0
BillyVance

Ex-LAPD cop Chris Dorner's manifesto

Recommended Posts

Quote

Hell, by lawrocket's definition not even most of the great genocidists if the 20th century could be called insane...even though they clearly were.



Hmmmm. Stalin eliminated threats and maintained his supporters. I prefer to think of Stalin as evil. Same with Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. North Korea - okay - I'll tip my hat to "crazy" over there.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry Paul.

Your endless repetition of the same mantra is not going to make it true.

P.S.

Ted Kaczynski during interviews, considered himself an addict.
“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

You're right.
Then again, it never had to because it already is.


Are you using the "common definition" of true or the legal definition?



The same one that knows people are human beings and not corporations. In other words, the real truth, not simply some legal one and also knows Newspeak is Double Plus Ungood.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my last post I said Ted Kaczynski but I was thinking about Ted Bundy.

Sorry for the mix up.
“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In my last post I said Ted Kaczynski but I was thinking about Ted Bundy.

Sorry for the mix up.



Reading this thread over the past couple of days I've been thinking about comparing the mental and legal states of Ted Bundy, Ted Kascinski, Timothy McVeigh and Christopher Dorner. Haven't had chance to devote necessary time to it, but it'd be interesting to discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. In one sense, I can see that Ted Bundy has a better claim for insanity than any of the aforementioned.

Kaczynski, McVeigh and Dorner share something that I think it the dividing line between the common understanding of “insane” and what is “sane.” Insanity (Loehner, Lanza, Hinckley) is shown when the person’s actions are a result of some inner compulsion rather than by planned and deliberate choices. All three were transformed by their choices over a period of months or years.

In a sense, their actions may be the result of “cognitive dissonance.” We see examples of cognitive dissonance on this very forum all the time by “confirmation bias.” How many people here have individual subjective views on things and interpret news, facts and evidence as supportive of their views while ignoring evidence contrary. Yep –“cherry picking.” That’s “cognitive dissonance” – rather than using facts to change your perception, you use your perception to interpret facts around you. This whole forum might as well be called “Cognitive Dissonance.” NOBODY is excepted from it. Not even scientists – because they are human.

What did Kaczynski do? Because of his own ideals, he made deliberate choices to form his idea of the world around him. His enemy was modern technology and he turned himself by his choices into the Unabomber by directing his anger toward technology. (Just as people blamed Bush for everything, now blame Obama for everything, and view facts as unacceptable). It wasn’t an organic cause. And consider Kaczynki – he only started killing AFTER he removed himself from society. He conformed his behavior to the expectations of society. He deliberately removed himself from those influences and built his own rules for a world in which he was the sole arbiter of perception and reality. His perception became his reality because there was no contrary influence. He chose to become the Unabomber.

He wasn’t born the Unabomber. He made himself into the Unabomber. Having known a victim of the Unabomber (I coached his son in soccer) it took some thought to form this opinion and I had to overcome some heavy leanings. Flippant dismissal by “he must be insane” is itself a manifestation of cognitive dissonance. No, Quade, it is not an idea that does fits into your long-held beliefs. It requires looking at the evidence on the other side and seeing things in a different way. (Understanding, of course, that I may in fact be falling victim to this very same cognitive dissonance).

McVeigh did the same thing. He conformed his actions to the expectations of society and culture. He also was not a person who bore some organic compulsion to destroy the federal government (such people typically do not enlist). Rather, he made deliberate choices based upon his subjective beliefs. He found a group of like-minded people who reinforced his beliefs and allowed him to consciously choose to interpret facts to fit his own conceptions. (Like Kaczynski, he also had difficulties establishing relationships with women. Sounds like the same thing with Dorner. This may be a subject of study). McVeigh, through his deliberate choices and not through some innate compulsion chose to become the OKC Bomber.

Viewing Dorner’s manifesto, the same thing applies. Dorner spent his whole life complying with the expectations of society. However, like McVeigh and Kaczynski, he also had a scapegoat. His thing was “honor” and his enemy was the LAPD (whom he had a life goal of joining). His manifesto suggests cognitive dissonance. He chose to become what he is not from some organic compulsion but through deliberate choices made over a period of years.

There’s the difference to me.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

You're right.
Then again, it never had to because it already is.


Are you using the "common definition" of true or the legal definition?



The same one that knows people are human beings and not corporations. In other words, the real truth, not simply some legal one and also knows Newspeak is Double Plus Ungood.



If you disdain the legislature's ability to legally define things and/or for the judiciary's ability to legally interpret things, you do understand this creates a bit of a hurdle in any argument that the government should ever do anything, yes?

You can't "lock up the dangerous people", "keep guns away from the crazys", "help the poor", "make the rich pay their fair share", "take a common sense approach to defense", or "leave no child behind" because none of those imperatives actually mean anything on their own.

You can campaign saying those things, you can make signs that say those things, or you can camp out in tents in city parks and yell those things at anyone within earshot, but if you actually want to accomplish anything you're going to need to define what it is first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I have disdain for is the concept that only one group of people can define or redefine terms that have existing meanings. This becomes especially troubling in cases such as "enhanced interrogation" or "targeted killing." When you give one group, in this case lawyers, the exclusive right to redefine the language, who knows what kind of shit they will invent to reframe your rights? This was precisely the issue Orwell was talking about when he invented Newspeak. Language absolutely has to remain the construct of the common man. It can not be allowed to be redefined exclusively by "the system."
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Looks like they've found and engaged him. 2 officers wounded as of this moment.



Yep.... he broke into a cabin, took two people hostage and tied them up, but one broke free and escaped and called police. He hightailed it out of there in a stolen pick-up truck right into a police roadblock where he shot the two deputies and then fled on foot. He's pinned down at the moment. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/cvplive/cvpstream3

news updates here: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/12/police-checking-reports-that-ex-lapd-officer-dorner-sighted/
"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Just love the air to ground video....;) I really like it when they show the two officers on the side of the building...:S The news is run by a bunch of nitwits

Killler...



Yeah, it was driving me crazy. No audio, no captions. Fuck the shit. :D

Dorner is now barricaded inside a cabin and he exchanged gunfire with police while inside. SWAT team just arrived, so I think this will be over soon.
"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What I have disdain for is the concept that only one group of people can define or redefine terms that have existing meanings.



So are you in favor of redefining terms? Or against it?

Quote

This becomes especially troubling in cases such as "enhanced interrogation" or "targeted killing."



Or redefining “insane.” There’s a definition that has been established for quite some time. You won’t find me objecting to “nutter.” But “insane” has a very specific and important definition to many people, like me, who understand that in matters of government it’s important to have clear definitions to avoid treating everyone as “insane” because it’s so overbroad.

[reply[When you give one group, in this case lawyers, the exclusive right to redefine the language, who knows what kind of shit they will invent to reframe your rights?



Um – legislators (those people who are elected representatives) provide the definitions. Or, committees of people like health care specialists. I’m not defining “insane.” I’m going off of the definitions provided by people I didn’t even vote for.

Quote

This was precisely the issue Orwell was talking about when he invented Newspeak.



Correct. I’m talking about “old speak.” You’re bringing in “newspeak.”

Quote

Language absolutely has to remain the construct of the common man. It can not be allowed to be redefined exclusively by "the system."



It has to be the province of both. But all provinces must be respected and not infringe on the other. You may have your definition for a “button.” It differs from that of a tailor. You may read your trade periodicals where the term “heat” is used. And it means something different from periodicals I read where I want to know the weather. You may see in your line of work “Pan left.” I may see on Food Network a pan on the left.

Sure, language must be accessible to all. But it is, I think, both unwise and disingenuous to think that trade jargon is useless. I also think that when discussing matters of law (which, like it or not, you do on a regular basis) that there must be some appreciation for the difference between what is understood by the public at large that does not apply to policy and procedure.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

LAPD just asked the news choppers not to show live feed...
REALLY?? they have to ASK?! :S



LAPD and news work together quite a bit to coordinate what is and isn't cool to show at any given moment. Yes, the Police have to ask and technically the news doesn't have to oblige, but when asked they do. News choppers in LA are a situation unlike anywhere else in the country. Procedures for everything. Actually quite nice most of the time even if it seems odd to those not familiar with the drill.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~20 years ago there was an incident in Denver where an armed suspect was on the run, and the cops were in pursuit. There were *no* law enforcement a/c in the air, but there was a news helicopter.

As the helicopter watched, he saw what the cops didn't: The suspect changed vehicles, commandeering a truck and it's driver, then drove past the cops w/o the cops realizing it. The pilot was watching the suspect get away as he finally got a radio message through to the cops, so he resorted to getting involved himself: He dropped down into a hover in the path of the oncoming suspect, stopping the truck and giving the cops a chance to catch up.
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I recall this.

News choppers in LA have also come to people's rescue during floods and other stories they've been covering. I believe the cooperation between them and emergency services is why they are allowed to do so much.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

LAPD and news work together quite a bit to coordinate what is and isn't cool to show at any given moment. Yes, the Police have to ask and technically the news doesn't have to oblige, but when asked they do. News choppers in LA are a situation unlike anywhere else in the country. Procedures for everything. Actually quite nice most of the time even if it seems odd to those not familiar with the drill.



I think it's insane that the LAPD has to even ask.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0