Should an armed drone be dispatched to kill Christopher Dorner?

[boedicca]

Does this precedent negate due process rights, or is he essentially an enemy combatant?

He's committing planned terror attacks against government officials. That's an enemy combatant by todays standard. If they can hit him with a missile and only take out 8-9 other civilians, they should do so without hesitation.

So why are rw's so against this happening on foreign soil?

(Interesting that its rw's who are in favor of using a drone of this war hero. In a different thread, another rw actually suggested bombing the home he's hiding in. That poster didn't mention the owners of that home .. )

You need to learn to distinguish criminal from war behavior - as does the Obama administration.

Someone who goes overseas and works for the enemy (during a war) deserves to be treated according to the rules of engagement for war. Without a war, such a person is a civilian, and subject to criminal and civil law, not wartime rules of engagement.

The Obama Administration has completely muddled this by asserting Constitutional protections for terrorists (i.e., treating them as common criminals) instead of war combattants. If we are willing to provide such treatment to foreign terrorists, why on earth wouldn't we extend the (faulty) logic to U.S. citizens?

IMO, anyone U.S. citizen who joins AQ or another terrorist organization has joined a wartime enemy and deserves to be treated as such; but I don't condone using drones with children as collateral damage to take him out.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Trajan and Uncensored:

The fact remains that collateral injuries and deaths do occur when bad guys and bad gals who do bad things and don't give up.

Yeah, the drone is just another tool in the LEO Hellfire tool box when bad boys and bad girls won't surrender. Yup, city gangsters and rural militia should be afraid. Right, Trajan?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

He's committing planned terror attacks against government officials. That's an enemy combatant by todays standard. If they can hit him with a missile and only take out 8-9 other civilians, they should do so without hesitation.

So why are rw's so against this happening on foreign soil?

(Interesting that its rw's who are in favor of using a drone of this war hero. In a different thread, another rw actually suggested bombing the home he's hiding in. That poster didn't mention the owners of that home .. )

You need to learn to distinguish criminal from war behavior - as does the Obama administration.

Someone who goes overseas and works for the enemy (during a war) deserves to be treated according to the rules of engagement for war. Without a war, such a person is a civilian, and subject to criminal and civil law, not wartime rules of engagement.

The Obama Administration has completely muddled this by asserting Constitutional protections for terrorists (i.e., treating them as common criminals) instead of war combattants. If we are willing to provide such treatment to foreign terrorists, why on earth wouldn't we extend the (faulty) logic to U.S. citizens?

IMO, anyone U.S. citizen who joins AQ or another terrorist organization has joined a wartime enemy and deserves to be treated as such; but I don't condone using drones with children as collateral damage to take him out.

Don't tell ME that. This is EXACTLY the point I have made repeatedly and in various threads. And its the same point the rw's don't understand.

 

[Papawx3]

Before you know it, it'll be "The Minority Report"; but for real. You even think about disagreeing with BHO's tactics, and they'll send a drone through your front door.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

He's committing planned terror attacks against government officials. That's an enemy combatant by todays standard. If they can hit him with a missile and only take out 8-9 other civilians, they should do so without hesitation.

So why are rw's so against this happening on foreign soil?

(Interesting that its rw's who are in favor of using a drone of this war hero. In a different thread, another rw actually suggested bombing the home he's hiding in. That poster didn't mention the owners of that home .. )

You need to learn to distinguish criminal from war behavior - as does the Obama administration.

Someone who goes overseas and works for the enemy (during a war) deserves to be treated according to the rules of engagement for war. Without a war, such a person is a civilian, and subject to criminal and civil law, not wartime rules of engagement.

The Obama Administration has completely muddled this by asserting Constitutional protections for terrorists (i.e., treating them as common criminals) instead of war combattants. If we are willing to provide such treatment to foreign terrorists, why on earth wouldn't we extend the (faulty) logic to U.S. citizens?

IMO, anyone U.S. citizen who joins AQ or another terrorist organization has joined a wartime enemy and deserves to be treated as such; but I don't condone using drones with children as collateral damage to take him out.

But that merely begs the question. Who gets to make that call? The President can accuse somebody of something and that makes it so?

 

[Borillar]

A major manhunt has been underway in the Los Angeles area for Chris Dorner, the former LAPD officer, Navy reservist, and trained marksman who is the prime suspect in the murder of three people, including the daughter of an LAPD captain (who previously represented him in a disciplinary proceeding) and her fiance. A lengthy Facebook message attributed to Dorner vows that he will continue to kill not only members of the LAPD but also their children and spouses until he receives a public apology for what he believes was his unfair firing:

"This will be a war of attrition . . . . I will utilize OSINT to discover your residences, spouses workplaces, and children's schools. IMINT to coordinate and plan attacks on your fixed locations. . . . HUMINT will be utilized to collect personal schedules of targets. I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own, I'm terminating yours. . . . I know your significant others routine, your children's best friends and recess. I know Your Sancha's gym hours and routine. I assure you that the casualty rate will be high."

Surveillance drones are now being used to try to locate him. LAPD are so apprehensive that they have already mistakenly shot at innocent people when they saw vehicles resembling the one they thought belonged to Dorner. Authorities suspect he's hiding in "the icy wilderness" of Big Bear east of Los Angeles which, reported AP, is "filled with thick forests and jagged peaks, that creates peril as much for Dorner as the officers hunting him."

Here's my question: if the surveillance drones detect his location, should the lives of law enforcement agents be risked, along with other civilians, in an attempt to apprehend this highly-trained warrior? Why shouldn't an armed drone instead be immediately dispatched once his location is ascertained and simply kill him?

For those of you who believe it's possible to know someone's guilt without a trial, there is very little doubt about his guilt. Nobody has contested the authenticity of the confession posted in his name, nor the threats of further killing. He admitted and justified the killings on his Facebook entry.

For those of you who believe there is a clear definition of "terrorism", Dorner meets it easily. LAPD chief Charlie Beck today said that Dorner was engaging in "domestic terrorism". That's because he has not only threatened to kill random LAPD officers but also their children and family members in order to terrorize the department into publicly apologizing to him. He vowed to wage what he called "unconventional and asymmetrical warfare" in pursuit of his goal. As intended, the entire community is in terror. If that's not "domestic terrorism" under the conventional defintion, then nothing is.

Should an armed drone be dispatched to kill Christopher Dorner? | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

What do you think? If a drone has a clear shot to just take him out should it be done?

If a drone took him out, the Right would probably start screaming about Obama murdering Americans without due process.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

A major manhunt has been underway in the Los Angeles area for Chris Dorner, the former LAPD officer, Navy reservist, and trained marksman who is the prime suspect in the murder of three people, including the daughter of an LAPD captain (who previously represented him in a disciplinary proceeding) and her fiance. A lengthy Facebook message attributed to Dorner vows that he will continue to kill not only members of the LAPD but also their children and spouses until he receives a public apology for what he believes was his unfair firing:

"This will be a war of attrition . . . . I will utilize OSINT to discover your residences, spouses workplaces, and children's schools. IMINT to coordinate and plan attacks on your fixed locations. . . . HUMINT will be utilized to collect personal schedules of targets. I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own, I'm terminating yours. . . . I know your significant others routine, your children's best friends and recess. I know Your Sancha's gym hours and routine. I assure you that the casualty rate will be high."

Surveillance drones are now being used to try to locate him. LAPD are so apprehensive that they have already mistakenly shot at innocent people when they saw vehicles resembling the one they thought belonged to Dorner. Authorities suspect he's hiding in "the icy wilderness" of Big Bear east of Los Angeles which, reported AP, is "filled with thick forests and jagged peaks, that creates peril as much for Dorner as the officers hunting him."

Here's my question: if the surveillance drones detect his location, should the lives of law enforcement agents be risked, along with other civilians, in an attempt to apprehend this highly-trained warrior? Why shouldn't an armed drone instead be immediately dispatched once his location is ascertained and simply kill him?

For those of you who believe it's possible to know someone's guilt without a trial, there is very little doubt about his guilt. Nobody has contested the authenticity of the confession posted in his name, nor the threats of further killing. He admitted and justified the killings on his Facebook entry.

For those of you who believe there is a clear definition of "terrorism", Dorner meets it easily. LAPD chief Charlie Beck today said that Dorner was engaging in "domestic terrorism". That's because he has not only threatened to kill random LAPD officers but also their children and family members in order to terrorize the department into publicly apologizing to him. He vowed to wage what he called "unconventional and asymmetrical warfare" in pursuit of his goal. As intended, the entire community is in terror. If that's not "domestic terrorism" under the conventional defintion, then nothing is.

Should an armed drone be dispatched to kill Christopher Dorner? | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

What do you think? If a drone has a clear shot to just take him out should it be done?

If a drone took him out, the Right would probably start screaming about Obama murdering Americans without due process.

Is that relevant to whether or not it should be done?

 

[Borillar]

Should an armed drone be dispatched to kill Christopher Dorner? | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

What do you think? If a drone has a clear shot to just take him out should it be done?

If a drone took him out, the Right would probably start screaming about Obama murdering Americans without due process.

Is that relevant to whether or not it should be done?

No, but I doubt the LA Police have that capability anyway, so it's a moot point. I remember the Philly police dropping a bomb on a house back in the 80's though. They caught lots of flak for doing that. I doubt the LA police are going to do anything that dramatic and drastic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I have no trouble with state police calling in federal LEO hellfire assets to take out Dorner if he won't give up. He has killed four, wounded four, and two other women were shot mistakenly by FU police.

Dorner is clearly drone feed.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Not just no but FUCK NO

 

[Bill Angel]

Absolutely not.

It's absurd to even bring it up.

Why? The President claims the power to assassinate U.S. citizens with no due process if they're deemed "terrorists," "enemy combatants," "insurgents," or any other number of horrible sounding adjectives. He does not claim that his power is limited only to use overseas. That being the case, why is it absurd to discuss whether or not this is a viable option for Christopher Dorner, who has already been deemed a "domestic terrorist?"

I would not be surprised if this fellow has already killed himself. After all what has he got to look forward to? A long time behind bars, followed by an execution by lethal injection?

It sounds like he did commit suicide
See Deputy dies, cabin ablaze in Calif. manhunt - News - Boston.com
BIG BEAR, Calif. (AP) — The man believed to be fugitive ex-cop Christopher Dorner never came out of a California mountain cabin, and a single shot was heard inside before the cabin was engulfed in flames, a law enforcement official told The Associated Press.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If true, that works also, but it would have been better to have the California LEO get real time hellfire practice on the scumbag. It could have been a case study for later operations against inner city gangs and rural militia who go all outlaw.

Drones don't kill people, people kill people.

 

[Powerglide01]

Well, argue as you will but facts remain and common sense would say; If he ain't around innocents who would get hurt then get him anyway you can.Unless of course you wish another officer to die first.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well, argue as you will but facts remain and common sense would say; If he ain't around innocents who would get hurt then get him anyway you can.Unless of course you wish another officer to die first.

You say "you can." Based on what?

 

[Desperado]

Looks like they didn't need the drones.
Cop overheard on the Police Scanner yelling "Burn It Down"
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNk-bV40XMc&feature=youtu.be]Christopher Dorner Shootout - Cops say "Burn It Down" - YouTube[/ame]

BTW..... Anyone hear how the fire started?

 

[Trajan]

If true, that works also, but it would have been better to have the California LEO get real time hellfire practice on the scumbag. It could have been a case study for later operations against inner city gangs and rural militia who go all outlaw.

Drones don't kill people, people kill people.

you can stop overcompensating now Fake, you sound like an overwrought idiot.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If true, that works also, but it would have been better to have the California LEO get real time hellfire practice on the scumbag. It could have been a case study for later operations against inner city gangs and rural militia who go all outlaw.

Drones don't kill people, people kill people.

you can stop overcompensating now Fake, you sound like an overwrought idiot.

I have been consistent on this from the beginning, and you have been all over the map, kiddo. Tis what tis.

 

[Trajan]

uh huh.....

 

[JakeStarkey]

uh huh.....

Yup, while you have been a trimmer. Thank goodness your type is not in control of the GOP much less the government.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yup, while you have been a trimmer. Thank goodness your type is not in control of the GOP much less the government.

Yep, because if they were, your shameful party wouldn't have a lock on government..