View Full Version : Report: Ex-Cop Christopher Dorner Is Now a Target for Drones
Teh One Who Knocks
02-11-2013, 12:21 PM
Eric Limer - Gizmodo
http://i.imgur.com/Rif5KNzl.jpg
Christopher Dorner, the ex-LAPD cop who allegedly killed three people has been on the run, successfully evading police, for over a week. To finally track him down, it seems that law enforcement is pulling out all the stops. According to the Express, Dorner is now a target for drones, among the first ever on U.S. soil.
The Express quotes a "senior police source" as having said:
The thermal imaging cameras the drones use may be our only hope of finding him. On the ground, it's like looking for a needle in a haystack.
Riverside Police Chief Sergio Diaz, a joint leader of the force tasked with finding Dorner, has confirmed—though not explicitly—and is quoted as saying "We are using all the tools at our disposal." And a third, vague conformation comes from Customs and Border Patrol spokesman Ralph DeSio who is quoted as saying the agency is on the "forefront of domestic use of drones by law enforcement," while declining to elaborate further.
It wouldn't be the first time drones have ever been involved in a law enforcement operation in the U.S. As early as 2011 there was an incident in which Predator drones hunted down fugitives and directly lead to their ultimate arrest. Still, the practice is far from widespread. Presumably, the drones looking for Dorner's heat signature are unarmed. Presumably.
Should armed drones actually be authorized to fire on Dorner, then it would be a first, and frankly a terrifying precedent. And considering all the collateral damage that's already happened, adding drone fire to the mix would be a horrible idea. Unmanned eyes in the sky could be the ticket to ending the week-long search, but you can't unset a precedent.
Acid Trip
02-11-2013, 03:00 PM
All the government needed was an excuse to start using drones domestically.
I find it interesting how the media keeps forgetting to mention how this guy is a die hard liberal/Obama supporter.
of course, "its not relevant"...
but if he were a tea partier, that would be the first, third, fifth, sixth, eighth, 11th and fourteenth thing mentioned about him every single article.
PorkChopSandwiches
02-11-2013, 05:00 PM
:cheerlead:
Hal-9000
02-11-2013, 05:02 PM
I hope along with thermal imaging they use facial recognition....
run Porky run! :shock:
I don't see what the big deal is - they are using the thermal imaging on a drone to help find him. No different then using a helicopter.
Hal-9000
02-11-2013, 05:09 PM
I don't see what the big deal is - they are using the thermal imaging on a drone to help find him. No different then using a helicopter.
the implication may be that teh drone will use weaponry to take him out...
the implication may be that teh drone will use weaponry to take him out...
versus some other cop that will shoot him when he refuses to give up? I don't see the difference
also the OP said "Presumably, the drones looking for Dorner's heat signature are unarmed"
Acid Trip
02-11-2013, 05:14 PM
versus some other cop that will shoot him when he refuses to give up? I don't see the difference
also the OP said "Presumably, the drones looking for Dorner's heat signature are unarmed"
Presumably is used before and after that statement. They might as well have said "we have no clue if they are armed or not but we are assuming not".
Hal-9000
02-11-2013, 05:15 PM
versus some other cop that will shoot him when he refuses to give up? I don't see the difference
also the OP said "Presumably, the drones looking for Dorner's heat signature are unarmed"
I'm just guessing from the context...please don't drone me :(
in other words, the drone is armed and they dont want to cause an even bigger ruckus, but "since its important enough for us to forgo Rights, we'll just keep hush about it"
yall that wondered how drone warfare against american citizens starts, here it is.
"he's too dangerous to worry about capturing and bringing to trial"
ok, good enough excuse, send up the drones.
Hal-9000
02-11-2013, 05:19 PM
apologies....I hummed 'Send in the Clowns' after that last post :oops:
Presumably is used before and after that statement. They might as well have said "we have no clue if they are armed or not but we are assuming not".
That was from the article - there was no quote from anyone in charge. the author is clearly trying to imply something that he/she has no knowledge of. They may as well have said that they will presumably not use a nuclear missle to take him out, presumably.
Loser
02-11-2013, 05:30 PM
I don't see what the big deal is - they are using the thermal imaging on a drone to help find him. No different then using a helicopter.
Well, considering they are shooting up random Toyota tacoma trucks because its the same make and model, not even same color, I can only imagine what will happen with drones.
in other words, the drone is armed and they dont want to cause an even bigger ruckus, but "since its important enough for us to forgo Rights, we'll just keep hush about it"
yall that wondered how drone warfare against american citizens starts, here it is.
"he's too dangerous to worry about capturing and bringing to trial"
ok, good enough excuse, send up the drones.
Really... what is the difference between that and sending in a bunch of SWAT guys to take him out?
If the guy is bunkered down and shooting at everyone, and the cops are in harms way, I don't see the difference between a sniper shooting him or a drone attacking him - neither is giving him a fair trial, both kill him. Please tell me the difference.
Teh One Who Knocks
02-11-2013, 05:33 PM
Really... what is the difference between that and sending in a bunch of SWAT guys to take him out?
If the guy is bunkered down and shooting at everyone, and the cops are in harms way, I don't see the difference between a sniper shooting him or a drone attacking him - neither is giving him a fair trial, both kill him. Please tell me the difference.
If the cops corner him, they can try and negotiate a surrender....you can't surrender to a drone. Push button and boom, game over.
Well, considering they are shooting up random Toyota tacoma trucks because its the same make and model, not even same color, I can only imagine what will happen with drones.
exactly the same thing (if the drone is armed - which there is no indication that it will be or not) - they will kill him before he kills someone else. They use the drones on the borders all the time
If the cops corner him, they can try and negotiate a surrender....you can't surrender to a drone. Push button and boom, game over.
Agreed - they can try to negotiate - however I still don't see a difference between pushing a button for a drone and giving the green light to a sniper to take him out... both have the same ending, one just has a bigger boom
Hal-9000
02-11-2013, 06:08 PM
sniper shots are cool....my fave features a guy alternately sitting on a lawn chair and then standing for a couple of hours in a public place
the sniper shot the trigger guard/his finger and the dude dropped the gun....it was a clean, awesome shot
Really... what is the difference between that and sending in a bunch of SWAT guys to take him out?
If the guy is bunkered down and shooting at everyone, and the cops are in harms way, I don't see the difference between a sniper shooting him or a drone attacking him - neither is giving him a fair trial, both kill him. Please tell me the difference.
Precedent. You think its a good idea for our airspace over the entire US to be subject to drone search? How are judges going to interpret that in light of the 4th amendment? This is opening a can of worms, and you can be your sweet patoot that the government wants to be able to quickly and efficiently crack down on whatever they feel is important that day or month. Do you honestly think if they find him using a drone they're NOT going to take him out?
What country are you from again? (seriously, not saying that to be pointed.)
I just dont get the willingness to let the government use any and all methods they deem appropriate for any situation, regardless of its legitimacy or legality - and then also back any efforts by the government to crack down on individuals for whatever the government deems inconvenient to them. Are you asking for the totalitarian police state that's literally a key's turn away? (them's gov official words, off the record of course...not mine.)
Acid Trip
02-11-2013, 06:27 PM
Agreed - they can try to negotiate - however I still don't see a difference between pushing a button for a drone and giving the green light to a sniper to take him out... both have the same ending, one just has a bigger boom
It's called collateral damage.
/curious about MrsM's view of the courts knocking out infrared footage the government obtained of people's grow lights in their houses and trying to use that as the evidence to bust them.
but hey, it was IR, and it was "visible from the sky"...
Precedent. You think its a good idea for our airspace over the entire US to be subject to drone search? How are judges going to interpret that in light of the 4th amendment? This is opening a can of worms, and you can be your sweet patoot that the government wants to be able to quickly and efficiently crack down on whatever they feel is important that day or month. Do you honestly think if they find him using a drone they're NOT going to take him out?
What country are you from again? (seriously, not saying that to be pointed.)
I just dont get the willingness to let the government use any and all methods they deem appropriate for any situation, regardless of its legitimacy or legality - and then also back any efforts by the government to crack down on individuals for whatever the government deems inconvenient to them. Are you asking for the totalitarian police state that's literally a key's turn away? (them's gov official words, off the record of course...not mine.)
Not all drones are armed - and Yes - I do believe that if a drone finds him, they will send in police/SWAT to get him and not blow him up. UNLESS - he is bunkered down and the order is given to kill. Then either way he dies and I really cannot see the difference.
Are you saying that you would rather see more people die instead of using technology that could save lives?
It's called collateral damage.
but the end result is still the same
/curious about MrsM's view of the courts knocking out infrared footage the government obtained of people's grow lights in their houses and trying to use that as the evidence to bust them.
but hey, it was IR, and it was "visible from the sky"...
Apples and Oranges to this topic - Currently police and other forces use IR to find people, the fact that this is on a drone versus a helicopter to me is not different - infact makes more sense because a drone can probably fly longer and there is less risk to the pilot.
as for my opinion to your post - if you don't want to get caught - don't do anything illegal
Hal-9000
02-11-2013, 06:51 PM
MrsM is from Canada btw....
sorry, but I view "if you don't want to get caught - don't do anything illegal" as entirely subject to the whims of TPTB. (why do you think the ar-15 was invented at sandy hook? or why they said omg the shotgun is black, its an assault rifle!) also evidenced by millions that toke up and that's technically illegal too. point is, people do not comply with arbitrary and useless laws. its the reason why people dont ever do the speed limit unless there's a cop right there.
so while ethics and morality may say one thing, the law may say something entirely different, entirely because of the whims of a group of people that got together and pushed for it.
like if you wanted to use your status in government "to try and make it a safer place, since who the hell needs assault rifles, they're overkill" - wow, we just witnessed that happen. just liike we witness them "pass" obamacare, even though that was a farce too. ILLEGALLY DONE. yet...well, we're the government, we say its good for you, therefore it is, and now you are subject to it whether you like it or not.
"we dont have a spending problem"
"we're not going to monetize the debt"
"we need to make housing more affordable...er, we need to make sure any tom dick or harry can get a loan regardless of their ability to pay"
I mean, point after point after point...all arbitrary garbage that enriches the connected at the expense of the feckin plebes.
the government has trashed the country to enough of an extent that they are honestly afraid of telling citizens the truth...
...the have bought billions of rounds of hollowpoints in the last year or two...
...they continue to explicitly hand over money to the big banks...
...spend without thought of how it'll be paid for...
...record amounts of people on disability and food stamps...
stock market more inflated than it was in 2008...
I look around and I see a government hellbent on keeping its grip on its power.
a government whose ends justifies the means
a government who will kill any citizen it finds inconvenient
I see a government that does not to wake the sleeping beast of its citizens, where every single one of them will be as scared as the LAPD is right now were the citizenry realize the extent of the government's transgressions, and they will do anything and everything they can to prevent that from happening.
PorkChopSandwiches
02-11-2013, 07:52 PM
http://www.facebook.com/IsupportCJD
I give up
I think every post relating to the US just needs 1 reply:
"I don't trust the government and they are all out to make me a slave to their agenda, They want my guns so we cannot fight back. This is because we are overspending and will be broke, so they will take all of my things to pawn to China so we can pay our debt. The democrats are only in power because of voter fraud and the single black panther guy that was standing at the polling station looking mean. If the Republicans were in power, nothing like this would happen and everything would be a perfect utopia. Oh and also the damn illegal immgrants have something to do with it. Praise Jesus "
PorkChopSandwiches
02-11-2013, 08:17 PM
Nailed It!
lol, if republicans were in power...we'd be seeing the red side of the coin instead of the blue. we'd be continuing our march towards insolvency. in fact if romney got elected, the revaluation-crash would come sooner than under obama, simply because there's more massive papering-over with pbama. are you forgetting who introduced the patriot act?
all I trust "my government" to do is restrict my liberties until they're confident I cant harm them, spend my tax money with such aplomb that they will continually need more, restricting my ability to do what I want, punish me arbitrarily for whatever they dont want me to do that I might want to do regardless of whether its harming anyone else, and make sure they and those connected will continually get favorable treatment no matter what venue.
how's about that town that wouldnt let a retired military guy into the town meeting because he had a gun on him? 160 of them showed up, many of them with a sidearm, demanding to know what the problem was. they wanted to know why the people that run the town might feel afraid of their "citizens"...this is exactly what TPTB at various levels dont want - because that would mean the end of their corner on the Power market.
redred
02-11-2013, 08:36 PM
i think they should give up playing hide and seek with him and just let him shoot a load of people till his ammo runs out :tup:
Muddy
02-12-2013, 01:15 AM
Due process!
a lil bit on economic freedom
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-02-11/whats-so-great-about-economic-freedom
I suppose if you cant connect the dots between drones and the totalitarian state and what this says...I probably cant get through to ya :mrgreen:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.