What's your point? If they broadcast it over a radio I don't think they were attempting to hide the fact.
Burn him out to the rear. He either comes out waving a white flag or out in a blaze of glory.
**** him.
They appealed to him to end this multiple times. He chose poorly.My point is that they weren't even sure it was him in the ****ing building. And there's a thing called due process. Burning a man alive ain't it.
**** him.
And you have multiple times. And no one has disagreed with you.I would say the same for the morons who opened fire on the two women delivering papers and attacked the guy on the highway.
And you have multiple times. And no one has disagreed with you.
My point is that they weren't even sure it was him in the ****ing building. And there's a thing called due process. Burning a man alive ain't it.
I have noticed a conspicuous shortage of ideas on a meaningful solution for this problem, as opposed to plenty for Dorner, all of which included assorted methods by which he may become dead.
I've openly stated several times the actions of those officers were wrong and should be punished.I have noticed a conspicuous shortage of ideas on a meaningful solution for this problem, as opposed to plenty for Dorner, all of which included assorted methods by which he may become dead.
It's becoming more and more evident that IndyDave merely has an axe to grind. I don't believe he's capable of seeing past his jaded view. And that's not a slam, actually it's a damn shame.I said in another thread they should be arrested for crimnal recklessness, or manslaughter if they actually killed someone. They were obviously geeked up, and poorly trained.
It is hardly a secret that my general opinion of police based on personal experience is pretty low
It's becoming more and more evident that IndyDave merely has an axe to grind. I don't believe he's capable of seeing past his jaded view. And that's not a slam, actually it's a damn shame.
I wouldn't call it an axe to grind, but rather cumulative experience indicating a certain aggregate of people to be less than trustworthy and dangerous to liberty. I can't help the fact that the results are what they are. I can understand that anyone would tend to identify with their own group. I would also consider it reasonable to expect that a good/honest/honorable officer is probably accustomed to working with others of similar character. Based on my observation of corrupt departments in which good officers don't last long, I consider it reasonable to believe that the opposite is true--that corrupt officers would be squeezed out of honest departments.
What I consider to be a damned shame is that I am left with observations that form the foundation of my conclusions. My jaded view will change when the police cease to be a greater threat to my well-being than the criminals, and not until then.
My point is that they weren't even sure it was him in the ****ing building. And there's a thing called due process. Burning a man alive ain't it.