ex cop hunts cops in la area [Archive]

Red Commissar

8th February 2013, 22:15

Didn't he say something about knowing who the guy was that beat up M. king, and that he was coming after him?

According to the manifesto that he posted online and has since then been replicated across many news sites, he mentions the Rodney King in connection to an officer who still holds a ranking position in LAPD as part of his case of LAPD being corrupt and brutal. He says for his part that he believes he was let off the force for trying to report instances of brutality and corruption in his precinct or something.

What's more odd is his list of people at the end. He praises Obama, Senator Feinstein, and VP Biden for working towards an assault weapons ban and wants ATF powers in gun control strengthened. He chides Romney for being a sore loser. Right wingers'll defintely pick up on that part... But he also mentions George HW Bush as his second favorite president and says he would like to see Chris Christie as a president. He also wants Fareed Zakeria deported for saying unamerican things.

piet11111

8th February 2013, 22:32

I do not know what to make of this guy but he is killing LAPD some of the most vile human beings on the planet.

I cant hate the guy for doing a rambo on those bastards.

Os Cangaceiros

8th February 2013, 22:42

I do not know what to make of this guy but he is killing LAPD some of the most vile human beings on the planet.

I cant hate the guy for doing a rambo on those bastards.

He'll probably be praised to the heavens by the insurrectos, that's for sure. Appropriating the actions of non-leftist cop killers is what they do best (well, besides this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Pittsburgh_police_shootings)).

Skyhilist

8th February 2013, 23:04

Honestly, many LAPD cops are absolute scum, but I really don't see this accomplishing anything.

~Spectre

9th February 2013, 01:29

Anyone who supports this guy is a political and moral imbecile.

~Spectre

9th February 2013, 01:30

I read this on CNN yesterday, weird stuff; the guy is ex military too, so he may be tough to track down.

He was a navy reservist, not a Spetsnaz. If he avoids capture, it's because he planned it out a few steps, not because he's immune to heat scanners, and the power of the surveillance state.

~Spectre

9th February 2013, 01:36

I do not know what to make of this guy but he is killing LAPD some of the most vile human beings on the planet.

Most of the people he's killed have been unarmed civilians. Such as the 28 year old women's basketball coach and her fiance.

Catma

9th February 2013, 01:39

This provides a fantastic setting for pro-cop propaganda. I don't see it being useful in any way.

GPDP

9th February 2013, 01:42

So he's like a wanna-be Batman that actually kills people.

Meh. Useless at best, homicidal maniac at worst. Just because he's offed some cops, bastards though they may be, does not make him worth supporting.

Art Vandelay

9th February 2013, 03:08

I don't think that anyone here is supporting this guy, merely that if he's going to go off people, he couldn't have picked a better group of scumbags to choose from.

nativeabuse

9th February 2013, 03:19

I was the one who stood up for Abraham Schefres when other recruits sang nazi hitler youth songs about burning Jewish ghettos in WWII Germany

What on earth am I reading?

#FF0000

9th February 2013, 03:29

I don't think that anyone here is supporting this guy

well actually

Charles Marxley

9th February 2013, 08:34

I don't think this has anything to do with "supporting" this guy, unless you are talking about joining his Peoples War against the LAPD. Supporting this guy would maybe mean not ratting out his location if you saw him, which in his manifesto he threateningly mentions that it would "behoove" you not to. I think you just have to understand where he's coming from and why he exists. He's basically commit psychological suicide and is using his physical state-trained solider body against the institution that he finds to to inherently racist and corrupt. He believes killing the family members of these corrupt officials is justified.

"I am here to change and make policy. The culture of LAPD versus the community and honest/good officers needs to and will change. I am here to correct and calibrate your morale compasses to true north."

I think its pretty interesting that he is trying to make a huge gun control point with this as well. He goes on about how easy it was to buy an ar-15 and a 30 round clip and suppressors without a background check in a state he didn't live in.

He also says a bunch of ridiculous celebrity referencing in the end of the manifesto which really adds to his cartoonishness.
"Larry David, I agree. 72-82 degrees is way to hot in a residence. 68 , degrees is perfect."

"Dave Brubeck’s “Take Five” is the greatest piece of music ever, period."

"It’s kind of sad I won’t be around to view and enjoy The Hangover III. What an awesome trilogy. Todd Phillips, don’t make anymore Hangovers after the third, takes away the originality of its foundation. World War Z looks good and The Walking Dead season 3 (second half) looked intriguing. Damn, gonna miss shark week."

"I thank the unnamed women I dated over my lifetime for the great and sometimes not so great sex."

"Mia Farrow said it best. “Gun control is no longer debatable, it’s not a conversation, its a moral mandate.”

I think all the mad gunmen phenomena is just an inherent symptom of late capitalism, and I'm a helluva lot more satisfied to see them turn their psychotic episodes towards cops then kindergartners. That's my opinion, and it's a story I'll be following closely. I won't however be buying any Chris Dorner T-shirts.

piet11111

9th February 2013, 09:41

Most of the people he's killed have been unarmed civilians. Such as the 28 year old women's basketball coach and her fiance.

I have only read the OP's links.

LuÃs Henrique

9th February 2013, 09:46

Thankfully he burnt his pickup before the LAPD had the time to shoot every Nissan pickup in California.

Luís Henrique

A Revolutionary Tool

9th February 2013, 10:06

According to the manifesto that he posted online and has since then been replicated across many news sites, he mentions the Rodney King in connection to an officer who still holds a ranking position in LAPD as part of his case of LAPD being corrupt and brutal. He says for his part that he believes he was let off the force for trying to report instances of brutality and corruption in his precinct or something.

What's more odd is his list of people at the end. He praises Obama, Senator Feinstein, and VP Biden for working towards an assault weapons ban and wants ATF powers in gun control strengthened. He chides Romney for being a sore loser. Right wingers'll defintely pick up on that part... But he also mentions George HW Bush as his second favorite president and says he would like to see Chris Christie as a president. He also wants Fareed Zakeria deported for saying unamerican things.

I don't think it's very strange, a lot of cops are pro-gun control. I think for very obvious reasons they don't want us to be armed as well as them. I've seen cops go after Obama because he's not being hard enough on this issue but are conservative on just about every other topic.

KurtFF8

11th February 2013, 06:10

Fugitive alleged LAPD-killer is first drone target on U.S. soil (http://now.msn.com/christopher-dorner-is-first-drone-target-on-us-soil)

It's official: The drone war has come home to America. Wanted fugitive Christopher Dorner, the homicidal former cop currently at war with the LAPD, has become the first known human target for airborne drones on U.S. soil. Their use was confirmed by Customs and Border Patrol spokesman Ralph DeSio, who revealed the government's fear that Dorner will make a dash for the Mexican border. The fugitive has already killed three people, according to police, and has a $1 million bounty on his head. Dorner, who has military training, is believed to be hiding in the wilderness of California's San Bernardino Mountains, where locating him without air support may be all but impossible. [Source (http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/376732/Man-hunt-for-ex-soldier-who-shot-police-chief-s-daughter-and-killed-policeman)]

LuÃs Henrique

11th February 2013, 09:38

Fugitive alleged LAPD-killer is first drone target on U.S. soil (http://now.msn.com/christopher-dorner-is-first-drone-target-on-us-soil)

You mean the State is openly admitting it will extra-judicially execute him? That's murder by any definition!

... or do they have invented a drone that is able to arrest people now?

Luís Henrique

Jimmie Higgins

11th February 2013, 11:22

You mean the State is openly admitting it will extra-judicially execute him? That's murder by any definition!

... or do they have invented a drone that is able to arrest people now?

Luís Henrique

Here in Oakland the cops want to use drones - they said "it wouldn't be used for things like Occupy, only if some people began throwing bottles or something":rolleyes:

I think the shooting up of the other truck by California Cops shows that it was going to be murder at any rate once they got him. Worse than having someone running around shooting cops is a big media frenzy over the trial of an ex-cop where his defense would consist of naming-names in the LAPD and proving the levels of corruption and racism in the department which his maninifesto/suicide letter says (and his potential legal defense would no doubt argue) drove him to this.

In Oakland someone got pulled over and was on parole and shot up the cops. The OPD mobilized and went into his sister's apparement with guns blazing even though they didn't have proof that the suspect was even in the appartment. Last month about two blocks away from my house the Oakland Sherriff came to evict someone; they shot themselves when the cops pulled up and the cops responded by surrounding the building throwing tear-gas into the house and shooting up the room... they guy had been dead the entire time they were doing this.

Jimmie Higgins

11th February 2013, 11:30

I do not know what to make of this guy but he is killing LAPD some of the most vile human beings on the planet.

I cant hate the guy for doing a rambo on those bastards.

I don't think there's a more perfect example of: "the chickens coming home to roost".

If you have a racist institution that acts in these ways, something like this is bound to happen now and then.

Police repression is getting worse and more intense on the street level because the need to control people in a recession is more needed and city governments can use crime fear to chanel funds towards more cops (which for them will attract gentrification projects for their business and real estate cronies) while slashing other services. This is obviously creating pressure on workers and the poor through increased harassment and whatnot, but it's also ironically creating other pressures on the cops themselves. Most of the time cop-stress just gets taken out on our hides in the form of more mean and nasty behavior (like the cop in S.F. that smashed that kid's face into a gutter for no reason) but also in places like New York, for example, stop and frisk policies have actually resulted in a bit of rank and file resistance. Of course the beat cop's interests aren't aligned with working class interests, but it demonstrates some of the stress and strain within police departments that easily lead both to more induvidual brutality by cops and more disgruntledness of the minority of cops who oppose these quota and harassment policies.

LuÃs Henrique

11th February 2013, 12:54

Here in Oakland the cops want to use drones - they said "it wouldn't be used for things like Occupy, only if some people began throwing bottles or something":rolleyes:

But lethal drones?! And they have the gall to explicitly say it aloud and put it into writing?

Usually the police would try set up an execution and frame it as a shooting exchange; do they not even feel the need to lie and be hypocritical about this anymore?

I think the shooting up of the other truck by California Cops shows that it was going to be murder at any rate once they got him.Except, of course, as the shooting of the other truck also shows, for their bad aim.

Worse than having someone running around shooting cops is a big media frenzy over the trial of an ex-cop where his defense would consist of naming-names in the LAPD and proving the levels of corruption and racism in the department which his maninifesto/suicide letter says (and his potential legal defense would no doubt argue) drove him to this.It would seem so. Who controls the police in Los Angeles? What are prosecution attorneys for? Isn't there some kind of external control? Aren't those guys legally accountable?

In Oakland someone got pulled over and was on parole and shot up the cops. The OPD mobilized and went into his sister's apparement with guns blazing even though they didn't have proof that the suspect was even in the appartment. Last month about two blocks away from my house the Oakland Sherriff came to evict someone; they shot themselves when the cops pulled up and the cops responded by surrounding the building throwing tear-gas into the house and shooting up the room... they guy had been dead the entire time they were doing this.I have said this elsewhere; American cops seem to go to work very high on cocaine. It just doesn't look like mere authoritarianism and sheer abuse of power; the incompetence and the lousy training are showing.

Luís Henrique

Jimmie Higgins

11th February 2013, 13:18

But lethal drones?! And they have the gall to explicitly say it aloud and put it into writing?Yeah bold even for them - though the LAPD has been one of the "vanguard" departments in the US as far as incorporating a millitaty-occupation style (and the technology too) of policing.

It would seem so. Who controls the police in Los Angeles? What are prosecution attorneys for? Isn't there some kind of external control? Aren't those guys legally accountable?Right, well that's the thing about the "war on drugs" and the police power that has been built up over the last long period of reaction: policing methods have essentially become "infallable" for the courts. The US supreme court has ruled that to even sue a police officer - let alone a department or a whole method of policing - on the basis of racial profiling or racism, there has to be concrete evidence of the cop explicitly saying that they are arresting or detaining someone for the color of their skin or because they hate homosexuals or trans people or whatnot. You could hardly convinct the KKK for buring crosses on that basis.

In the late 1980s through the mid-1990s there was a sort of revival of anti-police organizing in the US and (mostly) ex-maoists and black nationalists from the 1970s had grassroots networks (really Copwatch is probably the only thing the remains in most cities) and had a relativly small but good knee-jerk ability to mobilize people when things would happen. Some of these efforts did result in citizen review boards and whatnot, but it's all been defanged and/or dismantled like other liberal/progressive movements during the Clinton presidency.

Even then, most of the review boards were like a couple of professional liberal activists, a police representative and other City Hall types - so they were mostly symbolic victories that didn't result in much actual defense (maybe in some places these bodies were more effective at being semi-decent reforms, but that would be before my political time so I'm not sure).

At any rate, it is incredibly hard and rare to even bring charges against any cops. It really is a case of the system stacked against someone who would want to do this: reporters will not cover evenhandedly, prosecutors who work daily with the cops don't want to have these trials, cops get much more than the benifit of the doubt by courts, and the police unions ususally have some big-time legal defense. Until very recently, politicians form either party would consider any criticism of the police to be "political suicide" as local urban city hall races tended to be concerned over "crime rates" and "putting more cops on the street" through the late 80s and on to today.

I have said this elsewhere; American cops seem to go to work very high on cocaine. It just doesn't look like mere authoritarianism and sheer abuse of power; the incompetence and the lousy training are showing.They also drive around like maniacs in California. I see them basically drag-racing in the streets all the time in my neighborhood - going hella fast with no lights on for no apparent reason and then stopping or turning around and driving like normal again. I think it may just be machismo or even to kind of way to softly terrorize people and remind them who the law is. I don't know. But anyway there was a near-riot in Oakland a couple of years ago after one of these cops sped down a street and hit a car and landed in the front part of someone's appartment. People came out to the street and knew exactly that the cop had just been speeding around for no reason and they all said they knew something like this would happen someday.

But anyway, though I'm sure some are sampeling some of the drugs they swipe from people, I think their manic and agressive behavior is simply the result of being put in the position of professional bully - if you have to occupy a population, there is a logic to being brutal and acting like king-dog of the streets.

Os Cangaceiros

11th February 2013, 15:40

But lethal drones?! And they have the gall to explicitly say it aloud and put it into writing?

I didn't really get the impression that they were out to drill him with a Hellfire missile. AFAIK the Border Patrol drones are just used for survelliance and are unarmed.

Red Commissar

11th February 2013, 15:52

I don't think it's very strange, a lot of cops are pro-gun control. I think for very obvious reasons they don't want us to be armed as well as them. I've seen cops go after Obama because he's not being hard enough on this issue but are conservative on just about every other topic.

I know that municipal police forces are in favor of gun control (though some cops and sheriffs in rural and suburb areas sometimes differ), what I was getting at is the media is going to have a field day with a suspect like this on favor of gun control. He tries to point out that it was only possible for him to get a weapon because of the lax laws but still it's hard for people to take his gun control position seriously in light of these events.

Plus the conspiracy theories that are bound to come out from this.

Prometeo liberado

11th February 2013, 15:52

Damn, gonna miss shark week.

If he keeps up these shenanigans a lot of people are gonna miss shark week.;)
(See that? I snuck in "shenanigans".)

KurtFF8

11th February 2013, 16:11

I didn't really get the impression that they were out to drill him with a Hellfire missile. AFAIK the Border Patrol drones are just used for survelliance and are unarmed.

Yeah re-reading the article, it doesn't seem clear whether they're armed or not. If they are armed drones, they're certainly not releasing that info at this time.

RedHal

11th February 2013, 19:45

Yeah re-reading the article, it doesn't seem clear whether they're armed or not. If they are armed drones, they're certainly not releasing that info at this time.

not even sure this will be the first case of US drones used on US soil, I remember reading somewhere they were used earlier in finding stolen cattle. Simply surveillance.

The US ruling class have some of the best PR people around, they are not stupid enough to use armed drones (yet) on home soil. They will not indiscriminately kill innocents in order to get a few "high value" targets. They understand the huge uproar, if *gasp* some innocent middle class whites were killed to get Dorner in a drone strike.

and if they were to use armed drones, you know they'll take all efforts to ensure there were no innocents around before striking. Unlike what they do in Pakistan, where any male over a certain age is considered an enemy combatant.

#FF0000

11th February 2013, 22:06

if *gasp* some innocent middle class whites were killed to get Dorner in a drone strike.

hasn't stopped them from shooting so far.

blake 3:17

11th February 2013, 23:00

In the late 1980s through the mid-1990s there was a sort of revival of anti-police organizing in the US and (mostly) ex-maoists and black nationalists from the 1970s had grassroots networks (really Copwatch is probably the only thing the remains in most cities) and had a relativly small but good knee-jerk ability to mobilize people when things would happen. Some of these efforts did result in citizen review boards and whatnot, but it's all been defanged and/or dismantled like other liberal/progressive movements during the Clinton presidency.

Even then, most of the review boards were like a couple of professional liberal activists, a police representative and other City Hall types - so they were mostly symbolic victories that didn't result in much actual defense (maybe in some places these bodies were more effective at being semi-decent reforms, but that would be before my political time so I'm not sure).

Locally we go through some very repetitive processes around fairly basic police accountability, like making the cops follow the law, and some pretty centrist liberals do a fairly good job on this to some degree.

Beyond horrible excessive violence on the part of the cops, the big issues are whether local cops should be enforcing laws against victimless crimes and immigration law. For many years there'd been common understandings that local police wouldn't pursue the immigration status of many people reporting crimes and would cooperate with service agencies representing abused women and children.

There's been some really shameless BS where the prosecution of former police has just gone nowhere. The biggest local corruption trial has been one where:
Last June, a jury convicted Schertzer, 55; Joseph Miched, 54; Steven Correia, 45; Ned Maodus, 49; and Raymond Pollard, 48; of attempting to obstruct justice after an 86-day trial.

They were acquitted of conspiracy, assault, extortion and theft charges.
Correia — the only defendant still a police officer — and Maodus and Pollard were also convicted of perjury. Fuckers got 45 days house arrest.

One of the interesting things around the Idle No More movement in Ontario is that provincial police, on the ground, didn't enforce certain very repressive court orders around mass civil disobedience actions which disrupted trade at borders. I think that was mostly due to the massive blowback from the vicious racist policing of native peoples protests in the 90s and the more recent policing of the G20 in Toronto.

Prof. Oblivion

12th February 2013, 00:23

But lethal drones?! And they have the gall to explicitly say it aloud and put it into writing?

Usually the police would try set up an execution and frame it as a shooting exchange; do they not even feel the need to lie and be hypocritical about this anymore?

Except, of course, as the shooting of the other truck also shows, for their bad aim.

It would seem so. Who controls the police in Los Angeles? What are prosecution attorneys for? Isn't there some kind of external control? Aren't those guys legally accountable?

I have said this elsewhere; American cops seem to go to work very high on cocaine. It just doesn't look like mere authoritarianism and sheer abuse of power; the incompetence and the lousy training are showing.

Luís Henrique

I believe the drones are solely being used for surveillance, not for executing targets.

blake 3:17

12th February 2013, 00:31

The drones are for surveillance. So far.

LuÃs Henrique

12th February 2013, 08:58

I didn't really get the impression that they were out to drill him with a Hellfire missile. AFAIK the Border Patrol drones are just used for survelliance and are unarmed.

Ah, yes, this makes more sence. Though they didn't make it excessively clear, which is somewhat creepy.

Luís Henrique

Charles Marxley

12th February 2013, 13:29

I don't think I can post links yet, but there's a really good article about this on Counterpunch. You can find a link to it on the Kasama Project homepage. It's the most thorough and well-written analysis of Chris Dorner that I have seen.

Althusser

12th February 2013, 22:26

Dorner is barricaded in a cabin. Big shootout. Two officers injured.

Livestream: http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Christopher-Dorner-LAPD-Manhunt-Search-Big-Bear-190902721.html

Art Vandelay

12th February 2013, 23:13

Looks like it is coming to an end.

~Spectre

13th February 2013, 05:47

And it's over.

Geiseric

13th February 2013, 05:50

Did they actually catch him? This stuff is so sketch, they claimed he died in the cabin fire, but I seriously don't believe this.

~Spectre

13th February 2013, 06:07

Did they actually catch him? This stuff is so sketch, they claimed he died in the cabin fire, but I seriously don't believe this.

I'd assume that it's in their rational self-interest not to lie about him being dead. Otherwise, him cropping back up and killing someone else will discredit them to an unprecedented level.

Now, is it possible that they are lying about how he did? Absolutely. The previous behavior displayed, and the clearing the sky of media helicopters over the cabin, signifies that they were going after him with an intent to kill on sight.

Of course, it's also fairly possible for their story to be correct. The building ignited, and then, rather than be killed or captured by the police, Dorner committed suicide.

Who knows?

#FF0000

13th February 2013, 06:22

http://i.imgur.com/tFKDCZN.jpg

∞

13th February 2013, 06:48

Did you guys read what his manifesto? Hes bringing proletarian justice. Fuck the LAPD. You guys don't know how fucked up we've had it here. THE MOTHERFUCKERS SHOT TO LITTLE LADIES.

Trap Queen Voxxy

13th February 2013, 07:23

Cannibalism at it's finest.

Os Cangaceiros

13th February 2013, 08:22

Sounds like he went out Robert Jay Matthews style.

(In case you don't know who he was, he was a neo nazi who died after an intense gun battle in his barricaded house which the cops eventually burned down.)

Jimmie Higgins

13th February 2013, 08:43

I'd assume that it's in their rational self-interest not to lie about him being dead. Otherwise, him cropping back up and killing someone else will discredit them to an unprecedented level.

Now, is it possible that they are lying about how he did? Absolutely. The previous behavior displayed, and the clearing the sky of media helicopters over the cabin, signifies that they were going after him with an intent to kill on sight.

Of course, it's also fairly possible for their story to be correct. The building ignited, and then, rather than be killed or captured by the police, Dorner committed suicide.

Who knows?

This is much more reasonable than the wild speculation I was going to make: exaccuted and then burned by the LAPD to destroy any possibe evidence of a non-self inflicted close-rang gunshot.

But seriously his manifesto read like a suicide note, so I think it is likely he did just off himself. Too bad he didn't turn himself into the media, publically (so that he wasn't just killed on sight by cops), so that there would be a long-ass and hightly publicized trial about the internal racist and brutal bullshit inside the LAPD. But it would have been hell on him even if the cops didn't kill him in his cell - and, besides, I don't think he aimed for anything more than going out in anger.

It's kind of amazing the kind of giddy-talk about this I've encountered from people - random conversations in liquor stores and gas stations where people start talking about what he wrote, all the pop culture stuff as well as the grievences, and people talking about what they would do if they were in his situation. Some of it's just a reaction to such a sensational story, but it's also just a hint at what kind of public sentiment is out there and how, if there was a real militant movement that people could join that was against abuses by cops, a struggle against police brutality could quickly gain a lot of traction and support.

LuÃs Henrique

13th February 2013, 10:12

It is a shame.

A shame that he died, and a worse shame that he died without being able to tell the public the things he knew about the LAPD behaviour.

A complete, absurd, unthinkable shame that the LAPD obviously conspired to kill him, in the eyes of press and public, and wasn't stopped.

A shame that local police departments seem utterly unaccountable; it makes the US look more as a police State than a democracy.

A shame that other State agencies would look at all this happen and take no measure - not LA mayor, not the State governor, not the attorneys in Justice Departments, not the FBI, not the POTUS: all of them merely stared at it happening, as the Los Angeles Police acted as jury, judge, and executioner, in the clear intent of getting rid of an embarrassing witness of their "methods".

I don't think this man is an hero or was exacting "proletarian justice"; he was a disgruntled and disturbed police officer who snapped at the contradictions of his job (and he did horrible things such as threatening to kill police officer relatives), but the whole episode shows the utter lack of discipline, democratic commitment, understanding of law, internal and external controls, proper training, and professional competence of Los Angeles cops.

It is way time for intervention in this organisation of uniformed criminals.

Luís Henrique

Charles Marxley

13th February 2013, 16:32

It's kind of amazing the kind of giddy-talk about this I've encountered from people - random conversations in liquor stores and gas stations where people start talking about what he wrote, all the pop culture stuff as well as the grievences, and people talking about what they would do if they were in his situation. Some of it's just a reaction to such a sensational story, but it's also just a hint at what kind of public sentiment is out there and how, if there was a real militant movement that people could join that was against abuses by cops, a struggle against police brutality could quickly gain a lot of traction and support.

This is what fascinates me the most about this situation. I was incredibly surprised by the amount of public support this guy had. Often when I am discussing revolutionary politics with people the issue of violence is the one thing that shyes people away from the radical left, but this just goes to show that in the right circumstances, violence will get popular support. It leads me to think that if a bunch of head bankers or CEOs started getting lynched, people won't start crying about "human rights" after all.

Prof. Oblivion

13th February 2013, 23:04

http://i.imgur.com/tFKDCZN.jpg

Did you guys read what his manifesto? Hes bringing proletarian justice. Fuck the LAPD. You guys don't know how fucked up we've had it here. THE MOTHERFUCKERS SHOT TO LITTLE LADIES.

Are these jokes? He murdered like three innocent people.

It is a shame.

A shame that he died, and a worse shame that he died without being able to tell the public the things he knew about the LAPD behaviour.

A complete, absurd, unthinkable shame that the LAPD obviously conspired to kill him, in the eyes of press and public, and wasn't stopped.

A shame that local police departments seem utterly unaccountable; it makes the US look more as a police State than a democracy.

A shame that other State agencies would look at all this happen and take no measure - not LA mayor, not the State governor, not the attorneys in Justice Departments, not the FBI, not the POTUS: all of them merely stared at it happening, as the Los Angeles Police acted as jury, judge, and executioner, in the clear intent of getting rid of an embarrassing witness of their "methods".

I don't think this man is an hero or was exacting "proletarian justice"; he was a disgruntled and disturbed police officer who snapped at the contradictions of his job (and he did horrible things such as threatening to kill police officer relatives), but the whole episode shows the utter lack of discipline, democratic commitment, understanding of law, internal and external controls, proper training, and professional competence of Los Angeles cops.

It is way time for intervention in this organisation of uniformed criminals.

Luís Henrique

I don't think it was possible for him to get out of this alive. The police intentionally set the cabin on fire and burned it down to kill him. If that didn't do it then they definitely would have shot him. They were out for blood.

Leftsolidarity

13th February 2013, 23:12

Ele'ill

13th February 2013, 23:17

cabins are such bad news

Lucretia

13th February 2013, 23:24

http://i.imgur.com/tFKDCZN.jpg

So Dorner was Jesus with violent tendencies? This is sick.

Prof. Oblivion

13th February 2013, 23:28

Is he dead? I haven't followed it closely lately but I heard rumors that it wasn't really confirmed.

Anyways, all you who like to demonize any oppressed person that finally picks up a gun against their oppressors can kick rocks.

These are the people he picked up a gun against:

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site200/2013/0207/20130207_111303_PN00manhunt_200.jpg
Monica Quan was a basketball coach.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-myiKGxwzXUQ/URa2bSdAKMI/AAAAAAAAK74/Pzxt58KPQXE/s400/DORNER%2BMurder%2Bvictim%2BKeithLawrence%2B2013.jp g
Keith Lawrence was a security guard at USC.

Please explain how these two individuals were oppressing Mr. Dorner.

Leftsolidarity

14th February 2013, 01:19

Art Vandelay

14th February 2013, 01:22

I don't think I would consider him 'on our side of the fence' this is a former military vet and pig, who was simply pissed that he couldn't be a pig anymore; class traitor to say the least.

RedSonRising

14th February 2013, 01:31

Want to explain how your posts invalidates the fact that, even if non-police were killed, an oppressed person declared war against his oppressors and tried to fight back. Whether or not he was perfect is not the point. The point is that he is ultimately on our side of the fence and we should support oppressed people and their fight.

"Not perfect"? He slaughtered innocent people with no purpose. That's not just pushing the line of moral boundaries in resistance, that's cold-blooded murder. That in no way advances our cause to emancipate the proletariat. In doing what he did, he harmed innocent people much worse than any offense or abuse that was done unto him. He still had life. They now have none.

Any self-proclaimed leftists who want to worship the likes of suicide bombers and school shooters and other murderers of civilians who are "rising against their oppressors" can fuck off. Advertising such ideas not only fails to take us forward, it takes us many steps back.

Catma

14th February 2013, 01:38

I really don't think it's our job to show why somebody who killed innocents (personally and intentionally, this isn't like they were killed by accident in a shootout with cops) isn't on our side. It would be YOUR job to explain why we should overlook these crimes.

The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.

Let's Get Free

14th February 2013, 02:38

I can't say I support his actions, but i think as this system continues to decay, we'll probably see more renegade cops like Dorner.

Leftsolidarity

14th February 2013, 02:38

In doing what he did, he harmed innocent people much worse than any offense or abuse that was done unto him. He still had life. They now have none.

Spoken like a liberal. So oppressed people shouldn't fight back because at least their still alive? What garbage.

When an oppressed person fights back you support them. End of story. I don't care if the bourgeois media just wants to make them into a bad guy and I'm not going to focus on every single mistake they might have made. I will support that person because it's our class interest.

Let's Get Free

14th February 2013, 03:36

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/526374_448961061842033_1259177506_n.jpg

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist

14th February 2013, 04:00

, unless you are talking about joining his Peoples War against the LAPD.

If he beats the high score will we achieve full communism? If so then I am game

brigadista

14th February 2013, 04:17

~Spectre

14th February 2013, 04:34

Spoken like a liberal. So oppressed people

"Oppressed people" has become reactionary slang thrown around by liberals and Maoists, used to justify nonsense. It's actually quite racist, as it implies that because he was black, he shouldn't be expected to not have been a political and moral imbecile.

~Spectre

14th February 2013, 04:36

well one thing is for sure - if they hadnt of killed him the way they did he would have been killed on the way to the court room -no way was he going to be allowed to give evidence about what he knew about the LAPD

I think it's more likely that he would'be been medicated, and plead an insanity defense.

Much more effective to discredit him, than to make him a martyr.

~Spectre

14th February 2013, 04:39

A shame that other State agencies would look at all this happen and take no measure - not LA mayor, not the State governor, not the attorneys in Justice Departments, not the FBI, not the POTUS: all of them merely stared at it happening, as the Los Angeles Police acted as jury, judge, and executioner, in the clear intent of getting rid of an embarrassing witness of their "methods".

While I get the "spirit" of your post, I don't quite understand this complaint. Why do you want the agreement of the state? Why would you expect the state to act differently? Why should they have?

Dorner had declared himself at war with agents of the state, and made good on those threats. It would be stupid for them not to have destroyed him.

It's basically like saying "it's a shame the state doesn't abolish itself."

Leftsolidarity

14th February 2013, 04:40

"Oppressed people" has become reactionary slang thrown around by liberals and Maoists, used to justify nonsense. It's actually quite racist, as it implies that because he was black, he shouldn't be expected to not have been a political and moral imbecile.

What the hell are you talking about? It's not offensive worth a shit so cut your bullshit.

It doesn't mean that, it means that he is an oppressed person and the struggle against that oppression (which he clearly stated) revolutions should support that. Whether or not every single thing he did was perfect is not the point.

And what's with the moral part? I didn't know that morals were something that really should come into a serious discussion.

~Spectre

14th February 2013, 04:42

It doesn't mean that, it means that he is an oppressed person and the struggle against that oppression (which he clearly stated) revolutions should support that. Whether or not every single thing he did was perfect is not the point.

So because he's black, then despite what he did being stupid, he should be supported, because he's a member of the category "oppressed" and not an individual capable of rational thought that should be held to standards?

It's the same ultra-racist shit. "He shouldn't be expect to know better!":rolleyes::rolleyes:

~Spectre

14th February 2013, 04:44

I didn't know that morals were something that really should come into a serious discussion.

Oppressed, as used by reactionaries like you, is a moral term. Which is why Marxists tend to use economic terms, such as "exploited" instead.

Otherwise, him being a highly paid state-agent, makes it hard to assume you meant "oppressed" as it relates to his position relative to the means of production.

RedSonRising

14th February 2013, 04:52

Spoken like a liberal. So oppressed people shouldn't fight back because at least their still alive? What garbage.

When an oppressed person fights back you support them. End of story. I don't care if the bourgeois media just wants to make them into a bad guy and I'm not going to focus on every single mistake they might have made. I will support that person because it's our class interest.

He should kill the daughter of someone who wronged him in cold blood? This is acceptable? Just a "mistake"? In pursuit of what? What revolution was he undertaking? He was out to kill cops, which does nothing but create public sympathy for them, and incited violence that harmed other innocent people as a result. The world is not a better place because of his shooting spree.

Spoken like an idiot fantasizing about violent insurrection with no grasp on how successful social change is brought about.

Islamist terrorist suicide bombers that slaughter civilians are "fighting back"? Bullied school shooters are "fighting back"?

A harm done to you by the system does not justify unnecessary, malicious harm to innocent people.

If he wanted to help oppressed people, he should have written a book, or talked to urban youth at their schools, or publicized a law suit, or organized a cop-watch/militant police protection program, or leaked useful information to resistance groups, or implicated powerful individuals, etc. A one-man war does nothing for the revolution.

Geiseric

14th February 2013, 05:20

Want to explain how your posts invalidates the fact that, even if non-police were killed, an oppressed person declared war against his oppressors and tried to fight back. Whether or not he was perfect is not the point. The point is that he is ultimately on our side of the fence and we should support oppressed people and their fight.

He would of made a better effect if he didn't shoot anybody, after that a lot of people thought he was simply crazy, and it was an action movie. He could of gone to like Democracy Now or the newspaper, and they wouldn't of been able to kill him, and it would be taken as truth, right from the horses mouth. So maybe he would of been killed anyways, but that would of had more effect.

I'm not judging him or anything, I'm sad for his family though. They and a lot more people could of done better with a man on the inside.

Geiseric

14th February 2013, 05:23

Let's Get Free

14th February 2013, 05:27

I don't understand what all the swooning over this guy is for among the left wing. Are we really that pitifully deprived of a heroic figure? I think the works of Michael Zinzun did far more against the LAPD than this guy's shooting spree could ever do.

KurtFF8

14th February 2013, 05:31

He snapped, end of story, like any of the shooters we've seen in the past month.

While I certainly agree that a lot of the cheering of Dorner is misplaced (to say the least), he's clearly not "just like any of the other shooters." He did not just randomly engage in violence like the Aurora or Newtown shootings, but rather was going against a particular institution of which he accused of injustice.

Now his murdering of innocent folks who had nothing to do with his aims (they weren't relevant to the LAPD as an institution, nor even his own case) is quite despicable, especially considering how targeted and thought out those murders were.

But there's certainly plenty that sets him apart from the other shootings we've seen recently (although as I said earlier, it doesn't follow from this that he deserved any sort of cheering on)

Geiseric

14th February 2013, 06:08

While I certainly agree that a lot of the cheering of Dorner is misplaced (to say the least), he's clearly not "just like any of the other shooters." He did not just randomly engage in violence like the Aurora or Newtown shootings, but rather was going against a particular institution of which he accused of injustice.

Now his murdering of innocent folks who had nothing to do with his aims (they weren't relevant to the LAPD as an institution, nor even his own case) is quite despicable, especially considering how targeted and thought out those murders were.

But there's certainly plenty that sets him apart from the other shootings we've seen recently (although as I said earlier, it doesn't follow from this that he deserved any sort of cheering on)

Oh what sets him apart? He's black? If he was a white cop, who said the same stuff and did the same things Dorner did, nobody here would be supporting him AT ALL. He snapped because of police brutality, maybe he felt guilty, but you can't express that by shooting regular people.

If he popped a cap in the cops who personally committed racist police violence, and brutality overall, it would be a different story, but he didn't, he shot regular people like you or me. So objectively he didn't accomplish anything, and the media had a hay day.

Maybe this will bring police violence to light, but it won't. The context was different but the actions were the same.

LuÃs Henrique

14th February 2013, 09:16

I can't agree with people who want to lionise this guy. But just saying he killed innocent people is not much better.

To cut it short, I think it is extremely stupid to focus the discussion on Dorner. What we, as leftists, should be doing is to focus the discussion on the Los Angeles Police Department. Dorner is dead, we can't ressurrect him; what he did is done and can't be undone, what he didn't do he can't do anymore, and we won't continue what he did (or will we? please don't answer). The LAPD is alive and well, and while its past deeds cannot be undone, what they are still to do (and I am pretty sure that they will do similar things in the future) can be prevented.

So let's stop the ridiculous discussion on whether Dorner is a hero or a common criminal or something in between. Let's discuss how to get action against Los Angeles uniformed criminals.

Can we do that? Or aren't we leftists?

Luís Henrique

KurtFF8

14th February 2013, 15:34

Oh what sets him apart? He's black? If he was a white cop, who said the same stuff and did the same things Dorner did, nobody here would be supporting him AT ALL. He snapped because of police brutality, maybe he felt guilty, but you can't express that by shooting regular people.

If he popped a cap in the cops who personally committed racist police violence, and brutality overall, it would be a different story, but he didn't, he shot regular people like you or me. So objectively he didn't accomplish anything, and the media had a hay day.

Maybe this will bring police violence to light, but it won't. The context was different but the actions were the same.

His aims, methods, targets, etc were all radically different than any of the other shootings in question. He did not go on a random killing spree (he encountered various people on the run and did not senselessly murder them), but was rather targeting the police particularly.

In all of the other cases, the shooters were indiscriminately just shooting at people, while Dorner was not in any way doing this.

I'm not saying he deserved support, I'm just saying that this case was unique and quite different from the others you're claiming it was similar to.

So let's stop the ridiculous discussion on whether Dorner is a hero or a common criminal or something in between. Let's discuss how to get action against Los Angeles uniformed criminals.[/So let's stop the ridiculous discussion on whether Dorner is a hero or a common criminal or something in between. Let's discuss how to get action against Los Angeles uniformed criminals

Indeed, one of the more interesting things about the case (and as you say: something Leftists should be pointing to) is the LAPD's response. Not only did they just go crazy (shooting various innocents, scaring the shit out of people, etc.) but the re-opening of the investigation, them possibly having burned down the cabin, etc. These are all things that highlight their problems.

bcbm

14th February 2013, 20:50

Islamist terrorist suicide bombers that slaughter civilians are "fighting back"? Bullied school shooters are "fighting back"?

yes

A harm done to you by the system does not justify unnecessary, malicious harm to innocent people.

the issue of justification is a different one than whether or not something is 'fighting back.'

If he wanted to help oppressed people, he should have written a book, or talked to urban youth at their schools, or publicized a law suit, or organized a cop-watch/militant police protection program, or leaked useful information to resistance groups, or implicated powerful individuals, etc.

'resistance groups?' lol

bcbm

14th February 2013, 20:55

exterminating angels (http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2013/02/11/mike-davis/exterminating-angels/)

LuÃs Henrique

14th February 2013, 21:44

yes

To fight back you need to know who your enemy is. Dorner, as well as schoolshooters and suicide bombers, can't understand who their enemy is - so, no, they aren't fighting back.

But we do know who our enemy is, don't we? And it isn't Dorner or similar victims of institutional violence and their own misapprehension of the world.

And if we know who our enemy is, we can fight back. We fight back, in this instance, by aiming at the Los Angeles police: how it is a corrupt gang of criminals, what are its relations with organised crime, why does it display such disturbing and disturbed behaviour in regards the population they should, according to the books, protect. And we demand the cops involved in wrongdoing be fired, and that recruitment for new personal strives deeper to weed out sadists, crackpots, racists, homophobes, etc. And we must ask also, quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, who is in charge of ensuring that the LAPD complies with the law it supposedly is sworn do uphold? And if there are no such organisms, we then ask why, and struggle to put them into legislation; or if those organisms exist, we ask why they are failing, and whose responsibility it is, and we demand that their behaviour be scrutinised, the organisms reformed, the bosses ousted, etc.

Or, of course, we can leave such things to liberals, and then complain that liberals are liberals and end up, as always, covering things up.

Luís Henrique

Jimmie Higgins

15th February 2013, 18:35

I think folks are way missing the point. I don't think "oppression" is really what's going on here - he felt fucked-over is the main thing and beyond that immediate thing, he felt frustrated that his illusions about the LAPD turned out to be misplaced and the institution really is, through-and-through, a brutal racist institution. His actions were not political and neither on the left or popularly, are people saying he's John Brown 2.0 let's all go raid some police stations now.

If the "Left" told people to support this guy, it wouldn't matter much one way or another - the thing that seperates this guy from the other shooters who've flipped IMO, is that his motivation and reasons tapped into something that no one in the mainstream will even acknowledge anymore. He has a sort of momentary folk-hero thing like bankrobbers have sometimes, gangsters; and for the right-wing, militia types or sovereign citizen gun-nuts who have shoot-outs with the police or "feds". No one thinks, "yeah, well maybe those students/Movie viewers/children brought this upon themselves". But I think that popularly it resonates because we see societies "stitches" exposed momentarily: the reveal that there is little difference between armed and trained "public servant" and armed and trained "public menace"; the absurdity of a guns-blazing panicked police force doing almost as much damage and bloodshed as the target himself all the while pretending that it was all "no big deal"; and of course that his grievinces resonate with a lot of people and point at and open secret of US society.

Since the 1990s there have been next to no legal challenges to police on the basis of racial profiling, or racial connections in abuse cases. No lawyers will persue such a case because the Supreme Court has set the bar for proving this beyond human capabilities - a prosecutor would have to basically be telepathic to win such a case. From the supreme court on down US policing is officially and legally "colorblind" - separate and unequal in effect, as the court acknowledges, but "necessary in the drug war".

On the ground-level meanwhile, people just see and experience more instances of brutality and heavy-handed policing (simultaneously along with increases in petty crime and random violence - often causing disorientation among people) and the videos circulate online and the stories and experiences pile up while the news media and city governments only cry for more police.

So like a bank-robber hitting Banks at the same time and in the same region where depression-era small farmers are loosing everything to the banks, this shooting resonates.

It is what it is, I think. Most people who are giddy about it feel the same way probably. They can't do anything about this freak event but comment about it; but the way people can popularly comment about it reveals a shared sentiment that most of the time can not be expressed or experienced so broadly in our society. And this is what I think is positive about this whole sensational thing and what we can and should point out to people: that this semi-hidden animosity for police shows that there is potential that a movement with more practical and useful aims and means could hit that same nerve.

bcbm

15th February 2013, 21:18

To fight back you need to know who your enemy is. Dorner, as well as schoolshooters and suicide bombers, can't understand who their enemy is - so, no, they aren't fighting back.

i think this is just silly. of course it is fighting back. is in ineffective and directed against the wrong targets? yes. but it is a form of fighting back, it is certainly a lashing out against some element of this world.

And if we know who our enemy is, we can fight back. We fight back, in this instance, by aiming at the Los Angeles police: how it is a corrupt gang of criminals, what are its relations with organised crime, why does it display such disturbing and disturbed behaviour in regards the population they should, according to the books, protect. And we demand the cops involved in wrongdoing be fired, and that recruitment for new personal strives deeper to weed out sadists, crackpots, racists, homophobes, etc. And we must ask also, quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, who is in charge of ensuring that the LAPD complies with the law it supposedly is sworn do uphold? And if there are no such organisms, we then ask why, and struggle to put them into legislation; or if those organisms exist, we ask why they are failing, and whose responsibility it is, and we demand that their behaviour be scrutinised, the organisms reformed, the bosses ousted, etc.

so we are fighting to make a more accountable, more friendly police force?

bcbm

15th February 2013, 21:47

los angeles on high alert as lapd back on regular duty (http://www.theonion.com/articles/los-angeles-on-high-alert-as-lapd-back-on-regular,31306/)

LuÃs Henrique

15th February 2013, 23:17

i think this is just silly. of course it is fighting back. is in ineffective and directed against the wrong targets? yes. but it is a form of fighting back, it is certainly a lashing out against some element of this world.

"Back" presupposes you know what is to your back, front, left, and right.

so we are fighting to make a more accountable, more friendly police force?

More accountable, no doubt. Or why should we, every time police kill or maim someone, or collude with organised crime, just roll our eyes and say, "well, that's the way things are"?

Luís Henrique

bcbm

16th February 2013, 22:30

"Back" presupposes you know what is to your back, front, left, and right.

mm semantics

More accountable, no doubt. Or why should we, every time police kill or maim someone, or collude with organised crime, just roll our eyes and say, "well, that's the way things are"?

Luís Henrique

i dont know why you need to roll your eyes but, yes, it is the way things are. the police as an organization will always kill and maim, collude with organized crime and be bastards. the police as a whole are the enemy, not just the 'bad apples.' they are all bad apples

LuÃs Henrique

17th February 2013, 01:33

mm semantics

Nope.

If my boss humiliates me, or harasses me, or does any of those things bosses do to workers, and then I go home and beat my wife or my son, or kill the neighbours cat because I'm angry, I'm not fighting back at all.

i dont know why you need to roll your eyes but, yes, it is the way things are. the police as an organization will always kill and maim, collude with organized crime and be bastards. the police as a whole are the enemy, not just the 'bad apples.' they are all bad apples

The police as a whole are the enemy, so we allow them to do whatever they wish unto us? Or we put our hopes in individual and necessarily ineffective action against them? What's the logic of that? The police are the enemy, so we strive to allow them the least possible freedom of action we can. That includes making them accountable, of course.

Luís Henrique

Art Vandelay

18th February 2013, 04:49

CNN is reporting that Dorner was killed from a single gunshot wound to the head...could be suicide..or maybe they capped him and then burnt down the cabin.

MarxArchist

18th February 2013, 06:54

I don't see him as my comrade. Exposing the racism within the LAPD and sticking up for a mentally ill woman who was assaulted by his supervisor is great and he suffered from the cop "code" as a result but his politics were confused and individual acts of retaliatory murder (because you lost your job) aren't the answer. Perhaps he should have stuck with specific police rather than family members? Anyhow, his manifesto lacked proper class analysis to say the least.

Ciarog

19th February 2013, 00:40

Something that this should show us is that even an urban guerrilla might want to learn a thing or two about wilderness evasion and survival. Imagine if he hadn't been so reliant on modern, more traceable forms of transport and shelter (carry a mountain bike with you instead of stealing another truck and hunker down in a mineshaft instead of a cabin). He could have gone hunting again when the weather allowed.

In all likelihood, he probably didn't expect to last as long as he did.

CNN is reporting that Dorner was killed from a single gunshot wound to the head...could be suicide..or maybe they capped him and then burnt down the cabin.
Little more thorough than the typical "died-by-fire" story (not many people short of Buddhist monks got the gumption to do that). They'll say the same thing they did about Donald DeFreeze et. al., that he was too cowardly to shoot it out with the pigs and, for some reason, decided that dying by his own gun would be better.

(either way, ruins my theory about them misunderstanding the concept of "grilling the perp")

So what about those poor innocent civilians whom our senseless evil madman so sensly and evilly gunned down?

Keith Lawrence: Rent-a-Pig and Pig-in-Training, valid target
Monica Quan: Piglet, probably not a valid target

Then again, at least Dorner didn't parade her corpse through the streets, as his former employers liked to do with the slain children of their enemies.