Christopher Dorner first drone target on U.S. soil.

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
Everything you've been calling paranoia, everything you've been calling us "teabaggers" for, everything that's just a "conspiracy theory" coming out of "deranged" right-wingers, is actually happening. Right in front of you. Funny how Glen Beck is still crazy when everything he's ever predicted in his paranoia is coming to fruition. I don't blame "Liberals" for this. I blame one man in specific, and everyone who's fallen for his image. President of the United States of America Barack Obama, and his entourage, are using you. They are slowly taking control of you. They are building their power. You are now witnessing him bypass the Constitution, and defending his right to do so! And only now that he's given the right to kill civilians without warrants, do any of you see what you've been trashing half the country for seeing.
Let me say it again: WE SAID HE WOULD TRY THIS!

Let me say this much: I am not saying that everyone who's even remotely left-leaning is bad, or responsible for this. I'm not outright supporting the right wing itself. What I'm saying is that this man, raised by a family who treated communism like a religion, is (surprise!) using KGB tactics to worm his way into your favor and exert control over a populace that has come to adore him. He is not the man he has made himself look like. Kennedy was a good man and a paragon of liberalism at the same time. Same with early Roosevelt (later on he fell in love with Uncle Joe's ideals). Obama isn't a Liberal. Obama isn't a Socialist. Obama is an anti-Western Communist. Denounce him and return to the true Liberalism that wants to benefit all of mankind, not destroy the many so that the few can feel better.
 

ShinyCharizard

New member
Oct 24, 2012
2,034
0
0
To anyone saying he deserves a trial I have just have one question. The guy is clearly angry and armed heavily so how will they safely capture him and put him on trial?
 

Arfonious

New member
Nov 9, 2009
299
0
0
ShinyCharizard said:
To anyone saying he deserves a trial I have just have one question. The guy is clearly angry and armed heavily so how will they safely capture him and put him on trial?
Carefully. No matter who you are and what you have done you deserve a fair trial.
 

the clockmaker

New member
Jun 11, 2010
423
0
0
Nieroshai said:
Can you show that the drone is armed? What is the inherent difference between a hostile killed by SWAT team operators and one killed by a drone?

Dark wolverine said:
America's been at this sort of thing since the Nixon days. America's been getting steadily worse ever since. Nixon may be dead but his spirit lives on. USA, USA, USA! *sarcastic tone*
Same question as above.

Arfonious said:
ShinyCharizard said:
To anyone saying he deserves a trial I have just have one question. The guy is clearly angry and armed heavily so how will they safely capture him and put him on trial?
Carefully. No matter who you are and what you have done you deserve a fair trial.
If he is not conducting actions conducive to surrender, then fuck him. He can get a free trial when he stops trying to kill people. He can get a free trial when he throws down his guns, turns himself in and accepts that he is going on trial.
 

Radoh

Bans for the Ban God~
Jun 10, 2010
1,456
0
0
Nieroshai said:
Let me say it again: WE SAID HE WOULD TRY THIS!
What, using drones to survey an area looking for a man who has claimed he has anti-craft weapons so as to limit the loss of human pilots?
This strikes of you not reading the actual article just like the OP.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,580
3,538
118
Heh...let's split this down the middle.

Anyone reckon it'd be cool if the unarmed surveillance drone could also arrest him? Like, it was armed with handcuffs and a baton and all?
 

Neyon

New member
May 3, 2009
124
0
0
Stop being so paranoid and plainly racist. I never understood Americans when they go nuts when they hear about drone strikes on Americans. Do you honestly think the morality of using drone strikes, regardless of your opinion of them, changes purely because the target is a citizen of a particular country? Is an American life worth more than a Pakastani or Afghani life or something?
 

Vrach

New member
Jun 17, 2010
3,223
0
0
Soviet Steve said:
As for your post, you seem to be implying that killing citizens without trial is something new for the American government.
Or at the very least, that, unlike doing the same thing in other countries, it's somehow wrong for them to do it within their own territory.
 

Soviet Steve

New member
May 23, 2009
1,511
0
0
thaluikhain said:
Heh...let's split this down the middle.

Anyone reckon it'd be cool if the unarmed surveillance drone could also arrest him? Like, it was armed with handcuffs and a baton and all?
As long as said drone would also speak about the environment, try to talk about the problems he and the criminals are having and not use his weapons. He should also be a role model to our kids and work to prevent smoking.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,580
3,538
118
Soviet Steve said:
thaluikhain said:
Heh...let's split this down the middle.

Anyone reckon it'd be cool if the unarmed surveillance drone could also arrest him? Like, it was armed with handcuffs and a baton and all?
As long as said drone would also speak about the environment, try to talk about the problems he and the criminals are having and not use his weapons. He should also be a role model to our kids and work to prevent smoking.
Eh, they'd probably make it so it couldn't arrest rich businessmen.
 

BOOM headshot65

New member
Jul 7, 2011
939
0
0
Fappy said:
So long as this is intended for surveillance only and this doesn't set some kind of privacy destroying precedent, I am cool with it. Though it'd be kind of funny if he shot down a drone. How much money do those things cost?
Assuming this is one of the older Predator drones: $4.03 million

If its one of the new Reapers: $36.8 million

Cost of a FIM-92 Stinger SAM (probly what he has, if at all): $38,000

OT: I dont see what the problem is here. If the only way to stop him is to bomb him back to the stone age with a drone, no shits are given by me. He is a wanted murderer who is well armed and EXTREMELY dangerous, and I put the lives of the LAPD FAR above this scum-bag.

Of course, I didnt complain about them bombing that guy in Yemen either, so take that as you will.
 

Brainwreck

New member
Dec 2, 2012
256
0
0
A missile is worth far more than a human, so they probably wouldn't bother blowing him up with it.
They're probably going overboard with expenditure just by having a UAV find him.
What I guess will happens is they're gonna find him with the drone, then go and riddle him with bullets because that's how justice works.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
I think people do not really get the whole "continuum of force" thing, the police can and do have the authority to kill people in the US (and in most countries) under the right circumstances. This includes shooting fleeing suspects under the right circumstances. They always have, but I'm not going to get into that in details right now. Nor do I hope I really have to explain that it's not a utopian world, accidents, and collateral damage happen. You should try and avoid them, but it's one thing to sit back and QQ about garbage and how it turned out from a safe distance, and another to go out there and have to do this kind of thing, putting your butt on the line every day.

That said, from what I've read about Dorner, he doesn't seem like the kind of guy to just snap and go rogue, even after being fired. I've noticed there isn't a lot of information about his firing, other than to say that it was due to him "making false statements". I've been of the opinion for a while that we need more information about what happened, and at this point they should be investigating the backround of this a bit more. It occured to me that instead of engaging in urban warfare with the guy, it might be a better idea to look into the situation a bit more, and maybe get the guy to surrender.

That said, I seem to remember this guy has been attacking the family members of people on his list, which doesn't speak highly for him.

While the situation needs more investigation and public scrutiny, as the guy is an armed, murdering, felon with a declared intent to strike again, I have no objection to him being taken out by snipers or a drone given the oppertunity... which is pretty much how I see killing someone with a Drone, the same as doing it with a sniper. For all intents and purposes a drone is just a much more advanced rifle/gun, someone is pulling a "trigger" to kill an unsuspecting target at a range. You have to be careful with tools like this, but as I've never objected to the police using Snipers in the right situations, I'm hardly going to object to them using a Drone. Dorner is exactly the kind of dude that warrents SWAT response and bringing those kinds of tools to bear to begin with.

This also applies to things like thermo, sensors, surveillance, Drones are just new ways of mounting/using those tools. As long as they go through the existing channels to use those tools to begin with, putting them on a Drone is no big deal. If Drones are used in place of SWAT members, or as a way of following up on pre-approved suerveillance/wiretapping operations that have gone through the proper channels, I really don't give a crap. Whether it's a couple of cops in a van listening to your conversation through a wiretap, or doing it by using a Drone hovering outside your window, to me it's the warrent/permission and that process that matters rather than the tool. Ditto for shooting someone with a Drone, I see little fundemental differance between a SWAT Sniper taking down a dangerous guy through a window, and doing it with a Drone, given the same kinds of targets.
 

RobfromtheGulag

New member
May 18, 2010
931
0
0
From what I've read/seen of the drones in the Middle East the accuracy of these things isn't great. Unless he's hiding in a cabin in the woods it seems far more likely collateral damage would outstrip the convenience.
 

michael87cn

New member
Jan 12, 2011
922
0
0
Let me clarify my previous post. I do not claim that they are going to kill him with the drone, but rather use it to find him, then kill him. They already tried shooting first. You cannot deny they intend to murder him - because they already tried it.

And as for the questions about how hes heavily armed and how are they going to bring him in? ...They're going to be sending in a small army after him once the drone finds him. The use of tear gas or tranquilizers would easily bring him down. There's no need to riddle him full of bullets, he's just one man. But that's what they want to do, so that's what's most likely going to happen.

Why's it wrong? Because in this country you're innocent until proven guilty. And its important that we keep to that rule.