Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

Toasting Dorner

Written By: Bob - Feb• 13•13

We listened to  him die last night, you and I.

Here is what it sounded like.

It happened after Dorner made a desperate escape attempt. Two maids found him in the condo he was hiding in at Big Bear, less than a half mile from the headquarters of the search trying to hunt him down. He tied them up and stole their car. He then crashed that car, and carjacked a truck.

Moments later he fired upon two wildlife units in a drive-by before crashing the truck in a ravine.

Details are still a little murky about what happens precisely at this point, but Dorner was cut off by San Bernadino Sheriff’s Deputies, and wounds two (one later dies) before taking refuge in a cabin.

Hundreds, if not a few thousand rounds were exchanged in the firefight between Dorner and the LEOs that swarmed around the cabin. We do know at one point Dorner threw a smoke grenade and attempted to escape, but was suspected to have been hit in this exchange and fell back inside the structure.

So that’s the situation.

A murderer who has published a manifesto that he intended to fight to the death, who had attempted to kill every police officer he’d seen, who had made a series of successful escapes, is now holed up in a solid structure ( a log cabin) that provided cover and and concealment for him, while officers are forced to take whatever scant cover and concealment they could find behind vehicles and trees and the exterior corners of nearby cabins.

The LEOs respond with a small breaching vehicle, which appears to be nothing more or less than a lightly-armored version of the ubiquitous Bobcat construction vehicle that used to “dance” on Captain Kangaroo.

The vehicle “ports” (knocks holes) into the walls, and they pump in tear gas. Dorner chooses to remain inside.

Dorner claimed to have explosives in his manifesto.

He’s professed his wish to kill as many officers as possible in his blaze of glory. Dorner has initiated and returned fire at every possible opportunity. He’s killed five so far. Should there be more?

Do you send in a tactical team into a situation where you might expect the suspect to have an IED? No responsible commander who valued the lives of his men would.

Do you merely set up a perimeter, and hope that his insanity of the past week suddenly fades? Do you take the chance that he’s pie a corner from the dark of the cabin, and kill yet again? Do you run the risk of him charging your men, getting off more rounds that might widow and orphan more?

Dorner had a week to surrender, on his own terms.

He had chance to surrender at any part of the long process of the bobcat knocking down parts of the exterior walls. He had another chance to surrender when the tear gas was deployed.

It is my judgement that the on-scene commander mad the rational, morally-correct, and legally-justifiable call.

He called to deploy “burners,” which Dorner reminded us in his manifesto, is likely one of the “TTPs” he knew they would be forced to try.

They deployed CS gas grenades.  CS isn’t a flamethrower. It isn’t the equivalent of pouring gas on the building that will set the entire structure up in a flash, giving Dorner no final chance to escape.

The primary purpose of these grenades is of course the choking CS gas they deploy, but the high heat they produce give them their “burner” nickname, and this is not unwanted. Moments after deploying them, the building begins to burn.

There is then a single, solitary, muffled shot. It is at this moment it is suspected that Christopher Jordan Dorner chose to end his life.

I’m hearing some whining that the tactic of using these CS grenades to ignite the structure and force his hand is somehow unsporting to poor Mr. Dorner.

It is a “violation of his constitutional rights.”

It is a “violation of the homeowner’s property rights.”

It is “proof of a police state.”

It is “murder.”

I see widows. I see orphans.

Why was it okay to torch the cabin? Basic human decency.

Try it when your sanctimony runs thin.

Update: It seems we’ve discovered something almost as morally repulsive as leftists cheering Dorner as he killed cops; radical libertarians who think cops taking logical steps to end his rampage at the end of a gun battle didn’t give him “due process.”

Yeah… they think they’re holy like that.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.


  1. Comrade X says:

    DISGUSTING: CNN Panel says Dorner’s murdering rampage “exciting…like ‘Django Unchained’ in real life”…

    Death before slavery!

  2. Glen Harness says:

    I see it as murder by cop, not suicide by cop. Just a few days ago cops in Alabama waited nearly a week for a guy with guns and a hostage to come out. There’s no reason these cops couldn’t have done the same. But they never really intended on trying to take him alive.

    By no means am I a flaming liberal. But if they can kill this guy with no consequences to whoever ordered it, then the next step is to kill innocent people (oh, wait a minute, they nearly did kill two innocent people). The fact is, the cops overreacted big time on this.

    If “basic human decency” says it’s ok to just throw due process out the window, then I’m pretty sure I want no part of it.

    • Mudlark says:

      Glenn its too bad the three people he murdered aren’t here to comment on your opinions.

      • The Business End says:

        Maybe the four people “mistakenly” shot/shot at by police would care to comment on yours?

      • Mudlark says:

        They still can. But the man who you champion has made sure that their voices are stilled forever. Your morals are showing. What do you do for a living? Perform partial birth abortions?

  3. Declan says:

    There is only one way to convict a criminal in America: through trial.

    While the evidence heavily pointed at Chris Dorner as being very much what he appeared to be, he was still entitled to a trial before being convicted and executed.

    For his sake? No. For the sake of what hundreds of thousands have laid their lives down for. Freedom and the rule of law.

    If you don’t get it, you never will.

    • Bob says:

      Dorner had days to surrender.

      Yesterday, he had the option to surrender to the Fish and Game officers. He fired 15-20 rounds at them, attempting murder instead.

      Moments later, he had the option to surrender to SBSO deputies. He murdered one SBSO deputy and wounded another instead.

      Surrounded in the cabin, he could have surrendered. Instead, he engaged in yet another firefight, and tried to shoot his way out instead.

      LEOs put tear gas into the cabin, giving Dorner a chance to surrender. He refused.

      Leos used CS grenades to start a fire in the front of the cabin hoping to force him out the rear where he could be apprehended. He chose to eat a bullet instead.

      Did you get that?

      Dorner was given multiple chances to surrender, even after he had murdered five people. Instead of surrendering he killed himself.

      If you can’t grasp basic reality…

      • The Fatman says:

        And the recordings of the cops planning to “burn him out”? That sounds an awful lot like a lynching. It’s nice to know that you guys aren’t really interested in liberty. But in a police state where you get to be in charge. Like Nazis. Just remember you guys all thought this was OK when the murdering f**ksticks from LAPD or wherever your locale is come for your guns. I hope you have the same attitude about “due process” when it is your ass on the line. F**king degenerate statist ass holes.

    • Mudlark says:


      If you don’t get it after this monster killed three people and had pledged to kill more innocent people you just won’t get it and never will. How’s it feel to be a moron?

    • Real Deal says:

      Yeah, and I guess you guys think that we should be reading the Taliban their Miranda Rights too huh?

      The LAPD did a horrible job during the manhunt, but LE did the right thing by killing Dorner without any further casualties on the part of LE. This wasn’t some poor random suspect they cornered in a house. As Bob states this guy had plenty of time to surrender and face trial by a jury of his peers. He chose not to, he apparently chose to eat a bullet instead.

      • The Fatman says:

        The Taliban are no in the U.S., nor are they American Citizens. They are also in an active Combat Zone. You sir, are a complete moron and should refrain from procreation for the betterment of mankind.

      • Mudlark says:

        Fatboy res ipso loquitur. You are sooo gay.

  4. Phoenix says:

    One thing that I have learned by all this…

    When everyone finally has had enough and starts to push back, local and state law enforcement is going to be so out-manned and out-played it will be ridiculous.

    This guy Dormer had them running in circles.

    one guy

  5. SicSemperTyrannus says:

    My sympathy for the cabin’s owners. I hope they are compensated properly for the property loss. I doubt “arson by law enforcement” is covered under their homeowner’s insurance.
    Dorner? He got a preview of how he’ll spend eternity.

  6. McThag says:

    If you can discard them when they’re inconvenient they are not rights.

    Preserving rights means we have to walk a longer, more dangerous, road that expeditiously and summarily executing someone.

    • Mudlark says:

      Somehow I doubt you said that about Waco and Ruby Ridge.

      • Malamiyya says:

        Why would you doubt it for a moment? Isn’t McThag saying, “Waco, Ruby Ridge, Dorner — executions by the Powers That Be because it’s convenient is never justified.”?

      • McThag says:

        I said exactly that about Waco and Ruby Ridge.

        The state killed without arrests and trials.

        We apparently don’t care about the 6th and 8th amendments if “officer safety” is involved.

        Would I want to be the first officer in the door of that cabin?


        Nor would I want to be the first soldier on the ramp on D-Day.

        The difference is there was a first guy on the beach on D-Day, there was no cop even trying to do his DUTY to ARREST the suspect.

      • Mudlark says:


        You’re comments display an ignorance almost beyond belief until one stumbles upon Dan III and Fatboy. And how many people died trying to capture this man?

        You sir are not only an idiot but beneath contempt.

    • Mudlark says:


      That’s way too funny for words. Off your lithium.

  7. Parker says:

    Dorner, per currently available evidence, was deranged. But burning down the cabin was just another example of the murderous intent of domestic police forces. I have no sympathy for Dorner. Yet, I have only contempt for the forces that be for how they handled the standoff. Shades of Waco. The police forces of CA are obviously not willing, per their employment agreement, to put their lives on the line to conduct affairs according to their oath of office. I shall show little pity should I have to put them down on my street should they act contrary to their oath. An oath is an oath. Break your adherence to that oath and you become a rabid dog.

    • Mudlark says:

      Oooh when can we expect you to serve an arrest warrant sir?

      • The Fatman says:

        When can we expect you to put on the badge A** hole? Cops choose their profession, if they are too frightened to do the job THEY signed up for they should resign and get an actual productive job.

      • Mudlark says:

        Fatboy you are too stupid for words. What did you do before they stuck you in a rubber room?

    • Real Deal says:

      And what do we do with rabid dogs?

      Didn’t Dorner break all those oaths when he went on his rampage? So by your statements they did the right thing. Put down the rabid dog.

      Logic & reasoning, you seem to only have a passing aquaintence with them.

      • Archer says:

        The problem I see, and Bob and several other don’t, is that Constitutionally-protected rights apply to ALL citizens. Even – perhaps ESPECIALLY – the very worst.

        In my opinion, Chris Dorner was a scumbag and a near-worthless human being. But, and as painful of a pill as it is to swallow, he WAS a human being, and he deserves the same rights you and I do.

        Was he guilty? Almost certainly.
        Did he deserve death as a punishment? Probably.
        Was it SBSO/LAPD’s place to make that judgment and carry out the sentence? Absolutely NOT.

        Guilt must be determined by a jury of 12 weighing evidence for and against the accused, and upon a guilty verdict an appropriate sentence must be set by a judge or magistrate. That is justice.

        While I can understand the pressure the LEOs were under and the high-emotions from chasing a suspect who (allegedly) murdered their colleagues and friends, they did NOT have the right or authority to pass summary judgment and carry out the execution. Under any other circumstances, that would be condemned as vigilantism, though I suspect no charges will be filed and no further investigation will be held. You or I wouldn’t be so lucky.

        What do you call a place where the LEOs can decide for themselves which rights to respect and which to disregard? A police state.

      • Mudlark says:

        We all realize you would want the police to act as you described if it were your family’s safety and well being at stake.

        Truly we all believe it.

  8. Linoge says:

    Good of you to confirm your belief that Constitutionally-protected rights – like that whacky thing called “due process” – can go out the window when you feel it is appropriate to do so.

    I do not waste my time reading folks with similar beliefs regarding the Second Amendment; I see no reason to continue wasting my time here.

    • pat says:

      Oh come off it dude, a huge problem with our national dialogue is that no one can have different opinions. It’s “I’m right and if you think differently you’re wrong, wrong, wrong and any differing opinion you have from mine makes you an idiot/evil and i’m not listening to you anymore.” It’s why there’s deadlock in washington, why the news networks are filled with bitter partisans, and why people can hate each other without ever meeting simply because of party affiliation.

      Now, I see both sides of this argument. Bob and others seem to believe that the guy very likely murdered people before, he definitely murdered people in the current shootout, and he had good cover with unknown quantities of ammo. Under these circumstances deployment of CS gas is perfectly legitimate. I can absolutely understand this point of view.

      On this particular issue, however, I RESPECTFULLY disagree. Primarily for two reasons. First, there have been similar instances to this before where the suspect was coerced into surrender. While i can’t recall the specific time/date of the incident, i remember watching a documentary where a guy commits murder, leads cops on a chase that ends at someone’s house. Guy barricades himself in the house proceeds to have an hours-long firefight with LE. Guy claims he’d rather die fighting than surrender. Police use a robot with a camera and microphone to keep tabs on the guy and negotiate with him. Importantly, the negotiation is FREQUENTLY interrupted by exchanges of gunfire. Eventually, the guy gives himself up. The point here is twofold: that murders who claim to rather die than surrender can be coaxed into changing their minds, and that LE.only when fired upon despite the guy doing so multiple times and having already killed someone.

      The second issue I have is how quickly they employed CS gas. Tear gas canisters are well known to present huge fire risks inside structures and therefore i think that their use absolutely constituted a deliberate attempt to burn the house down. For LE to claim otherwise I frankly think is dishonest and an attempt to exploit the public’s lack of knowledge on how such canisters work. My main beef with its use is i think at least some attempt should have been made during the shootout to let Dorner surrender, and more importantly i don’t think a few hours is sufficient to ensure there was no one else in that building. In fact that is by far my biggest issue. Imagine the tragedy if the cops burned to death some innocent hostage or terrified civilian hiding somewhere in the house that everyone, including Dorner, was oblivious to.

      So that’s my 2 cents. I think Dorner got what he deserved, but i think LE was ultimately overzealous in their bid to bring him justice. We are, afterall, a nation of laws, and as such we live in a society where the ends are not supposed to justify the means. It matters how are government officials do things, and this includes killing people who deserve to die. I will, however, continue to follow Bob’s blog despite my disagreement on this one issue. Good, men can come to different conclusions, and that’s what happened here. I look forward to continuing to read this blog, as Bob speaks on issues I care about in an intelligent, thoughtful, and interesting manner.

      One team One fight.

      • pat says:

        *our government officials. Damned droid…

      • MonkeyLeader says:

        Hear Hear!

      • Jake says:

        I think Dorner got what he deserved, but i think LE was ultimately overzealous in their bid to bring him justice.

        Agreed on the first part, but not the second. It’s fairly obvious that the plan from the start was to kill him, and that they never had any intention of “bringing him to justice”. LAPD demonstrated that quite well, and I have no doubt SBSD was working under the same plan.

        It matters how [our] government officials do things, and this includes killing people who deserve to die.


      • Chuck says:

        Well said.

        I vehemently disagree with Bob on this one, but his blog is valuable to those of us who love liberty and Bob is obviously a good man and patriot. I, for one, will happily continue to read this blog.

      • The Fatman says:

        Not my team. My team respects the Constitution and all of it’s amendments. The Blood-thirsty statists here are most certainly NOT on my team. They are no better than the progtards that think Obama is soooo great. These contards love to suck them some cop and the police state. Their only problem with it is which TEAM is in charge.

      • Mudlark says:

        Fatboy’s team is using seen turning public aquares into open air urinals. Shouldn’t you be posting at DU and MoveOn Fatboy. Your team marchs in goosetep on Mayday.

    • Mudlark says:

      Why is it whenever someone uses Constitutional Rights for a mad dog killer, especially if that individual is a progressive member in good standing, that I have difficulty in believing the same consideration will be given to the police.Pardon me if I find your defense of Constitutional rights less than convincing.

      • DAN III says:

        Oh you mean the murderous bastards with badges who slaughtered Jose Guerana in his home, in front of his family ? Then after pumping him full of lead Jose was still breathing. Your courageous scum with badges refused him medical treatment. They let him bleed out.

        Your kind make me want to puke. Once again a defender of all that is wrong with America….you sally forth defending the police state this country has become. May you and your beloved, badged scum rot in hell.

      • Mudlark says:

        Dan I have noticed you confuse a murderer with an innocent man. Did your parents make a habit of dropping you on your head?

        If you confuse the circumstances of the two cases that you equate a rabid murderer with an innocent man one must conclude that you inhabit an alternate reality where facts neither matter nor touch you.

    • Mudlark says:

      Let’s hear for due process for a man who acted a judge, jury and executioner. A man who murdered innocent people and the morons like Fatman who defend him.

      • DAN III says:

        Well Mudlark….I see you avoided my reference to now deceased, courtesy of murdering, badged thugs, Mr. Guerena.

        You write and spew a lot of statist, collectivist trash.

      • Mudlark says:


        Oh yes I addressed it. Now explain to the readers here how there is any similarity between the opolice persuit of an admitted murderer and the gestapo tactics of an rouge Obama hit squad?

        Seek help. You exercise neither logic and are apparently incapable of any sort of analytic judgment. Tell us are you one of Obama’s czars you nattering twit.

  9. Alan says:

    Like we say to liberals about the 2nd Amendment, you don’t get to pick and choose what Constitutionally guaranteed rights you’re going to uphold. You either support and defend them all or none. You can’t ask people to stand up for the 2nd when you’re not willing to stand up for the rest.

    • Mudlark says:

      My God sir, the president has ordered a drone attack on your position. You running dog of the Wall Street capitalists.

      Take that you counter revolutionary.

      • DAN III says:

        The sooner a necktie of hemp decorates the necks of those of your ilk, the better off those who rever freedom and liberty will be.

      • Mudlark says:

        Dan you are clearly of the same ilk as Donner. Civilization hasn’t impacted on your world view and your experience demonstrates you are not capable of running with sharp objects. Now back to your parent’s basement like a good little girl.

    • The Fatman says:

      Hear, Hear! Well said SIR!

  10. Cole says:

    Everyone keeps talking about Dorner’s rights. What about rights of the police? Do they lose them when they put on a badge. Cops don’t wear guns for fashion. They have them to return deadly force. They have the same right to defend themselves that other people do. That we do. Dorner lost every right he had when started shooting from the cabin. Fire or pistol, the bastard needed to die. Lets not allow dissatisfaction with the government to cloud common sense. Do you really think Dorner taking five more officers before he’s subdued is a better alternative? Especially when the LA jury finds him not guilty. Or have Dorner escape and kill more innocent as his murder spree crosses the country. We can armchair this all we want from the comfort of our homes. But the cops on the scene were losing lives to a madman. They made the call. And now there’s one less monster in the world. I have no problem, legally or ethically, with the LEO involved or their actions. Bob’s article is spot on.

    • bx says:

      The shooting happened after the burners were sent in. One shot, then nothing. Then the rest was ammo exploding from the fire. As far as I know, Dorner never shot at anybody from inside the cabin.

      Even if he did, the cops didn’t know there weren’t hostages in there. They set the place on fire anyway, because they didn’t care.

      • Mudlark says:

        And your evidence for this is? Can you also give me the teacher who taught you to read minds. I’ve always wanted to learn the Vulcan art of mind melding.

      • Cole says:

        @ BX: I guess all of Chris Dorner’s victims are secretly alive and hiding out with the airplane passengers from 9-11 and the sailors in the Philadelphia Experiment.

        It’s amazing how peaceful the crazy spree killer got once he entered the cabin in your version of events. This lunatic wrote a manifesto stating he would kill police in exactly this situation. No matter what grudge or distrust you have against law enforcement the facts are on their side.

      • bx says:

        @mudlark My evidence is the police scanner audio. They said on the scanner that they intended to burn the place down. They said it very clearly. Please google this and confirm it for yourself.

        After the fire was set, the entire conversation on the scanner was about letting the place burn. There were zero reports of officers taking fire.

        Please, show me evidence that he was shooting at officers while in the cabin. I was listening to the police scanner live the entire time, and had about 4 news stations running. If you saw something I didn’t please share it…


        Alleged victims. The only evidence that he killed Quan and her husband is the manifesto, and the manifesto was given to the media by the cops.

        If you take the manifesto as being 100% genuine, just because the cops say it is, then you’re very naive.

      • Mudlark says:

        bx you neither have a complete transmission nor were at the scene. You deal in hearsay. As such you are in the same league as the great and mighty Obama who claimed the police acted stupidly in Massachusetts, even though he didn’t know the facts.

        I take it you’d swear in court your evidence is complete and even passes the laugh test?

        Sad what education has sunk to in this country when it allows people like you to roam freely.

    • MonkeyLeader says:

      No one is forced to become a police officer. They take on that dangerous responsibility because they feel a duty to serve the public. And in part of that service, they defend and follow the rights that every US citizen is entitled.

      The police don’t loss their right to self defense, I don’t think anyone is arguing that point. But, by carrying a badge, they have an obligation to defend and follow the rights they’ve sworn to protect. Once Dorner became a trapped rat inside that cabin, I think some people feel that the threat was contained and that the police have an obligation to get this guy to surrender peacefully using a trained negotiator. Only if Dorner presents himself as a threat again, can the police use self defense to defend themselves.

      No doubt, it was a very fluidic situation there, where Dorner was a threat in once instance, by actively shooting a police (allowing return fire to be used) and he was a nonthreat in another, by hiding inside the cabin (requiring restraint on the side of the police).

      Just like the US military has “rules of engagement”, I believe the LEO’s have a similar duty to follow a set of ROE set forth by a command authority.

      It would be interesting to see what the on scene officers were told to do and what they saw the situation as.

    • Phelps says:

      What about rights of the police? Do they lose them when they put on a badge.

      In short? Yes, they do. They can take that badge off whenever they want, and get them back. Until then, they play by the damned rules. One of those rules is “you don’t summarily execute a suspect just because waiting him out would be inconvenient.”

    • The Fatman says:

      Got it, your a jack-booted thug loving fascist.

  11. David says:

    I agree with Declan and Linoge. No one has proved who murdered the cops. No one proved who posted the manifesto. Mr. Owens seems to think it is ok to kill someone because the police say so and something might happen.

    • Bob says:

      The only person who killed anyone in this sorry saga, was Dorner. He got six kills.

      Including himself.

      • The Fatman says:

        What is your proof Bob? You read minds, your clairvoyant? What special extra sensory skill do you have that allows to view from afar the events that unfolded? It is a miracle the Keystone Kops of LAPD didn’t kill the old ladies or the other guy. Face it man, you are a fascist d**k. I have lost all respect for you. You talk alot of shit about the constitution but now we see you are no better than the progs. Rights for me but not for thee. Sooner or later you WILL be on the receiving end of this and you know it.
        Good luck with that Fascist Scum.

      • The Fatman says:

        I guess you are just like a proggy Bob, you won’t respond to those that criticize you. Going to explain to those of us that are mere mortals how you “KNOW” that Dorner killed those folks? Or are you just regurgitating what the police tell you like a good little statist? Peace is War, Ignorance is Strength, right Bob?

      • Mudlark says:

        Poor Fatboy. Those people were really killed by Dan III. Right? Res ipso loquitur.

    • bx says:

      This. Chances are, Dorner did write the manifesto (or at least most of it), and chances are, Dorner did murder those cops and the civilian couple. But now we’ll never know.

      As for your claim that he had a chance to turn himself in… go ask the two asian women the cops shot, and the others cops shot at, if they think the cops were open to the idea of taking him in alive.

      Even if Dorner did manage to get himself taken in alive (which would have been a feat of its own), there is no doubt in my mind he would have “hung himself.”

      The cops wanted Dorner dead. I don’t agree with any alleged killing of innocents, but at the end there, the self defense case could definitely be made.

      And the beginning is all based on a “manifesto” that the cops claim was posted to facebook but not a TRACE of evidence supports that claim.

      The only known sources of the manifesto was distributed by cops… and Bob Owens here would have me to believe that the LAPD is so corrupt that it sends one of its own into a murderous rampage, but not so corrupt that it would lie about a manifesto, or any of the events that occurred over the past week?

      That’s the kind of thing that would come up in a trial. Everyone, even ALLEGED murders, deserves a trial. Due process isn’t always convenient, but it is JUST.

      This is another reader that won’t be coming back

      • Mudlark says:

        Too bad the people that Donner murdered can’t comment on your observations of Donner’s rights.

        The readership here would probably like to know what your sources of information are. I mean besides MoveOn and the DemocraticUnderground. Its always so good to hear from someone of such elevated moral standing as yourself who can condemn the murderous rampage of the LAPD while refraining from describing Donner in similar terms.

        Let all remember that the police shouldn’t have shot down the murderous Maj Hussain, after all he deserved a trial, didn’t he?

        The police should have stood by while additional people were killed till the ACLU arrived. We all know this is exactly the song you’d sing if you and yours were in danger.

        Its sooo gaay.

      • bx says:

        @mudlark I’m apparently a leftist because I believe its a bad idea to set fire to a building that may have hostages in it? And because I believe that people are innocent until proven guilty?

        What would you like sources for? That the cops had no intention of taking Dorner alive? That there is no evidence that the post was ever on Facebook? That the only copy of the manifesto that is of questionable authenticity as it was released to the press by the LAPD? That cops lie?

        What would you like sources for?

        Like I said above, Dorner is probably a murder, the manifesto is probably accurate, but whatever the fuck happened to innocent until proven guilty?

      • Real Deal says:

        Hmmm you neglect to think on this, despite the fact that the police were behaving quite unprofessionally Dorner could have safely turned himself in.

        All he had to do was turn himself in to a media outlet. The police would have been hard pressed to to shoot him if he turned up at a TV station unarmed. He chose differently.

        The logic people are using about the cops is flawed. Sure they took a dangerous job, just like people who work in cities have a chance or being mugged on their way to work.

        However, what logic you’re using for the cops would be the same as saying the person working in the city should also walk through the most crime infested part of the city wearing expensive jewelry with wads of cash in their pocket while fanning themsleves with a handfull of hundreds.

        There is risk and then there is outright stupidity. You’re demanding that LE take unnecessary risks to ensure that Dorner get due process. Would it have been the ideal outcome that Dorner surrender and get his due process? Absolutely. Then again we’d have had another show trial on the level of OJ with Dorner getting off because someone screwed up (and you know someone did from the other stuff we’ve heard about) or because one of the officers is or gets tarred as a racist. Then even if Dorner did get convicted or committed we’d get to support him for the rest of his years because CA doesn’t have a death penalty. I say WE because CA is broke and will only recieve more Federal funds as time goes on.

      • Mudlark says:

        BX apparently you believe the cops would set fire to a building with hostages in it. Res ipso loquitur.

        Seek help.

  12. Foamy says:

    There is no doubt this guy was long gone from the reservation, but as his case relates to your larger theme of an increasingly tyrannical government and the increasing risk the government takes as they curtail our rights, look at the resources ONE armed, trained, determined man tied up, and for how long he tied them up.

    John Dillinger, 2013 edition, needed to get taken out. However, his is a good example of how a determined armed man with convictions can tie up government resources.

    Now, picture the resources that would be tied up with hundreds of thousands of trained, armed insurrectionists traipsing around the woods.

    Bob, as you so eloquently put it…tread carefully.

    PS. It will be interesting to see how long the LAPD re-investigation of his whistleblower complaints stays open. I’m of two minds on this. First, I suspect the LAPD has a great deal of what would be classified as institutionalized racism. How could you police the streets of LA and not develop it? My other thought is that this guy was an amateur grievance-monger, and trampled the Thin Blue Line, and what happened in Big Bear was just a matter of cleaning up a really big loose end. Either way, the guy was a shitbag. It would have been better, in my mind, to have figured out a way to eliminate the suicide option, and have him stand trial. No big deal, though. This way, less public money gets spent on providing HBO to this guy for 30-life.

    • Mudlark says:

      Exactly how many blacks did Donner kill? Seems when you use the term racist you better look at the facts there. Projection is a bitch isn’t it?

      • Real Deal says:

        Contray to what the Left would have you believe you don’t have to be a white person to be a racist.

        In fact the biggest racists I’ve ever met were a black guy and an Chinese woman.

  13. Cleburne says:

    We’re supposed to be a nation of laws. LEO’s are to apprehend suspected lawbreakers for due process. They are not authorized to be judge, jury and executioner.

    Bob Owens you’re wrong on this one.

    • Mudlark says:

      Yup the police should allow an armed manic to run loose. By the way nice to see you defend a murderer who acted as judge, jury and executioner.

      Too bad four people can’t respond to your views.

  14. David says:

    I agree to some extent will those of you pronouncing this murder, abuse of due process, etc. If this was a case of the police storming a place where they suspected him to be located, I’d agree with you 100%. But. Active shooter. He started not just the grand sequence of events, but this specific day’s events. He fired first, he led them on a pursuit, he continued shooting from cover. I’m sorry, but my regard for due process and worry about government overreach doesn’t stretch that far. If you open fire on the police, they get to fire back, and they aren’t required to aim to wound, or wait for you to run out of ammo, or food, or what have you. It may be the sound thing for them to do in certain circumstances, and we can hope for them to do so, but in the circumstances here, no.

  15. Mike says:

    You have lost a reader tonight. I sure hope the media never takes snippets of your posts or takes a disscusion of small unit tactics out of contexts and sells to the masses that you are a danger to society. The I hope that same society in their rush for blood doest convict you via Facebook and sentence you.
    When tyranny does come and they come for your freedoms that same society will be sold that you are a cop killer when all you did was defend yourself and your family. They will lust for your blood just as you have done to this suspect. I will not defend his actions but the truth is we only know what the media has told us. You should have conceded the point in the earlier article but all you did is double down. Shame on you.

    • Bob says:

      I pity those of you who so hate the state that you think law enforcement officers are soulless automatons, instead of human beings with husbands and wives, children, brothers and sisters, and friends.

      The SBSO deputies that were forced to deal with Dorner in the end were eighty miles removed from the LAPD, and had nothing to do with any wrong done to him, real or imagined. They did not ask for this. Dorner came to them, then Dorner came at them, murdering one of their duputies, and wounding another.

      That murdered deputy had a newborn infant at home that will now grow up without a father to sing him to sleep, watch him take his first steps, bait his hook, or watch him graduate and get married.

      That murdered deputy has a shattered young widow at home with a hole in her heart a mile wide that will never be filled, the love of her life ripped away. Her bed will never feel full again. She’ll have only a ghost and a memory.

      The SBSO gave Dorner every chance to surrender up until the end, and in that end, instead of surrendering and facing accountability for all that the had done, Christopher Jordan Dorner took the coward’s way out, and committed suicide.

      And you have the gall to blame the police for it.

      Shame, sir? I wish you were capable of it.

      • Phoenix says:

        You wait and see, there will be so many new facts come to light in this case.

        The media paints a picture for you and you took the bait.


      • Mudlark says:


        People who root for murderers and then use “due process” while ignorning the full circumstances are no different from jihaddies who strap suicide vests onto the retarded. They have no morals and their agenda is clear.

        They are beneath contempt. Sort of like the stuff you step on one hot summer’s day. Smelly, sticky, and difficult to get off your shoe.

      • The Fatman says:

        So f**king what. That was his job. He took the risk for the pay. If he didn’t want to do it get a different, safer, job and his wife and baby would still have him. Your fawning respect for people in gov’t issued costumes is sickening Bob. You really are a fascist aren’t you?

      • DAN III says:

        Well Bob it is apparent you have no shame or belief in liberty and freedom. While us common serfs are bound by laws created by our ruling elite you dismiss those same laws for your beloved bastards with badges. Jose Guerena, a decorated Marine gunned down in his own home and left to bleed out by your beloved bastards with badges.

        You’re just another neocon statist who believes the scum who comprise the “government” are supreme. Count me as one more who has come to hate those who wear the badges and enforce the tyranny of those who rule over us like royalty.

        You Bob appear to be one more in a line of neocons who trash the Constitution and the Freedom and Liberty it stands for.

        What of Jose Guerena and his widow and children murdered at the hands of your beloved murderers with badges ?

        Rot in hell you neocon bastard.

      • Real Deal says:

        Personally I’m no fonder of the cops than anyone else but you all are just wrong. These men and women put themselves in harms way every day for less than many of you make.

        How about this? Next time someone goes on a murderous rampage and holes up somewhere with an undetermined amount of ammo and possible IEDs YOU volunteer to go get him out so that he can get his due process.

      • Archer says:

        No offense, Bob, but that was an excellently-written argument, rendered valueless by being based entirely on emotion. No logic or reason at all.

        And no, LEOs are not unthinking robots.

        But does that mean we blame the newspaper-delivery ladies for presenting a perceived hazard to the officers? After all, they are humans with husbands and wives, children, brothers and sisters, and friends, and will say they were in fear of their lives. Or are the police to blame for shooting before confirming their target or seeing a “reasonable” threat?

        The LEOs involved have every right to self-defense against a threat, but absent an “active shooter” (and if comments from others here are to be believed, Dorner wasn’t shooting from the cabin), there was no clear threat here. To draw a parallel, if a thug breaks into your home and threatens deadly force, you can defend yourself, but if you present your own deadly force and he leaves, you can’t shoot him in the back; the threat has ended, regardless of his previous actions and even if he’s still on-site (but leaving).

        The whole situation just screams “Vicki Weaver” and “Ruby Ridge” to me.

      • Mudlark says:

        Fatboy and Dan demonstrate why the public is at risk when the mentally and morally deranged are allowed to roam fire without restraint. They pity the murderer who acted as judge, jury and executioner killing innocents. But the people killed were taking risks they were paid to take.

        Your humanity never fails to impress. It is on the same level as intellectual skills and sense of right and wrong. Now we know the type of person Hitler used to man the ovens in the death camps.

  16. pat says:

    Jesus Christ people, two good & smart men can look at this issue and come to different conclusions. Let’s stop the personal attacks and bring some civility back to this topic. Personal attacks and belittling your opponent are hallmarks of the left, whom we oppose. Let’s not become them and tear each other to pieces over the actions of a mad man.

    One team One fight.

    • MonkeyLeader says:

      Well said.

    • The Fatman says:

      Well, “Good & Smart Men” don’t defend the state murdering a man they only suspect of committing a crime. The folks here, including Bob, that do are neither good nor smart. They are little fascist’s that think “due process” means whatever the gubmint says it is.

  17. Chris Muir says:

    Bob,you’re a damn good writer.But you are waaaay off the reservation on this.Rethink it.

  18. chief661 says:

    Yep I get it Bob he ate a bullet, the guy was sick. That doesn’t change a darn thing. I almost always agree with you but on this one you are so far off base, IMHO, you are in another world. If you “volunteer” to work as a police office then you take the good with the bad. I chose to be a firefighter and I and my wife knew and accepted the risks inherent to the job. You want to be a cop, carry a gun and be a “hero”, fine; if you want to make certain to come home at night find another less risky job. Those guys were out of control; listen to the audio of them on radio about burning the building down. This was revenge by an out of control team. And yes, I think we are living in a police state, that fact is proven more every day by the behavior of poorly chosen and trained personnel. The idea that the cops can do anything for “officer safety” now includes shooting the defenseless just because, as in this instance, their truck is the same color as the one allegedly being driven by some a_hole perp. How about if that was your wife and daughter. Come on Bob, you’re smarter than this.

    • Mudlark says:

      Wow, somehow I bet you teach not to play with matchs, use electrical appliances near water, or drink and drive yet you advocate taking risks in a very dangerous profession.

      Tell us sir are you a school teacher or DMV worker.

      • The Fatman says:

        He is a firefighter. Didn’t you read the post you asshole? As he said, he is aware of the risk inherent in his job. If the cops aren’t, or are not prepared to accept those risks, find a new job.

      • Mudlark says:

        Fatboy bing a fireman doesn’t mean you have to dose yourself with gasoline when fighting a blaze. You minimize your risk. How many men did this rabid Obamaist kill. Please dont embarass yourself any more with your mindless ranting. You only demonstrate how limited your reasoning skills are and how far to the left you are on the bell curve.

  19. Phoenix says:

    The only thing of any relevance to the Dorner case…..

    The media is the problem in this country, worse than politicians and Wall st. combined. They play on the half-wits that don’t have critical thinking skills and just blindly follow the narrative.

    In King Obama’s case first comes the false flags, then comes the executive orders. Slam dunk politics.

    We got to be close to the end.

  20. Mudlark says:

    Bob you did an excellent job of describing the situation. None of the blow hards here would have done anything different if they were facing this man, except for soiling their collective diapers.

    The problem with this country is we have forgotten what justice and right and wrong is and replaced it with “legal” and “due process.” So it is legal for the government to rob you blind but somehow wrong to eliminate a mad dog that represents a threat to all and sundry if that criminal isn;t attended by an ACLU representative at every step of the proceedings.

    Now you can understand how Obama was elected and why the nation is at the state it is. Can anyone imagine the Aurora killer having this defense made by the same crowd or the killer in Conn?

    We have become a people who would rather go through a legal kabuki dance than protect the innocent or see that justice is carried out.

    • Phoenix says:

      I see what your doing here but when justice is really public perception the whole thing is a blur.

      The only thing we can be certain of anymore is that nothing is what it seems.

      It’s an illusion…the matrix.

    • MonkeyLeader says:

      Wow.. what a collection of Strawman Arguments you’ve created.

      Be careful around an ignition source, that straw is really dry.

      • Mudlark says:

        Hey Monkey Brain you don’t even understand what a strawman argument is. If you could refute anything I wrote its clearly beyond your limited intellect and education. Why don’t you join the Fatboy in the bath house.

  21. Jim says:

    I can see both sides of this issue. I don’t like police not going the extra mile, but I can understand that Dorner had plenty of chances to end this. My problem is that it isn’t all above board. The San Bernardino County Sherrif states that they did not intentionally burn down the cabin, and we have direct evidence that they did.

    Why lie about it? THAT’S my problem. It is not necessary to blur the lines here, but it’s the government that doing the blurring.

  22. nels says:

    We pay police huge salaries and benefits exactly because they are to risk their lives to protect ours. I didn’t see that happen in this instance. Yes, considering the basic qualifications for the job, the salaries ARE huge.

    Dorner was a foul murderer. So were the police he was targeting; we see that by their actions against Dorner, against the paper ladies, against the surfer dude, and against all the innocents who have been murdered by SWAT raids. The police cared no more for our safety or rights than Dorner cared for the safety and rights of that couple he killed. The police are supposed to safeguard _everyone’s_ rights, including Dorners. That’s our law, and basic human decency, and necessary to keep the cops from becoming just another criminal gang. That’s why we pay college professor wages to high school graduates with badges.

    There are no good guys in this story. Dorner was evil, the police who murdered him and tried to murder others in their blind panic are evil, and none of them did the right thing. Supporting the cops actions is exactly as repulsive as supporting Dorners actions: they are morally equivalent because they are actually equivalent. Dorner and the police each had their hit list, neither cared about any that got in their way, and neither thought of bringing anyone to justice.

    This was different than Waco and Ruby Ridge not because the good guys were on the outside here, but because there were no good guys and no basic human decency involved, inside or out.

    • Chuck says:

      Bingo. It’s analogous to watching the Iranian backed militias battle it out with AQ terrorists in some Middle East shithole. No good guys to root for and any civilians within range get shot at, kidnapped, carjacked, rammed by police cruisers, tied up, and have their houses burned down. The collateral damage in this thing was out of control.

  23. Steve says:


    Long-time reader, infrequent-to-never commenter.

    I understand you feel strongly about this; so do those of us who agree with you on a lot of things but feel troubled by your position here. Re-read Pat @ 11:14 pm, David @ 9:03 pm, BX @ 10:43 pm, and Chris at 11:47 pm, and have the courtesy to acknowledge that opposing opinions may be legitimate.

    If that has no effect, at least take a moment to consider that Mudlark is all over the comments here, spraying venom, and he’s on your side.

    • Jaynie59 says:

      I’m a new reader of this blog and have only commented a couple of times but I can tell you that I love Mudlark’s comments on this thread. He’s spraying venom, huh? That’s funny. I’ve had to hold myself back because I am new here and haven’t got the lay of the land yet. But trust me. Mudlark is being a lot nicer than I would be.

  24. Bill says:

    As I see it, with limited intellect as I possess;

    Dorner by all accounts and actions was a mass-murdering ****head.

    The LAPD shot first and often in the initial freakout, lending creedence to conspiracy theorists.

    Then the audio surfaced of the cabin actions.

    Then the Sheriff says the cabin was not purposely burned.

    So here’s the main problem:
    No one tells the damn truth anymore.

    It’s all spin. How are people supposed to react in that situation?

    So I get it. The government hasn’t earned our outright trust in any situation. That is the crux of the problem. They’re not inherently trustworthy and the perception is they will do whatever they want whenever they want no matter what occurs.

    We’ve seen far too many heavy handed applications of force and the SWAT rampages are epidemic.

    It’s right to be suspicious and demand answers and accountabillity.

    But stop defending this idiot. He stated intent, followed up on it, continued with it.

    I understand the “wait him out” crowd. I have conflicting feelings on that.

    Why risk one more second if the lives of your men are at stake? Then we’d be equally angry they wasted their time and didn’t just burn the place to the ground.

    Fact is: The police can’t win. Damned if they do, damned if they don’t. And it’s mostly self-inflicted.

    But we sure as hell don’t either playing these dumb logic games. Was due process applied to Charles Whitman? He didn’t even publish a rambling manifesto.

    My $0.02 – Lord, I’m getting tired of all this.

  25. Jaynie59 says:

    When I first discovered this blog, through links from other blogs, I knew the liberal shills and libertarian jerks would come out in force. They had to. Bob is such a good writer and makes so much sense that his blog had to be targeted. So the comments by the shills and jerks on this thread don’t surprise me at all. I wish conservatives would recognize that there is a concerted effort on the part of the Left to infest conservative blog comment sections with their swill. But they don’t. They fall for the “free speech” and “courtesy” and “agree to disagree” crap that liberals use to undermine or silence conservative arguments.

    Anyway. The point I want to make is one that keeps being overlooked when conservative bloggers write about Dorner and his killing spree. Everybody keeps referring to him as a “cop killer”. Yes, he did kill cops. But his first victim was not a cop but the DAUGHTER of a cop. This lowlife scumbag coward didn’t have the balls to go after her father, who represented him in the hearing that got him fired, he stalked and murdered that mans 27 year old daughter as she and her boyfriend were sitting ducks in a car. The coward. The racist coward, by the way. She was Asian. That poor girl and her fiance were ambushed and killed because Dorner wanted revenge on her father and didn’t have the guts to go after him. So he killed a defenseless woman.

    Next, he ambushed a cop car stopped at a red light. Nothing I’ve read said he even knew who those cops were. They, too were sitting ducks. Every other murder was committed while he was trying to escape.

    Dorner was a coward. He went after the daughter of the man he blamed for his firing. His union rep. He killed her in cold blood as revenge and because he was a racist. Even the Mafia doesn’t go after families. Anyone who considers this lowlife some kind of antihero is either an ammoral ahole or a progressive tool using moral equivalence to attack conservative values.

  26. UncleZeb says:

    1. Homeowners insurance will compensate the homeowner since he did not intentionally set the fire. That is the key to fire coverage.
    2. I do not understand the drivers license being found since on Feb 6 he threw his ID and Police Badge out the window.
    3. I have no problem with him being killed if necessary, my concern is with the rush to do so when he is surrounded. This is after the two incidents where the LEO’s fired on two other vehicle with no warning due to them believing it was him in the trucks.

    Number 3 makes it look like the LAPD had something to hide and wanted him silenced.

    • DAN III says:

      Hey smart guy, Uncle Zeb….you sound just like the neocon Bob Owens. How do you know if the guy whose property the bastards with badges burned down had insurance ? If so, how dare you assume to know the coverages of his alleged policy.

      • Mudlark says:

        Dan you never fail to demonstrate your pathetic ability to repeat the party line. Do you suppose the responsible parties will not reimburse the owners.

        They are not Obamaists like you and your merry band of neoMarxists.

  27. MonkeyLeader says:

    My two cents.. for whatever it’s worth.

    Dorner definitely brought this upon himself. He was an active shooter and seemed to have no issue going out in a blaze of glory (according to what is being reported). The police forces that were after him had every right to take him down in any way possible because he was a threat to the populace as a whole (so long as that way didn’t also endanger civilian lives.. hello LAPD shooting up two Mexican women driving a different truck while delivering newspapers).

    BUT, once they chased Dorner into that cabin, the SBSO I believe, had a duty to shift from attack to contain. Dorner was trapped with no possible way of successfully escaping, he was surrounded. He was no longer a direct threat to civilians.

    I believe the LEO’s had a duty to keep him contained and to negotiate his surrender to bring him to trial. It wouldn’t be the first time a barricaded active shooter wasn’t talked into surrendering. That’s what negotiators do best.. using psychology to get into these peoples minds and changing the outcome for the best and in peaceful ways.

    I would rather this guy be taken alive, so that all the facts of this case can become public record through the court process. I also want due process to be conducted. Everyone, no matter how vile and disgusting, deserves their day in court. It’s one of the great things about the US system that makes people want to immigrate there. Denial of due process is something that is found in dictatorships and tyrannical regimes.

    Otherwise, why not just call in a Predator strike on this cabin and vaporize him? That would be the safest thing for the police and everyone else. One missile hit and all of the problems go away. He was dangerous wasn’t he? He wanted to kill cops didn’t he? So, why not remotely kill him? I would hope that no matter what state the US becomes, that this never becomes reality. Otherwise, everyone should be worried about the State. It’s hard to protect yourself, if you have a real grievance, when a missile strike is just a laser designator away to keep you silenced.

    Did the police forces that surrounded the cabin get overzealous in forcing Dorner out of the cabin. I believe so. That is why they used CS gas. The wanted to make his environment uncomfortable, so that he’d have to leave to breath and see and in doing so, he’d either surrender or go out a ‘guns a blazing’. Hell, they even probably wanted the third option, where he takes his own life.
    Do I blame them for it? No. It’s basic human psychology. They wanted this guy badly for what he’s done to their fellow officers.
    But, I would hope that our police forces are more professional and trained then that, to overlook their need for revenge. I would hope that once they contained the threat, they can start using other means to bring a resolution to the situation that is less lethal then having the criminal shot by police or shot by their own hand.

    I would hope that what happened at Big Bear was a last resort type of situation, that all options had been expended before CS gas was tossed into the cabin.

    In the end, I’m glad that no further harm came to civilians or the police. A burnt down cabin can be easily replaced and I have no doubt that the police will pay for the property loss if the insurance doesn’t pay for it (most jurisdictions have a crime victim compensation fund for these types of situations).
    I’m not sad that Dorner is gone. In a perfect world, I would have rather he surrendered and had his day in court, but we don’t live in a perfect world. He created the circumstances of his own demise. He could have easily surrendered and spent his remaining days in prison. Hell, he could have even used the court system to his advantage and tried to get off on a technicality or insanity defense. But, he took the option that he felt was the only one he had and took his own life. Which, was probably the safest and most expedient way to end this whole tragic affair.

  28. Rob Crawford says:

    Bob, I saw one guy justifying Dorner’s murder of his lawyer’s daughter by saying “he was in war mode”.

    Well, OK. Let’s say he was. When someone “in war mode” purposefully targets an unarmed civilian, they become “unlawful combatants”. They remove themselves from the protection of the laws of war. No one is required to accept their surrender; they could surrender and then be shot immediately, without trial.

    • UncleZeb says:

      Would that give the LEO’s authority to determine when a criminal is in “War Mode”? Very slippery slope.

      • Rob Crawford says:

        Yes. But I wasn’t saying that was what happened. I’m saying I read someone trying to justify the murder of an innocent person that way.

        I don’t think the police had the choice of bringing Dorner in alive. He was committing suicide by cop, just in a particularly long, drawn-out way.

  29. Jax says:

    Dorner was a child who was throwing a tantrum for not being in the “boys in blue club” (gang) anymore. Can’t say I’ll lose sleep over them trying to smoke out a leftist murderer who supported gun control.

  30. UncleZeb says:

    Do not interpret any of my comments as support for Dorner.

  31. Chief661 says:

    @ Mudlark I was a firefighter for 20+ years. I never worked for DMV, or as a teacher. I’m just saying this was wrong based on the information currently available. I also no longer trust LEO and I worked with them during my active fire service/EMS years. I met some good, some not-so-good. Some were just a_holes who liked to hassle people, firefighters included. Hell I had one cop follow me to the scene of a an alarm at a multi-family condo and break my balls because according to him, I “should have known it was only an automatic alarm” and why was I responding with lights and siren? I asked him how he knew that and he walked away. But I digress. They have become militarized and overly aggressive. They are way too quick now to shoot first and ask questions later. Erik Scott and Jose Guerna come to mind. I don’t care one whit about Dorner or LAPD/SBCS; I care that the people who are being selected and trained as LEO don’t have the right type of personality characteristics for the job. It is stressful and dangerous, but it has become ALL about them coming home safe and I’m really sick that this has become the reason they can get away with using deadly force when, if you or I did something similar, they would lock us up and throw away the key. This crap has to stop. I don’t know about you but I worry, maybe that’s too strong a word here so let’s say I am concerned that some night, or early morning, a SWAT team who got an address wrong will come kicking down my front door. Is that being paranoid? Given what these guys did, how much restraint could I count on if I woke up, grabbed my S&W 40 to meet an unknown threat and met them at the door? How about NONE. I am armed so I now die. Maybe even my wife and dog as well since, well after all they felt threatened and just had to defend themselves so they could go home safe. Right. Bob is wrong on this one, sorry.

    • Jaynie59 says:

      What’s wrong is taking this incident and turning it into an attack on conservatives as defenders of the police. As an ex-liberal, I see how conservatives open themselves up to accusations of “right wing extremism” with their knee jerk hero-worship of cops. I grew up in the white suburbs and every contact I’ve had with cops, save one, has been terrible. No, I’ve never been arrested. I’m referring to social situations and incidents my friends have had with cops. I’ve met a lot of cops and every one of them, with one exception, as been an arrogant ahole. So I get it. I’m not saying conservatives should go around trashing cops, but the hero worship is cringe inducing to me and I wish they’d stop and think about it before rushing to always take the cops’ side no matter how bad the situation is.


      This case has nothing to do with that. Dorner was a cop. I think we can all guess how he got hired in the first place, and how bad he must have been to get fired. But even that doesn’t matter.

      Dorner stalked and killed the DAUGHTER of the man who represented him at his hearing. Think about that a minute. His union rep at his hearing. Not any of the cops who decided against him. His rage was directed at his union rep. And that coward killed that poor girl because he didn’t have the balls to go after her father and he wanted her father to suffer a fate worse than death.

      Dying in a fire was too good for that lowlife scumbag. Justice was served.

      • Chuck says:

        SOME who think of themselves as “Conservative Republicans” hero-worship cops. Scratch the surface and you’ll find most of them are big-government, statists who loves them some social security, medicare, corporate welfare and chickenhawk warmongering.

        Come on over to the “little r” republican, constitutionalist, liberty-minded conservative side and you’ll see that cops are generally looked at with suspicion at best, and most certainly not looked at as heroes.

        I think you mistake the alarm that many of us see at the abuse of government power and the out of control abuse of deadly force by the police as support for Dorner. That is not the case. We abhor Dorner because of what he did (or was alleged to have done) and because HE WAS ONE OF THEM. The point is, just like Dorner, the police didn’t seem to care how many civilians they shot, cars they wrecked or houses they burned down to get their man.

      • Mudlark says:

        Res ipso loquitur. Seek help.

    • Mudlark says:

      Chief there are idiots in every walk of life. There are bad police officers. There are some departments that are corrupt. But there are also people who hate authority and losers who hate society, as we see by their comments. The question is simply did the police overeact to a man who said he had C4, a shoulder fired missile, and was trained as a sniper and during his peaceful activities killed four people, stole three vehicles, held how many hostage? An individual who published a document that was erratic and threatening. Did the police have good reason to treat this man as a rabid manic?

      Now you may say you fear SWAT teams and Obama’s storm troopers. I believe there are over 2.5 million people in the past month who agree with you and have voted with their pocketbook and are preparing to defend against Commissar Obama and his storm troopers. But to equate them with the LAPD and your fears with a very real threat is at best, questionable.

      If the police use excessive force they are subject to extreme penalties. In the past ten years I have seen the show trials against police. No one speaks for the victims. You’ll notice how due process is invoked as it was some sort of holygrail. It is invoked by people who have no intention of being in police work, putting themselves in harms way or care the least about the victims or their families.

      • Chuck says:

        There aren’t a few bad apples. There aren’t “some departments that are corrupt.” The entire system is broken. Your police department is part of the standing army the Founders warned us about.

        You can’t have it both ways Mudlark. Statism is evil whether it is Federal, State or Local. The enforcers of statism are the boys in blue, of which I assume you are one (either that or one of their sycophants). You attempt to establish your bonafides by mouthing all the words against Obama and then you go on to defend the LAPD’s actions. All of them apparently, because you gloss over the excesses they committed in the name of “officer safety” prior to Dorner’s retreat to the cabin.

        At any rate, we are not fooled. It ain’t ATF or the FBI that will be used to confiscate guns, it will be the locals. Especially in Cali which is way ahead of the FedGov in the gun confiscation business.

        So, is LAPD the good guys when they enforce unconstitutional state and local laws but the Feds are the bad guys when they enforce unconstitutional Federal laws? How does that work? Will you obey your masters when the time comes?

      • Mudlark says:

        Chuck if you ever bother to read the Federalist papers you’ll notice the founders thought the idea of both local, state and federal governments was required because men are imperfect.

        Now unlike you and your pal Obama, I am not a god. If you think you will gain the support of good citizens within the police and security forces by imitating Dan and Fatboy I can only assume you are flying a false flag. I don’t habve to establish my bona fides with the likes of you. I paid my dues. Your mala fides are evident to even the partially engaged. No one could be as dull as you appear therefor I have to assume you are of the same ilk as the Obama thug brigade. If I am wrong it is because you are just too crazed to be out on your own.

        So get up on your soap box and demonstrate your ignorance once again. Your comments would be comical if they weren’t so bizarre.

      • Chuck says:

        There’s a term for your ilk Mudlark: “agent provacateur.”

        Your deliberate obtuseness is a tired and shop-worn tactic of the progressive troll.

      • Mudlark says:

        Chuck I never interfere with someone who is so ignorant that the depth of their coIf you were capable of making a coherent argument based on facts and logic we are still waiting for it.

        But convictions based on their feelings creates a blackhole of misinformation and delusion. Clearly you are happy flying a false flag. If you are capable of making a coherent argument logically and supporting it with the relative evidence, we are still waiting for it to appear.

        But continue posting. Its fun to watch someone with the IQ of an eggplant rave and rant. “Your police department is part of the standing army the Founders warned us about.” Really? Try reading the constitution imbecile, you’ll notice among the few requirements of the Constitution is to provide for a standing army and navy.

        Perhaps you could enlighten us to when “all” police forces became part of the “corrupt” system. Paranoid, delusional, psychopath are all terms which are too limited to describe the scope of your problem. Have you considered a career as a lawyer for the ALCU?

  32. sullivanhollow says:

    somethings fishy why did they find two ids and wallets? one in San Diego last week and then one in the cabin after it burned to ground with only charred remains? How did the 2nd id survive the fire?

    • Bob says:

      Not really that fishy on the surface. Cops often carry their badge and department ID in a specific case, and their driver’s license in a regular wallet with their credit cards, photos, etc. The real question is why Dorner had LAPD ID and a badge. That claim sounds fishy to me.

      As for finding his DL in his wallet, that isn’t very surprising, if when he committed suicide he was sitting on it or landed on his back. Most wallets are leather (generally flame and heat resistant, which is why leather gloves are used by welders and grill jockeys), and if his entire body weight was in effect blocking flame/heat, an intact license should be expected.

  33. Phelps says:

    This libertarian disagrees with you. Was the commander boxed in? Sure. Too bad. That’s what the job entails. Sometimes the suspect boxes you in. Sometimes you have to wait. You know who decides to break the rules rather than wait? The criminals.

    Dorner wasn’t convicted of anything. He was, despite overwhelming evidence, still simply a suspect. He still had his rights to due process. When they burned that house down around him, they enacted a summary execution, with no judicial oversight.

    That’s murder, and it puts San Bernadino PD on the same level as Dorner.

  34. Marty says:

    Bob said “He had another chance to surrender when the tear gas was deployed…They deployed CS gas grenades. CS isn’t a flamethrower. It isn’t the equivalent of pouring gas on the building that will set the entire structure up in a flash, giving Dorner no final chance to escape.”

    Check this video. Check the sheer volume of gunshots as the smoke rises. How, pray tell, could ANYONE surrender during that volley?

    • Bob says:

      Marty, the video you showed was from the second firefight mentioned in the article, and the white smoke you see is coming from the smoke grenade Dorner threw when he tried to make a break for it and shoot his way out.

      This was at least 30 minutes before LEOs tried to tear gas, much less the CS.

      • DAN III says:

        Well Bob….will you defend your beloved bastards with badges who murdered Jose Guerena ? You statists who hide behind the cloak of conservatism are in for a rude awakening.

        You’re another shill for big government. Oh….and yes, I hate what this country has become. You and your boy Mudlark can celebrate together as your beloved bastards in blue continue their attacks on the Constitution.

        Remember Jose Guerena !

    • Mudlark says:

      Can’t wait for Dan to start yelling Der Fahnen hoch. He is soooo gay.

  35. Declan says:

    Why are libertarians so unpalatable to republicans?

    Why is OK to circumvent the letter and the spirit of the law in some cases?

    How can the letter of the law be expected to be the corner stone of American society if it’s not written in …well..stone and doesn’t apply equally to everyone?

    A few people have cried about how the cops did what they had to do to stop a mad man and end the possibility of further killings. Bullshit!

    They were in control of the situation and had the SUSPECT locked down. They don’t even know with certainty who they executed, just like they had no clue who was in the blue Toyota Tacoma when they riddled it with bullets.

    These guys are supposed to be the tip of the spear, the law enforcers, the good guys…

    As it is, they acted like a bunch of angry thugs, bent on vengeance,justice be damned! Vengeance and Justice are not the same thing.

    If we accept extra-judiciary executions now, we will never be able to go back and with one swift and secretive change of the rules, anyone could be a “justified” target of it.

    Welcome to the Judge Dredd era!

    • Bob says:

      The SBSO was not remotely “in control of the situation,” nor was the scene remotely “Locked down.”

      No police force on the planet (nor sane human being) would make that claim when a heavily armed murder suspect was still in control of his weapons, in cover.

      This sort of absurd statement is why radicals such as yourself (libertarian, conservative, liberal, or otherwise) will never be taken seriously.

      • Declan says:

        It’s you who’s absurd, every step of the way. By their own admission, the police were in control of the situation. A weapon in the hands of a barricaded suspect does not remove control from the police. In the majority of cases where SWAT teams have a barricaded suspect contained, the suspect is armed but they eventually get talked down and out.

        I’m a radical because I can see the very slippery slope that you this leads to?

  36. rumcrook says:

    You people crying for dorner are the very definition of crackpots. I mourn for this nation in its time of moral confusion. Bob is right and morally clear. I would like to see one of you deficients explain your position to the seven year old child of the officer killed outside the cabin.


    • Mudlark says:

      Nice comment. These people have weighed the dead who are innocent of any crime and found them wanting in comparison to the “rights” of Donner the choirboy. Can you imagine any of them on a jury?

    • Declan says:

      Wow! Did you learn the “standing on dead bodies” technique from barak obama personally?

      What about the two innocent ladies that the police just about executed? What would you explain to their families?

      And what about all the other innocents that were served a large helping of miscarriage of justice by the cops? What would you tell their families?

      If you want play the emotional card, you will lose because the police haven’t been the people’s heroes for a very long time.

      There is a very long list of atrocities that police have been committing against the people they swore to protect and serve, in America.

    • Phelps says:

      Did you pay Piers Morgan his royalty fee for using his Dance of Blood in that comment?

    • Mudlark says:


      You do realize the word execute means to kill don’t you? Exactly where did yougo to school? Or does the fact that both woman are alive just present an Orwellian problem for the representative from the Ministrry of Truth?

      • Chuck says:

        True, he should have said “attempted execution.”

        The fact that those two women and the other gentleman who was first rammed by a cruiser and then shot at is not for lack of effort by the police. Lack of marksmanship, certainly, but lack of effort, no.

        I hope the police are paying you for being such an enthusiastic apologist for their excesses.

      • Mudlark says:

        I will not defend the police for firing without being sure who they were firing at, probably one the first things they should have learned.

        I will not however try to defend a murderer who sought out people who had not wronged him and attempt to defend him as you have Chuckie.

        It is apparent to the casual observer that you are just another one of Obama’s team of race husytlers, malcontents, and neoMarxists.

        And what are they paying you to post such party line BS?

  37. rumcrook says:

    What’d you do Bob? Get a stick and whack a hive of basement dwelling cranks?

  38. John Jacobs says:

    Wow a lot of anti-government and anti-state fervour on this site lately. That can only be a good thing…this government has become far too powerful since 9/11 and its time to take them down a few notches.

  39. Chris Watson says:


  40. bob r says:

    This debate is not new:
    A Man for All Seasons. The saddens me how many have not learned the lesson.

    Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!
    More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
    Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
    More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man’s laws, not God’s– and if you cut them down—and you’re just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.

    Yeah, name redacted (appears to have) violated Man’s law and needed to be brought to account for same. But the LAPD and the SBSO are supposed to be subject to Man’s law also. I won’t go so far as to say they did commit murder but the available evidence suggests they may have — and there is little doubt that some of the LAPD did commit other crimes during this fiasco. Too bad I have absolutely no confidence that a proper investigation will be done.

    • Mudlark says:

      Wonderful example of the devil quoting scripture. Did Donner give the benefit of doubt and the protection of the law to anyone of the four people he cut down?

      I expect you had hoped the Donner could have added to his score.

  41. ASM826 says:

    I don’t have to be a “radical libertarian” to see that the LAPD was trying to execute him. They were firing at pickup trucks that might have sort of resembled Dorner’s truck. The only reason the police didn’t murder 3 people going about their own lives is bad marksmanship. When they trapped him, they burned the dwelling. I’m not whining about it, I’m simply stating the obvious after reading the transcript of the police radio calls.

    It is the hard cases, the situations where the police have their personal feelings involved, where they most need to be professional. They failed and you support that failure as a course of action.

    I suspect you will see more of this, it is the direction we are sliding. Homeland Security didn’t 1.4 billion rounds of combat ammo for range practice.

    And for what it is worth, I think murdering the children of people you have some perceived gripe with is depraved. I think shooting at law enforcement officers is just as bad as shooting little old ladies delivering newspapers. I think Dorner was guilty of capital murder and a slew of other crimes and I think he would have been convicted and deserved the death penalty if convicted.

    • Bob says:

      This was 80 miles from LA. Incident was handled by SBSO, as every picture clearly shows Deputies, not LAPD officers.

      Two different places.

      Completely separate sets of incidents.

      • DAN III says:

        Hey smart guy, Uncle Zeb….you sound just like the neocon Bob Owens. How do you know if the guy whose property the bastards with badges burned down had insurance ? If so, how dare you assume to know the coverages of his alleged policy.

  42. Chief661 says:

    @rumcrook – No crackpots here and I don’t live or work in a cellar. Those of us who served in the military and who worked or work with LEO understand the mindset at play here. I don’t hate cops, I just no longer trust them; nor do I have that unquestioning belief that they will act within the law that I had tended to have when I was still an active firefighter/EMS pbccer. Note I say that I tended to have because I always tried to evaluate who and what I was dealing with on a scene (fire/rescue) when LEO were involved. All that I want is for them to be held to a higher standard of care when using force, especially deadly force, and to follow the Constitution. Is that too much to ask? If you can’t see the logic and reason in that request, it’s you who are the crackpot. Bob’s position on this is wrong this time IMO in giving them what I see as a pass because Dorner was a really bad guy.

    • Bob says:

      I did not give the cops a pass whatsoever.

      Dorner was a heavily-armed active shooter, refusing to surrender.

      IMO, the cops exercised a rational use of force attempting to use regular tear gas, the threat of the building being brought down around his ears, and finally introduced CS to the front of the building in an attempt to smoke him out with a fire.

      Dorner’s response during the time period he was inside the home included two confirmed firefights and an attempt to shoot his way out.

      When SBSO used the CS grenades in the front, Dorner had every opportunity to drop his weapons and come out the rear with his hands up.

      Instead, Dorner fired a single shot, which we all seem to agree was suicide, and we can expect the coroner to confirm that later.

      What was that word again?


      Not murder.

      !5 or so minutes after Dorner’s suicide, his ammo began to cook off, and the SBSO scene commander decided to let it burn off before putting the firefighters at risk.

      • Phelps says:

        So if I set your home on fire, and use gunfire to prevent you from leaving the burning structure, as long as you decide not to burn to death, I’m off the hook?

        That’s a convenient way of looking at things. You don’t seem to have held the same opinion when the state did it in Waco.

  43. Chief661 says:

    @rumcrook – Correction that should read EMS provider. Sorry

  44. Chief661 says:

    Thanks Bob, I get your point he ate a bullet hence suicide. I don’t agree with your conclusion given what I see as the bigger picture and which I feel I have clearly outlined already; but that is only my opinion. We are on very dangerous ground with LE in America today, but that is also a reflection of where we are as a society. I heard a progressive congressperson today on internet radio outline why we need to get rid of the Constitution and why it no longer matters. Couple that with the heavy anti-gun rhetoric of some politicos which, if it prevails means the 2A is indeed dead. I believe Obama, his DOJ thugs and some states intend unilateral anti-gun action beyond what Obama announced post Sandy Hook. They will come for our firearms and it won’t be the military, it will be state and local PD perhaps with the military as backup depending on the intel they have as to what you own,etc. Mortem Ante Servitutum.

  45. Tom Wolff says:

    (Sorry, delete that last, I edited out the cuss words! :D )

    I’m a little late to this party, but I think I must toss in my 2 cents. Bob, I’ll join in saying that I like your place here and your excellent writings. You’re usually insightful and resonate with free Americans in a very satisfying way.
    Right on.

    However, I also think you are dead wrong on this one, man.
    Let’s review the events one more time:

    1.) Dorner was a POS, and much more. Given. However, all we REALLY know about him is what we have been spoon-fed by the LE and media. That creates reasonable doubt.
    2.) The entire LE apparatus was saturated with fear for many reasons, and they were definitely out to eradicate Dorner. No capture option, just kill the SOB. That was wrong. Simply killing suspects/perps is NOT the proper MO.
    3.) Once they had him isolated, and YES, he was completely contained, they proceeded to the point where they tried to burn him out, which is pretty chickensh*t to most all of us. It just reeks of Waco. The nuclear option also shouldn’t be standard procedure.
    The cops knew damned good and well that they were causing a fire, and I’ll bet you $1000 that if he had ran out with his hands up, he would have been hit 3 or 4 times as they fired a few hundred rounds at him. They didn’t want him to be captured alive.
    4.) There’s a lot of intel that will never be known now, because they dusted the bastard, or more properly, he smoked himself. But the mechanism of his death is irrelevant. Point is, he won’t ever be able to give us his true motivations, straight from his mouth.
    5.) Despite any desires to the contrary, even Dorner deserved that benefit of reasonable doubt. Given that he was not going anywhere, this was an execution. Suicide simply facilitated the predetermined outcome.

    The whole frikkin’ circus was a series of blatant statist cowardice and excessive force. Shooting the wrong truck, etc.?

    Just as an aside, if it came down to even 1% of gun owners fighting back? If this is how these cops act? It would probably be a clusterf*ck of epic proportions.

    The thing that really pisses me off is that they burned down some poor guy’s cabin, and I’ll bet another $100 that he’ll have a hell of a time getting reimbursed for that, not to mention probably losing stuff that can never be replaced. That was wrong all over the place. Hell, the whole damned LE response was was disturbingly wrong.

    If this is what we have to look forward to in every encounter that LE/Feds have with US? We should ramp up our plans for resistance. There will be no surrender. Bank on that. Plan accordingly.

    And as far as “radical libertarians”? Do you really want to piss off maybe half of your readership? I thought us libertarians and you conservatives were on the same side here. Don’t start creating divisions where none should exist, man. We have enough problems already.

    So, rethink this, as many have asked you to do. This picture is MUCH larger than this one incident. It is prescient of what will be acceptable behavior on the part of LE/Feds when this goes hot. Do we really want these options to be part of the ROE? I sure don’t. Pandora’s Box, ya know?

    Take care, man. I hope you’ll see this differently, and soon.