i disagree completely. people kill for what they believe in all of the time. every frigging day. many are called heroes. the difference between this guy and "legitimate hero" is not as vast as it might seem.

that having been said, i endorse this guy in no way. he is a brutal, scary, dangerous, and murderous beast, and he should be hunted down and killed. but that doesn't lessen any of what he said by one degree, imo. much of it is true, and it should be recognized for that. words, having been offered up, get their own life that is separate from their creator, imo. you don't see it that way. i get that. i understand that. i disagree.

i don't know much about Kazynsky, but his background is totally different. TK came from an academic background, and developed a distaste for elitism and corporatism. the reason i think that parallels are stronger between this guy and McVeigh is that they were both military. they were both against bullies. they were both picked on when they were kids. they both became disillusioned with their profession and those in it, and came to see IT as the enemy they were fighting.

there is ONE similarity, however. and that is the TK targeted the perpetrators (as he saw them) of the crime, rather than innocent bystanders. so does this guy. he is more discriminating than McVeigh. but all three of them see themselves as righteous, and serving a greater cause.

there is zero chance he will be taken alive. he is not afraid to die, and he is trying to inflict as much harm as possible. this can only end one way, imo.

Something that bothers me is that public tax dollars are being used to partially fund a $1 million reward.


By what right do local governments and police department have to take our tax dollars and arbitrarily spend them on something that we did not authorize them to spend it on?

Also, it is unfair that they should pick-and-choose when our tax dollars can be spent on rewards. It would be fair if the rule were: "If someone kills three or more people, then a reward shall be offered", but just because the killer is after cops and their families shouldn't mean that a reward shall be offered, but if someone kills three people that are not cops or their families then no reward shall be offered.

Additionally, they are offering the reward (our money) too soon. There is a good likelihood that Donner will be found (dead or alive) within the next two weeks. By offering the reward now, we might have give away $1 million, but if they just waited a week or two, we might have been able to keep that money.

By what right do local governments and police department have to take our tax dollars and arbitrarily spend them on something that we did not authorize them to spend it on?

You gave them that right when you voted for them.

This man has obviously taken the "Serpico" personna to the extreme--difference is that Serpico was "straight"and not a killer...it is obvious the police want this man dead, the sooner the better. They most definitely do not want him to "have his day in court". If he was to surrender he would not live to see trial. I find the whole situation tragic...

Not so! The funds allocated to government agencies can't be spent by those agencies on just anything. There are rules and laws governing how the money can be spent. Usually the money is to pay for salaries, equipment, supplies, rent, building maintenance, and so forth.

For example, what if the agency decided to use the money to buy all their workers brand new cars for their personal use? Could they do that since "we gave them that right when we voted for them"? No, of course they couldn't. That would be an illegal use of tax payer dollars and they would go to prison.

I am dubious that they truly have the legal right to use tax payer funds for rewards.

Assuming you are correct, from which budget is the reward money coming from?

I was listening to the news during my lunch break on KNX 1070 Newsradio (CBS) -- when they suddenly broke in with a reporter live on the scene.

Suddenly there was a gun battle! I heard hundreds of bullets being fired live on the air!

Then I heard the cops yelling: "Get the fuck down! Get the fuck down!"

The KNX anchor back at the station voiced-over: "We apologize for the expletives, but this is live radio!"

Wow! So exciting! And I was hearing it live!

Looks like Dorner is dead ~ after barricading himself in a cabin and another [I think] 2 murders today during a shoot-out, the cabin burst into flames ~ not sure if that was set off by Dorner or by the cops ~ but now the mayor of LA is announcing that the body recovered from the cabin "appears" to be Dorner ~

Sooz

I hope this guy is dead but the latest I read this morning is that no body has been found.

JUst now heard that charred remains have been found so hopefully this guy is dead.

Yes, they recovered the charred remains of a body in the cabin, along with personal items identified as belonging to Dorner.

Those who initiated the American Revolution did so when pushed to the brink as was this chap, yet they are heroes to you.

I have a hard time believing what an evil deranged man says, though. His manifesto was rambling and he sounded like a narcissist. He crossed a major line with me in killing that man's child. Unforgivable and very definitely a testament to his character.

I hadn't seen this post.
Sorry, mac.
I agree with you but take exception to: he should be hunted down and killed.
That's what Obama/Bush are/were doing with the drones.

He shot two more LE killing one--a father of two young children...he had to be stopped. I am not at all surprised how it ended. Unfortunately, the only "investigation" of all of this will be the investigation of the "ending" (the "shot" fired, the fire, etc) and very little investigation of the "start" of this horror (what set him off, his manifesto, etc) will be done. As the sheriff said "It's time to move on." That's what he meant.

Anything uncovered from the investigation of his grievance hearings and his subsequent firing will be swept under the rug and the status quo will continue, if perhaps a little more subtle in action....

He was fired from the LAPD for being unfit for duty. And he proved them right. I am not an LAPD fan, I think they are very corrupt. But, they got it right that time. This man should not have been tasked with protecting and serving.

He was probably unstable from the git go, but there are some things that leaves me curious...doubtful we'll ever know.

He wasn't sufficiently corrupt.

He blamed his deployment, said he wasn't ready to go back to work. He made these statements to his training officer, who documented them. After time she said she was going to recommend he be let go. At his disciplinary hearing is when he brought up the arrest 3 weeks earlier in which his training officer kicked a man in the face. His accusation was seen as a deflection. They have reopened that investigation, but even if she did do it, it does not change the fact of the reason he got fired. He wasn't fit for duty.

I don't think every officer on the LAPD is corrupt. Is that your assertion? If not, your statement makes no sense.

If a police department is corrupt 9 times out of 10 it starts at the top.
That's why it doesn't get cleaned up and they get to do the firing.

mpicky, where did you get this info? It's the first I've heard of it.