Fugitive alleged LAPD-killer is first drone target on U.S. soil

[AZRedhawk44]

"Be sure of your target, and what's beyond it."

Obviously only for us proles.  Our betters don't have to worry about that.

[Boomhauer]

Agreed.  Setting a structure ablaze is deploying an indiscriminate weapon.

At what point will law enforcement be able to simply level a building with an airstrike/mortars/artillery because there might be someone in there who is too dangerous?

"Be sure of your target, and what's beyond it."

They tried to flush him out with gas but he would not leave the structure. They tried to get him to surrender. He would not. I say that was a fair attempt at getting the situation resolved without killing him.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/christopher-dorner-maids-stumbled-on-suspect-setting-off-chase.html

“I saw some movement within the trees,” he said, and “here comes this guy with a big gun.” Heltebrake said the suspect aimed a gun at his head, but said he didn’t want to hurt either Heltebrake or his dog.

Heltebrake asked if he could get Suni's leash, but the suspect told him no.

Behind the wheel of the stolen truck, the suspect was once again careening down Glass Road, and once again he passed a Fish and Wildlife vehicle coming from the opposite direction. Again an officer recognized the suspect. That driver radioed his colleagues traveling behind him that the suspect was heading in their direction in a silver pickup.

When the suspect saw the second Fish and Wildlife truck approaching, he rolled down his window and took aim. The suspect opened fire into the cab as the vehicles passed just two feet apart, shattering the driver's side window and strafing the state truck with a handgun.

The badly damaged truck skidded to a halt and a game warden, a 35-year-old former Marine, fired 20 rounds from a high-powered rifle as the suspect fled in the hijacked truck.

The suspect subsequently crashed that truck and ran into the woods. He ended up in the cabin. A firefight ensued. Two San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputies were shot; one was pronounced dead at a hospital, while another is undergoing surgery. Hundreds of rounds were fired in the firefight.

According to a law enforcement source, police had broken windows, fired tear gas into the cabin and urged, over a loud speaker, the man they believed to be Dorner to surrender. When they got no response, authorities deployed a vehicle to rip down the walls of the cabin "one by one, like peeling an onion," a law enforcement official said.

By the time they got to the last wall, authorities heard a single gunshot, the source said. Then flames began to spread through the structure, and gunshots, probably set off by the fire, were heard.

[zxcvbob]

Cops say: Burn it down?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sisVskohj1k

[AZRedhawk44]

Dorner's wallet found in ruins of burned down house:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/12/christopher-dorner-ex-cop-los-angeles-mexico/1912553/

A wallet with a California driver's license bearing the name Christopher Dorner also was found, the Associated Press reported, citing a law enforcement official who was briefed on the investigation but declined to be named because of the ongoing probe.

Dorner's wallet found at a coastal port near the US-Mexico border:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/dorner-manhunt-ex-cop-may-got-help.html

After authorities interviewed the boat captain early Thursday, they found Dorner's wallet and identification cards "at the San Ysidro Point of Entry" near the U.S.-Mexico border. That same day, a guard at the Point Loma Naval Base told authorities he had spotted a man matching Dorner's description trying sneak onto the base, according to the court records.

Well...

Which is it? 

Did he visit the DMV and get another license sent to him?

Did he segregate his identity cards and leave a library card and military ID in one wallet and keep driver's license and other ID in another?  (Really?  Come on.  His driver's license in a different wallet than his other ID?  You want to give this guy credit for being cagey enough to deliberately plant ID on one exit plan and then disappear elsewhere with another set of ID?  He's not that smart.)

Or is Dorner not dead, and the burned house in Big Bear actually has no one in it?

Or is the LA Times story about Dorner seeking a boat to take him to Mexico a baloney story?

 

[cordex]

It's the nature of the gas cannister.

So it seems

They tried to flush him out with gas but he would not leave the structure. They tried to get him to surrender. He would not. I say that was a fair attempt at getting the situation resolved without killing him.

I'm not complaining about killing him at all, just the idea of using fire as a weapon.

Did he segregate his identity cards and leave a library card and military ID in one wallet and keep driver's license and other ID in another?  (Really?  Come on.  His driver's license in a different wallet than his other ID?  You want to give this guy credit for being cagey enough to deliberately plant ID on one exit plan and then disappear elsewhere with another set of ID?  He's not that smart.)

He was a former cop.  The moment he crossed the line, an ID became essentially worthless to him except as a distraction.  Using some of his IDs as a distraction would be entirely reasonable for someone with police experience, not a sign of tactical brilliance.  I'm surprised he hadn't already ditched his operator license to try to cast a false trail.  It's not like he would be worried about getting a ticket for driving without a license. 

[Tallpine]

So a dangerous fugitive breaking into my house is a warrant to burn down my house 

[Fitz]

So a dangerous fugitive breaking into my house is a warrant to burn down my house 

Of course... And if you are lucky, they will try and see whether or not you are there before they burn it down

[Scout26]

They tried to flush him out with gas but he would not leave the structure. They tried to get him to surrender. He would not. I say that was a fair attempt at getting the situation resolved without killing him.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/christopher-dorner-maids-stumbled-on-suspect-setting-off-chase.html

All they had to do was wait.  Time was on their side.  Cut the utilities, keep the TV people away.  Everyone has to sleep sometime.  No need to for gas or fire or anything else.  Don't even have to talk to him (but that helps to keep him awake).   Just had to give it time.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I totally agree, however:
1. Tear gas deployed against a structure leading to fire seems to happen an awful lot.  It may just be selection bias, but it feels like it is intentionally used in some cases as an incendiary weapon.
2. I have a strong aversion to law enforcement using fire as a weapon.  Even in situations where I feel a hail of gunfire would be an appropriate response (as seems to be the case here), cops burning someone out feels wrong.  Maybe my concern is because fire is indiscriminate and could easily kill innocents.  Maybe it is because being burned alive scares me in a deep, animal way.  Maybe it just reminds me of the George Washington quote about fire and government.  Whatever the case, if police are using tear gas to intentionally torch structures - even if they are pretty sure the only person in the structure is someone who needs killing - I think they are in the wrong.

3. It causes for a longer and less certain investigation after the fact.
Case in point, they still don't have confirmation that he's actually dead.
So, basically, if they were wrong (and considering their track record so far, it's highly possible) a murderer could still be happily running amook the streets of CA and now he's got less manpower on his tail.
Burning stuff down is counter productive to both sides, and the only justification for it is one that isn't acceptible for LEO.

[Blakenzy]

So they found his wallet among the burnt ashes, with a still legible ID, but no body?

[zxcvbob]

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5414302&postcount=86

[cordex]

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5414302&postcount=86

Yeah, lots of audio from on-site reporters as well as scanner traffic coming out that - if legit - pretty clearly indicates that fire was the goal.

[Boomhauer]

All they had to do was wait.  Time was on their side.  Cut the utilities, keep the TV people away.  Everyone has to sleep sometime.  No need to for gas or fire or anything else.  Don't even have to talk to him (but that helps to keep him awake).   Just had to give it time.

When he's actively shooting, and word has it with a .50BMG, yes you take him down ASAP or suffer more casualties. And they countered lethal force with lethal force. Someoone's shooting at you. Just wait them out? Really??

[Blakenzy]

Arson is not legit SOP for any police force. Or it shouldn't be.

[roo_ster]

When he's actively shooting, and word has it with a .50BMG, yes you take him down ASAP or suffer more casualties. And they countered lethal force with lethal force. Someoone's shooting at you. Just wait them out? Really??

Well, those of us with both a moral sense and a passing familiarity with the Four Rules might, given the circumstances. 
1. Hostages/innocent third parties?  LEOs on site did not know if there were any in the structure.
2. Damage to some third party's property?  Us plebes are held responsible for burning down folks' houses.
3. Use of fire in an area notorious for arid conditions and wildfires.  Even in winter, incendiary bits caught in the updraft can ignite fodder, shingles, etc.

So, if the LEOs on site deliberately used fire, or used means that could reasonably lead to conflagration, they are fools and moral retards.  And ought to be shunned by decent folk.

[slingshot]

Burning combatants out is a military tactic.  It should NOT be a civilian tactic.  They might as well have torched the place with gasoline.  This is a big negative for the police agency.  I loose respect.  I don't care if it would have taken a month to get him.  Same goes for the Branch Dividians.

[seeker_two]

It's the nature of the gas cannister.

Is that a bug or a feature?....

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i listened to the video.  got a different spin.  i think the word for the day is gonna be propane

[Fitz]

i listened to the video.  got a different spin.  i think the word for the day is gonna be propane

Huh?

[Gewehr98]

"Deployed 7 burners" per the police radio transcripts.

Yup.  Waco. 

[BlueStarLizzard]

When he's actively shooting, and word has it with a .50BMG, yes you take him down ASAP or suffer more casualties. And they countered lethal force with lethal force. Someoone's shooting at you. Just wait them out? Really??

Fire is not acceptable.
Not morally, not tactically, and not reasonable.

It's too easy to lose control of, it's too difficult to deploy with absolute presision, and it's has no positive results.

This is going after a spider with a flamethrower. Yeah, you might kill the spider, but in the process you've destroyed the house and probably hurt yourself.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Huh?

i think once the fire got started someone popped the propane tank and made sure he got roasted.  tear gas wouldn't have got it going that fast. have repaired a house with more than a dozen gas rounds in it. they scorched  started small fires. this thing went big fast

[roo_ster]

"Deployed 7 burners" per the police radio transcripts.

Yup.  Waco. 

Bingo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0X-WoiJhVY8#t=60s

Fire is not acceptable.
Not morally, not tactically, and not reasonable.

It's too easy to lose control of, it's too difficult to deploy with absolute presision, and it's has no positive results.

This is going after a spider with a flamethrower. Yeah, you might kill the spider, but in the process you've destroyed the house and probably hurt yourself.

What BSL wrote.

[Nick1911]

When he's actively shooting, and word has it with a .50BMG, yes you take him down ASAP or suffer more casualties. And they countered lethal force with lethal force. Someoone's shooting at you. Just wait them out? Really??

So where do you personally draw that line?

Do the cops have to positively identify that the suspect is in the dwelling in question?
What other indiscriminate weapons should they be allowed to use?
Should the cops be able to just chuck a fragmentation hand grenade through a window?
If that's deemed "too dangerous", can they hit the building with an RPG?
How about mortar fire?
An airstrike?  A drone strike?
Are they responsible for the financial liability of destroying a third parties property?
Are they responsible for other collateral property damage they cause?
Are they responsible for murder if they use indiscriminate weapons and kill an innocent?

[AZRedhawk44]

When cops use warfare tactics to enforce law... there is no more law.