Hey Hunters, Are you watching the news?

You should be, you really really should be. Somthing about Standing Together or Hanging Separately comes to mind. here.

.

.

Because guess what? It has already started. Yep — a .308 caliber hunting rifle with a silencer is a ‘dangerous high powered weapon’. Does the magazine look like a 4 or 5 round magazine?

And as a side note, those rifles and equipment  look pristine. Amazing that a person with the training and abilities that the murderer had wasn’t in the cabin with him. It is almost as if they were left to be found – or displayed by the police.

The cabin caught fire when police shot tear gas canisters into it, McMahon told reporters this week.

Although the canisters included pyrotechnic tear gas, which generates heat, “We did not intentionally burn that cabin down,” he said Friday, echoing earlier comments he’s made on the case

Right and Bill Clinton didn’t have sex with Monica either.

I’m pretty sickened by the spin they are already pushing in this case — that the murderer was killed by  self inflicted gun shot — as if the fact that his other choices were a.) be shot as he left the cabin or b.) burn to death in a fire that ‘conveniently’ covered all four sides of the building.

Look I’m not excusing his actions, he was a murdering thug who needed to be captured, tried and put in jail for a very long time (California doesn’t have the death penalty). Not burned to death in such a manner — even vicious, ex-LEOs deserve due process of the law.It is sad to see that this is the mentality of some in the law enforcement community.

 

 

5 Responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Aaron on 16.02.13 at 08:14

    I had a conversation with Republicans at work…

    I said something to the effect of “Why didn’t they just wait him out. They could hide behind their vehicles with their weapons trained on the cabin. Who would starve first?”

    Then I brought up that the radio traffic actually broadcast that they wanted to pour gasoline on the cabin and burn it down–and that it was a violation of the due process they swore to uphold in the Constitution.

    The response floored me:

    If you resist a cop, the constitution doesn’t apply.

  2. Posted by Linoge on 16.02.13 at 08:14

    I would have absolutely no problem with this whackjob’s body being unceremoniously dumped in an unmarked grave in the middle of nowhere… IFF (sic) he had been found guilty of the crimes he allegedly committed.

    But he was not found guilty.

    Instead of respecting the Constitution and abiding by its limitations, the police put their own personal desires and motivations – specifically, revenge – above all else, and, surprise surprise, got exactly what they wanted.

    Now, for those people who feel otherwise and who happen to own firearms, how hard would it be for the police to publish a “manifesto” that allegedly came from you indicating violent and dangerous tendencies, note that you are in possession of an “arsenal”, and subject you to the same “flush him out” techniques?

    The Constitution is there for a reason. Ignore part of it, and you throw the whole thing out.

  3. Posted by Weer'd Beard on 16.02.13 at 08:14

    “Look I’m not excusing his actions, he was a murdering thug who needed to be captured, tried and put in jail for a very long time (California doesn’t have the death penalty). ”

    Or at least killed by police in a justifiable manner. Its one thing to shoot the guy as he’s firing upon you, its another to burn private property down without ever attempting to communicate with Dorner that he was surrounded, and he was not going to escape them.

    Same goes for the friendly vehicles attacked. No warnings were issued, no attempt to confirm the target, no chance for the lawful citizens to surrender and allow police to confirm their mistakes.

    Dorner most likely was most likely a murderous monster (tho I do have my doubts for obvious reasons), but the actions of the California police agencies involved in this case are really egregious.

  4. Posted by Veritas on 16.02.13 at 08:14

    Am I worried that this rabid dog’s desire to kill was ended without a trial?

    I look at the murderer of Ft Hood and laugh.

  5. Posted by Bob S. on 16.02.13 at 08:14

    Veritas,

    I think that attitude is very short sighted. How long before you, one of your friends/family are being labeled a ‘rabid dog’ and not given a chance to surrender, never making it to trial?