PR here in an attempt to save face. Their PR department is also releasing any kind of information about Dorner to the press.

I've also heard reports that he was fired for whistle blowing. It's kind of difficult to believe what the LAPD's PR department about Dorner if they're looking out for themselves.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

This reminds of me another instance where I was treated like a criminal instead of someone who needed help. Late one night on my way home, I had to pull over on the freeway due to a mechanical issue with my car. Not even a minute after I pull over, a highway patrol car pulls up behind me. The officer gets out and comes to my vehicle and asks why I'm pulled over. I say that my car was having an issue and I needed to give it a restart. The next thing I know, pig starts asking me if I've had anything to drink. Seriously, I'm pulled over because of an issue with my car and I'm asked if I had anything to drink?!?!?!?! Long story short, I take a quick sobriety test (follow the finger), which I easily pass and get on my way and as quickly as I can get out of there.

Well, for that specific instance the root cause is easily identifiable.

We put so much emphasis on eliminating drinking and driving, that the police force also has to make sure they are catching all of the drunk drivers. So any instance where they can do a quick test and maybe catch somebody is one they are going to take.

Now I have my own opinion on drinking and driving, one that surely isn't popular, but either way when you make that the top priority, instead of say, catching murderers, you're going to have that type of situation occur pretty regularly.

[yg17]

Originally Posted by eric/

Now I have my own opinion on drinking and driving, one that surely isn't popular, but either way when you make that the top priority, instead of say, catching murderers, you're going to have that type of situation occur pretty regularly.

Let me guess, you're all for drinking and driving because the Constitution doesn't specifically ban it or something like that.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by yg17

Let me guess, you're all for drinking and driving because the Constitution doesn't specifically ban it or something like that.

I don't base my arguments on what the Constitution says

[yg17]

Originally Posted by eric/

I don't base my arguments on what the Constitution says

So what are your views on drinking and driving then?

[eric/]

Originally Posted by yg17

So what are your views on drinking and driving then?

That we have demonized drinking and driving too much. And that drinking a beer and driving a car, or having an open container, aren't really that big of a deal. If I'm driving and 2 friends in the backseat are knocking back beers, it shouldn't be a problem.

You shouldn't have your entire life ruined for making a mistake

Every single person who has drank at a bar has driven over the limit before. It's a very, very common thing.

[yg17]

Originally Posted by eric/

That we have demonized drinking and driving too much. And that drinking a beer and driving a car, or having an open container, aren't really that big of a deal. If I'm driving and 2 friends in the backseat are knocking back beers, it shouldn't be a problem.

Open container is legal in Missouri. Don't like the laws in your state? Move. States rights!

You shouldn't have your entire life ruined for making a mistake

Every single person who has drank at a bar has driven over the limit before. It's a very, very common thing.

Speak for yourself. I have not driven drunk. Ever. I know my limits, I know when I'm going to be driving, and I drink responsibly.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by yg17

Open container is legal in Missouri. Don't like the laws in your state? Move. States rights!

Gay marriage is legal in Iowa. Don't like the laws in your state? Move. States rights!

Originally Posted by yg17

Speak for yourself. I have not driven drunk. Ever. I know my limits, I know when I'm going to be driving, and I drink responsibly.

You think you know your limits. That's the exact mentality that every person who drives drunk or over the limit has.

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

I haven't seen anyone post this one (it is a separate incident from the pickup shoot-up):

TORRANCE, Calif. (AP) — A lawyer for the driver of a pickup peppered with police bullets says Torrance officers were reckless in their search for fugitive ex-Los Angeles cop Christopher Dorner.

Surfer Dan Perdue was driving to the beach early Thursday when his Honda Ridgeline was stopped by officers guarding the home of a law enforcement official targeted by Dorner.

The pickup resembled Dorner's Nissan Titan.

After driving away, the Ridgeline was hit by a squad car.

Perdue attorney Robert Sheahen tells the Daily Breeze of Torrance (http://bit.ly/12F0uON ) the pickup spun around and officers began shooting. Perdue wasn't wounded.

A police department statement says Perdue's vehicle was suddenly leaving the area and officers on heightened alert took appropriate measures.

The shooting was blocks from the mistaken identity LAPD shooting of two women delivering newspapers.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/art...ss-4267653.php


I already knew that many police officers are badly trained. But, I really didn't realize just how badly trained.

[Kurwenal]

Originally Posted by bradl

I said nothing about the two incidents. I was referring to the search for Dorner himself.

So was I. You quoted, and responded to a post that said:

This guy still hasnt been caught!

It makes the lapd look incompetent.

by saying:

Or it exposes LAPD for what they are.

My point was, as is: I don't see how the fact that he "hasn't been caught" "exposes [the] LAPD" for anything, since the LAPD is not the lead agency looking for him.

[Peace]

imho this guy is dead from sitting under 4 feet of snow. He will be found during the spring thaw.

Otherwise,if he's as dangerous as they say he would have killed another cop by now.

[iMikeT]

Originally Posted by Peace

imho this guy is dead from sitting under 4 feet of snow. He will be found during the spring thaw.

Otherwise,if he's as dangerous as they say he would have killed another cop by now.

With all that training, it's highly doubtful and he's probably still on the run or holed up somewhere.

He's a very targeted person and knows who he wants to kill. He's killed what, 3 people total? Dangerous? Yes. However, it's more like dangerous when he gets to the people he's targeted and those that get in his way.

Definitely be skeptical of the mainstream media. They have made Dorner seem like he's on a killing spree when he's going after specific people.

[Peace]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

With all that training, it's highly doubtful and he's probably still on the run or holed up somewhere.

He's a very targeted person and knows who he wants to kill. He's killed what, 3 people total? Dangerous? Yes. However, it's more like dangerous when he gets to the people he's targeted and those that get in his way.

Definitely be skeptical of the mainstream media. They have made Dorner seem like he's on a killing spree when he's going after specific people.

Contrary to published news he's not Jason Bourne.

There are lots of sailors that get a marksman ribbon.

If this is all an elaborate plan he left camping gear,guns and ammo in a truck that was designed to be found.

I doubt this.

He would have needed another vehicle to escape Big Bear in. An auto or a snowmobile. In any case if he did have a way out of Big Bear he had to have had help getting the other escape vehicle there.

[Technarchy]

Originally Posted by Peace

imho this guy is dead from sitting under 4 feet of snow. He will be found during the spring thaw.

Otherwise,if he's as dangerous as they say he would have killed another cop by now.

He's 270lbs. He can go plenty long without a high caloric diet. And if he's worth a damn, he should be able to build shelter.

Give me a poncho, some para cord, foliage, and a good sleeping bag and I could stay in a field for a hell of a long time even in snow.

[bradl]

Originally Posted by Kurwenal

So was I. You quoted, and responded to a post that said:

Fair enough. Just wanted to be sure we weren't conflicting here. I still think LAPD is a bit out of their league on this one, but because they haven't caught him, doesn't mean that they are exposed. They certainly need to tighten up their investigation and operations overall, yes, but that isn't just based on catching him.

Right now, they are in reactive mode, not proactive, and that's where they got stung and hard.

Originally Posted by Peace

Contrary to published news he's not Jason Bourne.

There are lots of sailors that get a marksman ribbon.

If this is all an elaborate plan he left camping gear,guns and ammo in a truck that was designed to be found.

I doubt this.

He would have needed another vehicle to escape Big Bear in. An auto or a snowmobile. In any case if he did have a way out of Big Bear he had to have had help getting the other escape vehicle there.

Agreed. At this point he either would have need an accomplice to help with things, or he had killed someone else to take what he needed. This outside the fact that he probably had things already prepared for this (read: food/clothing/shelter)..

But surmise this (and colour me naive if there is already evidence towards this: I'm not keeping up totally on this):

What if he wants people to think he is up near Big Bear? For all intents and purposes, he's already misled the LEOs once (read: two ladies, shot up truck). What if he's doing it again?

Call it stereotypical, but being ex-Navy, can we assume he knows how to operate a boat? What if he went the opposite way: out to sea? I haven't heard anything about Coast Guard being involved yet, and if the media reports on that now, it may already be too late, as the LEOs would have been duped yet again..

Air is covered: He wouldn't get by TSA (actually, he probably could!).. Land is definitely covered by Sheriff and other LEAs. But Sea isn't covered that we (or the media) have reported on..

BL.

[webbuzz]

Originally Posted by bradl

Fair enough. Just wanted to be sure we weren't conflicting here. I still think LAPD is a bit out of their league on this one, but because they haven't caught him, doesn't mean that they are exposed. They certainly need to tighten up their investigation and operations overall, yes, but that isn't just based on catching him.

Right now, they are in reactive mode, not proactive, and that's where they got stung and hard.



Agreed. At this point he either would have need an accomplice to help with things, or he had killed someone else to take what he needed. This outside the fact that he probably had things already prepared for this (read: food/clothing/shelter)..

But surmise this (and colour me naive if there is already evidence towards this: I'm not keeping up totally on this):

What if he wants people to think he is up near Big Bear? For all intents and purposes, he's already misled the LEOs once (read: two ladies, shot up truck). What if he's doing it again?

Call it stereotypical, but being ex-Navy, can we assume he knows how to operate a boat? What if he went the opposite way: out to sea? I haven't heard anything about Coast Guard being involved yet, and if the media reports on that now, it may already be too late, as the LEOs would have been duped yet again..

Air is covered: He wouldn't get by TSA (actually, he probably could!).. Land is definitely covered by Sheriff and other LEAs. But Sea isn't covered that we (or the media) have reported on..

BL.

He tried to steal a boat in San Diego last Wednesday and fouled the prop. If he is still alive, he is not in Big Bear.

[63dot]

With his knowledge and training he can probably disappear like another clever manifesto psycho (the Unabomber) did and wait it out and strike again.

Maybe we have an idea who his targets are or are likely to be when he possibly expands his "enemies" list. His self-importance in his tasks, not unlike the Unabomber, will keep him in contact with the press and this will ultimately lead to his capture one day.

I don't think the $1 million dollar reward is enough for this man and I hope by now he's at the top of the FBI's most wanted list.

[bradl]

Originally Posted by webbuzz

He tried to steal a boat in San Diego last Wednesday and fouled the prop. If he is still alive, he is not in Big Bear.

Thanks. That means that unless he stowed away somewhere, sea is covered.

I'd put him now at trying to get down south to the border. He definitely wouldn't try to stay anywhere near Big Bear long, if at all, especially if given that bounty on his head. He'll know that unless the Federales catch and extradite him, they aren't going to catch him in Mexico.

BL.

[Sydde]

Originally Posted by iMikeT

Does the said government thug with a gun grow horizontally? Making up for something best measured in millimeters right?

I think he meant they become insects

[kylera]

The Korean press here is alluding the ongoing situation in LA to Rambo.

I think one paper even made a few comparisons with the first Rambo movie...

Thought you guys might be interested in how people from overseas are taking this in.

[stroked]

Originally Posted by kylera

The Korean press here is alluding the ongoing situation in LA to Rambo.

I think one paper even made a few comparisons with the first Rambo movie...

Thought you guys might be interested in how people from overseas are taking this in.

Rambo didn't kill for vengeance.

[kylera]

Originally Posted by stroked

Rambo didn't kill for vengeance.

I actually rented a copy of Rambo: First Blood because that was the first thing that came to mind when I heard of this. There, I noticed that Rambo didn't shoot to kill - any deaths were accidental. So yeah, there's definitely a difference if you look into it.