“We Are All Chris Dorner”- Crazy Support For Accused Cop Killer

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well, "gun rights" are interpreted in part to enable an individual to do just this....violent rebelion against government.

No, they exist to protect us from Government Tyranny, can you point to the government Tyranny this crazy fuck is defending himself from? The Crap he is complaining about happened 4 years ago.

Absolutely. The LAPD is the government. The City of Los Angeles government. He was a part of that, and felt the government oppressed his career and used false evidence to terminate him. He felt a government agency had caused him great harm, and he pick up a gun and went violent.

That is the same concept, on a local level, as the Dont Tread on Me crowd.

I ask....what would trigger you other nutjobs out there? Dangerous stuff all this anti-govt shit.

I would say the difference is that Dorner could have let it go and found another job.
Instead he goes on a killing rampage. His actions are way out of line when for what was done to him. This isnt a case of "A well regulated militia" there is no consensus amongst the populace. It's just him.
I hate to admit it as a conservative,but I dont hate the guy as much as I should,because if what this guys says is true I understand his anger. I dont condone what he's doing obviously,but I understand it.
It's a pretty serious thing to destroy a mans life's work.

As for what it would take for me to take up arms against my government?
Thats a very good question. Probably needs a thread of it's own.
I a few thoughts on it. But I have to admit I've never really thought about how it might actually start.
So many variables......

 

[HUGGY]

Best thread EVAAAAAHHHHH !!!!!!

 

[Katzndogz]

Dorner blames the LAPD for more than the lost job. He blames the LAPD because his mother is estranged from him and his wife left him after 30 days of marriage.

It makes as much sense as Adam Lanza blaming a first grade class because his mother wanted to institutionalize him.

 

[HUGGY]

This all makes as much sense as Kelly Clarkson getting a grammy!

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Simpson, king, dorner..........poor, oppressed, innocent little darlings

 

[MisterBeale]

It wasn't ONLY the single incident of reporting a female officer for police brutality. He followed that up. He reported ANOTHER officer for pissing on his jacket. Laboratory tests proved that the jacket had nothing more than water on it. Water that Dorner might have put on the jacket himself. That's when he was discharged, not because of the complaint about Teresa Evans.

Once the police learned that Dorner would tell any lie, commit any act, to prove that he was an embattled victim, the police had no choice but to get rid of him.

Wow, that's some interesting allegations. Could you please post that link. I have a few friends following this story that would be interested in that side of the story.

 

[bodecea]

It wasn't ONLY the single incident of reporting a female officer for police brutality. He followed that up. He reported ANOTHER officer for pissing on his jacket. Laboratory tests proved that the jacket had nothing more than water on it. Water that Dorner might have put on the jacket himself. That's when he was discharged, not because of the complaint about Teresa Evans.

Once the police learned that Dorner would tell any lie, commit any act, to prove that he was an embattled victim, the police had no choice but to get rid of him.

Wow, that's some interesting allegations. Could you please post that link. I have a few friends following this story that would be interested in that side of the story.

Yeah, I'd like to see that stuff too. I live in SoCal and I've not heard the "pissing on a jacket" story.

 

[MisterBeale]

No, they exist to protect us from Government Tyranny, can you point to the government Tyranny this crazy fuck is defending himself from? The Crap he is complaining about happened 4 years ago.

Absolutely. The LAPD is the government. The City of Los Angeles government. He was a part of that, and felt the government oppressed his career and used false evidence to terminate him. He felt a government agency had caused him great harm, and he pick up a gun and went violent.

That is the same concept, on a local level, as the Dont Tread on Me crowd.

I ask....what would trigger you other nutjobs out there? Dangerous stuff all this anti-govt shit.

I would say the difference is that Dorner could have let it go and found another job.
Instead he goes on a killing rampage. His actions are way out of line when for what was done to him. This isnt a case of "A well regulated militia" there is no consensus amongst the populace. It's just him.
I hate to admit it as a conservative,but I dont hate the guy as much as I should,because if what this guys says is true I understand his anger. I dont condone what he's doing obviously,but I understand it.
It's a pretty serious thing to destroy a mans life's work.

As for what it would take for me to take up arms against my government?
Thats a very good question. Probably needs a thread of it's own.
I a few thoughts on it. But I have to admit I've never really thought about how it might actually start.
So many variables......

Yup, that's the crux of the issue. We are living in an increasingly corrupt authoritarian soft facist state. But on the other hand, it is our friends, our neighbors, and our very own families administering this system. WE are the ones responsible for this very system.

So where do we draw the line? Isn't it better to raise awareness and to walk away then to kill each other? The corruption starts when we are young. We are indoctrinated with all sorts of moral and ethical foundations upon which this great nation was founded and built on. But then, we find as we grow old, when we get involved in both government and corporate structures, these ethics are not applied fairly across the board. There is nepotism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, and misogyny at every turn. The worst part of it is, in some organizations, it is sanctioned. Whether it is "officially" sanctioned or not, it makes no difference, it still ruins lives.

When people who cling to the establishment and defend it's institutions with their every breath don't care for the truth, what do they do? They attack the victims of these attacks. So naturally, when a person like Christopher "goes off the reservation," it is much easier to attack them.

None of us can condone it. But all of us are worried, very worried. If you aren't, you are in denial. There are only two solutions coming, a tighter, larger, more expansive police state, or an end to the old way things have been done. It begs the question, why do we have a quarter million troops stationed all over the world fighting so called "terrorists" and involved in half the world's nations internal affairs, when we have the world's largest population of non-violent offenders? Our prisons are bloated, our families are decimated, and our communities are crumbling.

Oh yeah, I remember why we have empire, so we can ship in that contraband and keep the profits from that prison system rolling in. A decimated public is easier to manipulate and control, easier to profit off of.

You are bound to have this sort of mess when the leaders at the very top are the real criminals. He's gunning for the wrong people apparently.

 

[HUGGY]

Geez ....!!!!

I wish he had started in New Jersey.

George S. Barrett has a startling copper/lead deficiency. Causes more pain to more Americans than any man un U S history.

Bing Local

 

[MikeK]

I would say the difference is that Dorner could have let it go and found another job.

Which would be the choice made by a psychologically stable individual. But Dorner is clearly a paranoid schizophrenic, a condition which manifests obsessive fixation on some personal circumstance to the exclusion of all other related factors. This disorder lies at the root of most of these killing sprees.

Instead he goes on a killing rampage. His actions are way out of line when for what was done to him.

Not as he sees it. For him, feelings of persecution, possibly because of racial concerns, whether real or imagined, over a long period of time, accumulate. Then something which by itself seems relatively trivial triggers years of quietly accumulated rage and this is what happens.

This isnt a case of "A well regulated militia" there is no consensus amongst the populace. It's just him.

I hate to admit it as a conservative,but I dont hate the guy as much as I should,because if what this guys says is true I understand his anger. I dont condone what he's doing obviously,but I understand it.

It's a pretty serious thing to destroy a mans life's work.

As for what it would take for me to take up arms against my government?

Thats a very good question. Probably needs a thread of it's own.

I have a few thoughts on it. But I have to admit I've never really thought about how it might actually start.

So many variables......

I clearly understand what you're saying. But the main difference between you and Dorner is you are rational.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah! Judging by the number of posts credited to you, you aren't working much! Seems as though you have a penchant for hanging around the house tapping at your keyboard...heh heh heh!

I don't work I direct where the work goes and who does it.

Then you are not a plumber. You are a liar!

Well I guess I need to turn my plumbing license in because you said so.
FAIL......

 

[EriktheRed]

HEY RIGHTIES, GET BACK TO ME WHEN NO ONE ON YOUR SIDE OFFERS SUPPORT TO TERRORIST KILLERS

 

[bigrebnc1775]

HEY RIGHTIES, GET BACK TO ME WHEN NO ONE ON YOUR SIDE OFFERS SUPPORT TO TERRORIST KILLERS

An obama supporter goes rogue and you think the right will support him?
Just how hard did you hit your head when you made this spin?

 

[emilynghiem]

HEY RIGHTIES, GET BACK TO ME WHEN NO ONE ON YOUR SIDE OFFERS SUPPORT TO TERRORIST KILLERS

Hi Erik:

I'd be happy to hear it from even ONE Democrat (besides me) who admits
that the federal health care mandates contradict the liberal pro-choice
stance against government imposition on personal and medical choices.

Doesn't even have to be the whole Party.
Just 1-2 serious enough to petition the President and Party to admit
this is conflicting and the bill should be treated as optional and open to any
reasonable alternatives to avoid govt discrimination and regulation by religious conditions.

If you want something the whole Party might admit to,
how about admitting the bill is to force single-payer incrementally?
Might have better luck getting more of the Party on that page.

If you want to get BOTH Parties to admit something together,
why not ask them BOTH to agree to pay for the respective policies their
party supports but the other does not; so the Republicans who
supported the Iraqi War spending can pay all that back to the taxpayers,
were the Democrat who didn't agree to spend all those billions,
can in turn take their refunded taxes and invest those resources to
fund jobs and systems of health care reforms any way they please, and leave
the Republicans free to fund social programs privately outside of govt, such
as building teaching hospitals that offer public health services through student
and resident interns while they received their medical education and training.

How's that? to get BOTH parties to quit pushing their own
policies or agenda on dissenting members of other parties to pay.
And each pay for their own programs and write them up any
way they want to fund them in a sustainable, cost-effective
and constitutional way. Why not?

Erik get back to me when you can find even 1 or 2 party leaders
from both parties willing to team up and work on PROPOSING that.

It doesn't even have to be the whole party or a formal agreement, just a few
committed enough to petition the others to organize teams, get their
party policies out of federal govt and pay for the programs
directly instead of bogging down govt with all that bureaucracy
that not all sides or taxpayers agree to pay for anyway!

See you later!

 

[EriktheRed]

HEY RIGHTIES, GET BACK TO ME WHEN NO ONE ON YOUR SIDE OFFERS SUPPORT TO TERRORIST KILLERS

Hi Erik:

I'd be happy to hear it from even ONE Democrat (besides me) who admits
that the federal health care mandates contradict the liberal pro-choice
stance against government imposition on personal and medical choices.

Doesn't even have to be the whole Party.
Just 1-2 serious enough to petition the President and Party to admit
this is conflicting and the bill should be treated as optional and open to any
reasonable alternatives to avoid govt discrimination and regulation by religious conditions.

If you want something the whole Party might admit to,
how about admitting the bill is to force single-payer incrementally?
Might have better luck getting more of the Party on that page.

If you want to get BOTH Parties to admit something together,
why not ask them BOTH to agree to pay for the respective policies their
party supports but the other does not; so the Republicans who
supported the Iraqi War spending can pay all that back to the taxpayers,
were the Democrat who didn't agree to spend all those billions,
can in turn take their refunded taxes and invest those resources to
fund jobs and systems of health care reforms any way they please, and leave
the Republicans free to fund social programs privately outside of govt, such
as building teaching hospitals that offer public health services through student
and resident interns while they received their medical education and training.

How's that? to get BOTH parties to quit pushing their own
policies or agenda on dissenting members of other parties to pay.
And each pay for their own programs and write them up any
way they want to fund them in a sustainable, cost-effective
and constitutional way. Why not?

Erik get back to me when you can find even 1 or 2 party leaders
from both parties willing to team up and work on PROPOSING that.

It doesn't even have to be the whole party or a formal agreement, just a few
committed enough to petition the others to organize teams, get their
party policies out of federal govt and pay for the programs
directly instead of bogging down govt with all that bureaucracy
that not all sides or taxpayers agree to pay for anyway!

See you later!

Well, 2 ways to approach this one:

I can either say,

1) This has what to do with supporting violent nutbags whose causes one might agree with, if not their actions??

or

2) You're right that there are many things about the ACA that are less than ideal, but ya know what else?

How's that? to get BOTH parties to quit pushing their own
policies or agenda on dissenting members of other parties to pay.
And each pay for their own programs and write them up any
way they want to fund them in a sustainable, cost-effective
and constitutional way. Why not?

Cuz you wouldn't get shit done, that's why. It would be nice if this could have averted one of the worst foreign policy blunders of all time, but it'snot realistic to think anything else more positive could be done, either. And if polls on the ACA are to be believed, a plurality of people wanted at least something done.

So tell ya what: you keep pushing your reps to get rid of the cursed Obamacare <fake-sounding movie scream> and then guys like me can push for something a lot closer to single-payer.

Oh and this, too...

how about admitting the bill is to force single-payer incrementally?

Yes.

 

[LeftofLeft]

I thought all you conservatives supported the right of the People to take up arms against a tyrannical government.

Make up your minds.

Are you saying the current government is tyrannical? Thank you for making the case......still can't see taking arms against innocents like Dorner did. That's more on the side of Anarchy.

 

[nitroz]

This guy killed INNOCENT PEOPLE, not just cops.

This is no bueno. He is just as bad as the LAPD, if not worse!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I thought all you conservatives supported the right of the People to take up arms against a tyrannical government.

Make up your minds.

Are you saying the current government is tyrannical? Thank you for making the case......still can't see taking arms against innocents like Dorner did. That's more on the side of Anarchy.

More like Jerrod Loughner I guess working twice on the campaign of a democrats corrupted his mind.
Is their a connection between the two?

 

[hazlnut]

SACRAMENTO (CBS13) – The ex-cop accused of three revenge killings left behind a long manifesto outlining all of his grievances and observations.

That manifesto has given investigators some clues, but they still don’t know where is Christopher Dorner.

Law enforcement spent four hours searching his mom’s Orange County home. They took out 10 grocery bags filled with evidence.

Dorner lost his job with the Los Angeles Police Department in 2008. His manifesto vows revenge for that; and, surprisingly, thousands of people actually support him.

It’s hard to believe but there are those out there who sympathize with the man targeting police officers.

One Facebook page is proclaiming Dorner for president. “We propose electing a man who could no longer sit idly by and watch as malicious tyrants abuse the innocent.”

The description on “We Are All Chris Dorner” chillingly says, “Yes, this is war.”

Keep reading…
Support Growing For Former L.A. Officer Accused Of Killing Spree « CBS Sacramento

Welcome to TeaBagger NRA America....

 

[LeftofLeft]

maybe this is more proof that the right doesnt understand what black people face with police forces in this country.


The man is a complete Nutter.


was he driven nuts by years of fighting a system gone mad from the inside?


He is likley suffering ptsd from his war or police career.


If nothing else the LAPD messed up really badly in hiring this guy in the first place huh?


Why did the LAPD not mkes sure this guy got the mental healtcare he needed.


Instead they just fired him when he became a problem.

In so doing they unleashed a madman on the public.

They jsut tossed a lunatic that they trained with weapons onto an unsuspecting public.

Gee thanks LAPD

Blame The System. Blame Whitey. Just don't hold a Black Man Accountable.