Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-13-2013, 04:37   #441
DustyJacket
Gold Membership
Directiv 10-289
 
DustyJacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Missouri, East of KC
Posts: 6,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
My understanding is that a "burner" is an incendiary grenade launched from an M79 launcher. Anybody can correct me if Im wrong here.
Not incendiary.
2 types of gas grenade.

One "pops" open and scatters tear gas dust (or liquid). It does not produce a lot.

The other type burns like a smoke grenade and produced a large volume of tear "gas" (dust actually, or particles). You need that volume to chase someone out of a building, cave, whatever, or to disperse a large crown outdoors. That is a "burner".

There is a risk that a burning smoke grenade or burning tear gas grenade can start a fire if used in a flammable structure.
__________________
"...our quick technology allows use to indulge our deepest stupidity and tastelessness with out first thinking...."

Last edited by DustyJacket; 02-13-2013 at 04:54..
DustyJacket is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 04:52   #442
jdavionic
NRA Member
 
jdavionic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,090
Well my Dad used to tell -
"when you begin to think you're invincable is when you're most likely to get beat down."

He used to have a similar saying about work - "when you begin to think you're irreplacable at work, you're most likely to get fired."

It's sad another officer lost his life. Hopefully Dorner is done. His acts have resulted in the deaths of 4 people with others facing a struggle to recover.
__________________
- JD

"No matter how bad it gets, if you're still alive it's just another bad day."
jdavionic is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 05:34   #443
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 35,552
Quote:
This message is hidden because G19G20 is on your ignore list.
Whatever you said, am absolutely certain it was wrong and no adult with normal intelligence shares your point of view.

Actually, from what I can see others quoting above, you don't know much about law...yes, Dorner can be shot by a police officer (not by a civilian) while running away, just to prevent him from escaping, even if he throws down his guns and isn't an immediate threat.

As Ohio Copper said, Tennessee v. Garner. Garner, by the way, made the rule stricter, because when officer Hymon of the MPD shot Garner in 1985, Tennessee law allowed the police to shoot anybody to keep them from getting away and the Supreme Court narrowed it down to people who had presented some deadly force threat to the officer or others.

What the law allows is deadly force and it's just as legal to do it by burning the house as by shooting (with regard to Garner - as to the owner of the house, it's less clear).
__________________
"Liberal" is when you hire others to use a guns to protect you, so you can pretend guns aren't necessary.

Last edited by Bren; 02-13-2013 at 08:26..
Bren is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 05:49   #444
2wheelDuke
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
Whatever you said, am absolutely certain it was wrong and no adult with normal intelligence shares your point of view.

Actually, from what I can see others quoting above, you don't know much about law...yes, Dorner can be shot by a police officer (no by a civilian) while running away, just to prevent him from escaping, even if he throws down his guns and isn't an immediate threat.

As Ohipo Copper said, Tennessee v. Garner. Garner, by the way, made the rule stricter, because when officer Hymon or the MPD shot Garner in 1985, Tennessee law allowed the police to shoot anybody to keep them from getting away and the Supreme Court narrowed it down to people who had presented some deadly force threat to the officer or others.

What the law allows is deadly force and it's just as legal to do it by burning the house as by shooting (with regard to Garner - as to the owner of the house, it's less clear).
Actually it wasn't just anybody but any fleeing felon, hence the burglar being shot. Since then, it's been restricted to fleeing felons that are posing a distinct danger to the public.
2wheelDuke is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 06:19   #445
4949shooter
Senior Member
 
4949shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Jersey Republik
Posts: 12,990


Well, I guess I was wrong, he wasn't froze to a tree.

It's more like the opposite.
__________________
"...the men under your command deserve your leadership."-OXCOPS
4949shooter is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 07:12   #446
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
My understanding is that a "burner" is an incendiary grenade launched from an M79 launcher. Anybody can correct me if Im wrong here.
As stated, it refers to a CS projectile that disperses the powder with heat. Yes, it carries a risk of fire, not a certainty.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 07:57   #447
Cav
Senior Member
 
Cav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 2,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
Are you telling me that a suspect that previously was alleged to have used deadly force becomes a justified target for deadly force by police absent an immediate threat to those police? In other words, even if the suspect isn't at that moment a threat (as in pointing a gun at YOU) that you can still kill him? While I think he did kill himself (pure opinion) and the burning actions were ultimately inconsequential, this is kind of a microcosm of this new policy that's popping up where the Powers That Be, local to federal, can just execute people based on past behavior or perceived threat level without any due process as prescribed by the law and the Constitution.
In the Great State Of Texas, if you are deemed a threat and used deadly force, than you shall be hunted down and met with deadly force. Yes, we can shoot people in the back as they flee, just like shooting at a vehicle that flees. Dont mistake America to all liberal states or all like CA.

Do you think a prision lets a convicted serial killer run away? Or do they take that 100 to 300 meter shot at his back?

Do you feel Police should let people escape when there are odds they will harm others? I mean if kill 50 people at a mall, and then drop your gun and then try to escape in car, do you not think that police will try to ram your car and use deadly force to stop you? Do you not think police will shoot at you to stop you?

Yes, you can become a target for deadly force, and in some states the Police dont even have to say "Freeze Police, Drop the Gun", we can just pull the trigger and stop the threat in some cases.
__________________
We need more restrictions on the 1st Amendment and less on the 2nd Amendment.
Cav is online now  
Old 02-13-2013, 08:00   #448
spcwes
Senior Member
 
spcwes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
My understanding is that a "burner" is an incendiary grenade launched from an M79 launcher. Anybody can correct me if Im wrong here.
No sir you are incorrect and your understanding must come from video games. "Burners" are a term I have heard used for any grenade gas or smoke that uses heat to conduct. We used the same for CS grenades while in the Army. But yea you are just reaching.

Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
Oh that "officer safety" thing I keep hearing about. Seems you can justify most anything as long as you claim "officer safety" once police start burning down houses with people inside. That's a scary precedent in the wrong hands and historically leads to cases where the wrong people are targeted or politically "unpopular" are exterminated. Don't get me wrong, I understand why it went down like it did in Big Bear. Im no moron. But I worry for the long term picture when things like that become policy and cops and gov't are able to convince themselves that such policies are fair and constitutional.
During the entire time he was in the cabin and right before there was a sustained gunfight. He shot two law enforcement officers a few hours prior to him being killed and one of those died at the least not sure on the other. You are reaching again trying to paint law enforcement as the fault in this case. This man was a murderous POS and has now killed what 5 people? With guns?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
That's all great and whatnot but whenever it becomes acceptable to burn houses with people inside (see: Waco) because they are an alleged and perceived threat, we have crossed the rubicon as a society that believes in the rule of law and have moved into Judge Dredd territory.

Im sorry but if you joined the police force and suddenly find yourself in a situation "too dangerous" to follow the rule book (you did say such things aren't policy) in ending the standoff with a suspect then you probably shouldn't be police. Plus there's a prohibition against something called "cruel and unusual punishment". Burning someone alive is what radical muslims do. Are you ok with doing what they do to address a problem?
You are just assuming based on ignorance (lack of knowledge) that they burned this guy alive lol. Here let me get some tinfoil out real quick before we go further.

Did you have anything and I mean anything that would show proof there was a fire set intentionally by law enforcement? Do you know or not if the suspect started a fire?
__________________
"We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American perception that each individual is accountable for his/her actions." -Ronald Reagan-
spcwes is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 08:31   #449
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 35,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2wheelDuke View Post
Actually it wasn't just anybody but any fleeing felon, hence the burglar being shot. Since then, it's been restricted to fleeing felons that are posing a distinct danger to the public.
You are wrong. "Fleeing felon" was probably the MPD's policy, but not the law. Tennessee law said "any means" necessary could be used to stop any fleeing person who was being arrrested:

Quote:
In using deadly force to prevent the escape, Hymon was acting under the authority of a Tennessee statute and pursuant to Police Department policy. The statute provides that “[i]f, after notice of the intention to arrest the defendant, he either flee or forcibly resist, the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest.” Tenn.Code Ann. § 40–7–108 (1982).5 The Department policy was slightly more restrictive than the statute, but still allowed the use of deadly force in cases of burglary. App. 140–144. The incident was reviewed by the Memphis Police Firearm's Review Board and presented to a grand jury. Neither took any action. Id., at 57.

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 4-5 (1985)
After the Garner decision (5 years after) they finally changed the statute to add the Garner standard:
Quote:
(a) A law enforcement officer, after giving notice of the officer's identity as an officer, may use or threaten to use force that is reasonably necessary to accomplish the arrest of an individual suspected of a criminal act who resists or flees from the arrest.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the officer may use deadly force to effect an arrest only if all other reasonable means of apprehension have been exhausted or are unavailable, and where feasible, the officer has given notice of the officer's identity as an officer and given a warning that deadly force may be used unless resistance or flight ceases, and:
(1) The officer has probable cause to believe the individual to be arrested has committed a felony involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious bodily injury; or
(2) The officer has probable cause to believe that the individual to be arrested poses a threat of serious bodily injury, either to the officer or to others unless immediately apprehended.
(c) All law enforcement officers, both state and local, shall be bound by this section and shall receive instruction regarding implementation of this section in law enforcement training programs.Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-7-108 (West)
__________________
"Liberal" is when you hire others to use a guns to protect you, so you can pretend guns aren't necessary.

Last edited by Bren; 02-13-2013 at 08:35..
Bren is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 09:11   #450
txleapd
Hook 'Em Up
 
txleapd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 6,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
Are you telling me that a suspect that previously was alleged to have used deadly force becomes a justified target for deadly force by police absent an immediate threat to those police? In other words, even if the suspect isn't at that moment a threat (as in pointing a gun at YOU) that you can still kill him? While I think he did kill himself (pure opinion) and the burning actions were ultimately inconsequential, this is kind of a microcosm of this new policy that's popping up where the Powers That Be, local to federal, can just execute people based on past behavior or perceived threat level without any due process as prescribed by the law and the Constitution.
Continuing Threat

Look it up.
__________________
1911 Club #75
Kahr Club #286
Lone Star Glockers #919


"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity” Sigmund Freud

Last edited by txleapd; 02-13-2013 at 09:12..
txleapd is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 09:18   #451
txleapd
Hook 'Em Up
 
txleapd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 6,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
That's all great and whatnot but whenever it becomes acceptable to burn houses with people inside (see: Waco) because they are an alleged and perceived threat, we have crossed the rubicon as a society that believes in the rule of law and have moved into Judge Dredd territory.

Im sorry but if you joined the police force and suddenly find yourself in a situation "too dangerous" to follow the rule book (you did say such things aren't policy) in ending the standoff with a suspect then you probably shouldn't be police. Plus there's a prohibition against something called "cruel and unusual punishment". Burning someone alive is what radical muslims do. Are you ok with doing what they do to address a problem?
Legally speaking It doesn't really matter if the fire started because cops pumped CS canisters and flashbangs in the house, or if they doused it in gas and lit a match themselves.

He murdered at least 5 people. The cops had been in a sustained gunfight with him, he was reasonably believed to be in possession of a .50 cal rifle, and was a continuing threat.

Deadly force is deadly force. If its authorized, it doesn't matter if you use a hammer, a handgun, or a house fire.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
1911 Club #75
Kahr Club #286
Lone Star Glockers #919


"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity” Sigmund Freud
txleapd is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 09:22   #452
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,488
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by txleapd View Post
Legally speaking It doesn't really matter if the fire started because cops pumped CS canisters and flashbangs in the house, or if they doused it in gas and lit a match themselves.

He murdered at least 5 people. The cops had been in a sustained gunfight with him, he was reasonably believed to be in possession of a .50 cal rifle, and was a continuing threat.

Deadly force is deadly force. If its authorized, it doesn't matter if you use a hammer, a handgun, or a house fire.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
I remember this from the academy when the instructor was talking about using deadly force and he gave a scenario where we were justified in shooting the guy. The whole class agreed that we could use our sidearms in that situation.

Then he goes, how about your gun jams or whatever, and you take out your folding knife and stab the guy a few times? Some people were hesitant and said probably not. The instructor said why not? If you are authorized for deadly force, it doesn't matter what deadly force you use.

Deadly force is deadly force. Might not be pretty and might not be what you think or what most people find acceptable, but it doesn't matter under the law. There's nothing that says you have to use one type of deadly force over another if it is called for.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 09:32   #453
spcwes
Senior Member
 
spcwes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,083
Yea one of the classes I was a part of I asked the class when you see an officer that is pinned down in a gun fight and the suspect is in front of you with his back turned as you pull in with your patrol vehicle what is the best course of action? Most responded to stop, get out and engage with the firearm but one who is now a patrolman with my agency said..hmmm I would run him over with my car!

I had a smile from ear to ear.
__________________
"We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American perception that each individual is accountable for his/her actions." -Ronald Reagan-
spcwes is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 09:33   #454
RyanNREMTP
Inactive/Banned
 
RyanNREMTP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 4,726
Fox News is reporting that there was a charred body in the cabin along with a wallet with the murderer's ID in it. Still like everyone else no rest until it's confirmed that the murderer is dead.
__________________
Support Free Range Shopping Carts on Facebook.
RyanNREMTP is online now  
Old 02-13-2013, 10:05   #455
LEOson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Middle America
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
Scanner recording here, clearly showing the cops intentionally started the fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCdqy...ayer_embedded#!

Regardless of what you feel about Dorner, we can not allow the rule of law to be pushed aside whenever it is expedient, particularly when that power is in the hands of the gov't. That's how this country got into the mess it's in now.
All I hear in that clip is them talking about deploying burners, which has already been stated is CS. So no I don't believe they intentionally set the house on fire.
LEOson is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 10:14   #456
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 45,485
Blog Entries: 1


damnant quod non intellegunt
TBO is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 10:25   #457
Mayhem like Me
Semper Paratus
 
Mayhem like Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 15,860
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEOson View Post
All I hear in that clip is them talking about deploying burners, which has already been stated is CS. So no I don't believe they intentionally set the house on fire.
Barricaded gunman 101, after it has been confirmed no hostages, surrender order, Burning Cs/Cn depending on preference.

This is the concept simplified for the simple.
__________________
How do you establish intent?
Well when a naked man is chasing a woman down an alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he's not collecting for the red cross...Inspector H. Callahan
Mayhem like Me is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 10:28   #458
spcwes
Senior Member
 
spcwes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
damnant quod non intellegunt
Even if they did the ones doing so here would not stop.
__________________
"We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American perception that each individual is accountable for his/her actions." -Ronald Reagan-
spcwes is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 10:55   #459
ICARRY2
NRA Life Member
 
ICARRY2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
That's all great and whatnot but whenever it becomes acceptable to burn houses with people inside (see: Waco) because they are an alleged and perceived threat, we have crossed the rubicon as a society that believes in the rule of law and have moved into Judge Dredd territory.

Im sorry but if you joined the police force and suddenly find yourself in a situation "too dangerous" to follow the rule book (you did say such things aren't policy) in ending the standoff with a suspect then you probably shouldn't be police. Plus there's a prohibition against something called "cruel and unusual punishment". Burning someone alive is what radical muslims do. Are you ok with doing what they do to address a problem?
I'm not a leo, but Dorner was not an alleged or perceived threat. He was an imminent threat. A threat where the actions of the police were absolutely 100% justified.
ICARRY2 is offline  
Old 02-13-2013, 10:59   #460
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 45,485
Blog Entries: 1


The ignore button can save you from seeing excrement, unless someone quotes it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 2
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?
TBO is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:30.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,123
275 Members
848 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31