Indeed, in that post you seemed to be excusing his actions based on assumed mental issues, but I'm not accusing you in that murder is justified over anger. Big difference.

I. Assumed. Nothing. Becasue I know that I have no valid info on the whoel case - so I lack the database to even form a hypothesis, not to mention a theopry or a concluded assumption.

I could as well have said "even if the reason just would have been the red beard of his father or the blue eyes of his mother".

However, still not excusing anything and still not assuming anything, IF he would be found as mentally ill indeed, some serious psychosis, a progredient mental dementia, a serious personality syndrome, a psychopathic character as defined by DSM and or ICD, or whatever it is, that maybe would explain why he became what he became, or why his life pushed him over the edge where others would nto have ticked out, or why it all broke out of him due to that disease.

But then he would have been a sick man indeed - and depending on the circumstances and diagnosis, somebody being technically, causally responsible for what he did, but morally not, at least not in full. You cannot sentence a patient with Tourette syndrome for speaking offensively, or sentence a White for having the genes to have a white skin, or sentence a patient with a brain tumour destroying his mind and personality for having a brain tumor. You cannot sentence somebody for developing a personality disorder or suffering from schizophrenia, and having suffered a trauma that kicked him over the edge and led to lasting personality changes.

If you wanted to say that medical reasons to often are abused at courts, while holding no ground (the "patient" is a simulating non-patient only, he and his lawyer lie about his health "issues") - to that I would agree. At least to a wider degree than is politically correct in Europe, but to a probably lesser degree than maybe is common in the US.

When you keep saying "if" he is mentally ill, etc., you're assuming.

"However, still not excusing anything and still not assuming anything, IF he would be found as mentally ill indeed,"

There is nothing at all to suggest he was mentally ill or insane, everything points that he let his anger reach a point to he became vengeful. Certainly anyone that starts killing innocent people isn't mentally stable, that doesn't mean they suffer a mental disease. It is clear he had great mental capacity, planning and a point to prove. I see no sign of a severe mental illness, but plenty signs of anger and revenge. He clearly knew right from wrong.

The fact is 90% of people with serious mental illness still know the difference between right and wrong and don't get involved with crime or hurting others.. I do agree when people are seriously mentally ill, don't know right from wrong, others have to get involved and take responsibility, even if that means putting them in an institution to protect others.

Like it or not, many people CHOOSE to follow their anger to the point of murder, they become evil. Dorner became evil, he planned and picked his targets to hurt others. He clearly knew what he was doing and why. We all deal with anger, that doesn't give us the right to kill. It's clear this isn't a case that he didn't know right from wrong.

I think you misunderstood what I said. I never said that opposition to gun violence causes gun violence, what I said was support of gun control caused gun violence; at least in this case. That would be a X causes Y situation.

In the case of Chris Dorner we have a man who couldn't control his temper over being fired from the LAPD (over a case of using excessive force), latching on to an idea that assault weapons are bad. An idea that has filled the media in recent weeks, along with the constant media coverage and indeed glorification of those who commit murders with firearms.

We have society that does not condone violence while we have a media that makes famous those who do commit violence. For a disturbed individual such mixed messages are dangerous, especially if they see themselves as betrayed by society or somehow better than it.

Much of what happens in the media is politically motivated, such is the case with guns. It will be interesting to see if Dorner used the gun control theme, knowing it would help give him a good guy image to many. It's shocking how the liberal media hates guns, but glossing this guy over.
This is how we create copycat Killers.

Sigh.

If there would be pink gas clouds on Io, it could maybe be a hint for pink elephants eating pink grass and producing pink gas.

But I do not assume that it is so.

If you would hop on one leg and never walk on two, it could be that your other leg is dysfunctional or you are phobic to walking on two legs, or your other leg is amputated.

But I do not assume it is so.

If you would consume LSD, you would see fancy colours and bright lights. By saying that, I do not express an assumption that you recently consumed LSD.

Enough of this now, before I feel like been pulled by force back into a Kindergarden. Since you have never been inside his head, you just do not know what it weas that made him tick the way he ticked. I just think it would be good to know, and I do not take YOUR assumptions (thats what they are! ;) that he just ticked out for granted. You do not know, nor does anyone at this stage. Maybe (or probably) we will never know.

I think it was him ... he was hiding right in front of one search party in a cabin across from where they searched.

They heard one single shot after the cabin (accidently???) caught on fire.

Someone tried to sneak out the back door and went back inside.

The witnesses he tied up saw him plus the hi-jacked truck.

Pretty sure it was him and now the argument over who get the reward starts.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...nanswered.html

I'll not get into the pink clouds or LSD, but it sounded like a good time.

I never said he got ticked off for granted, he wrote a complete manifesto why he was ticked and how he would seek revenge. This isn't a complex case, he clearly fumed in his anger for years. What made him finally snap years later, you're right, we may never know, but it's clear he knew right from wrong and chose to do wrong. He meets no criteria for mentally deranged or ill. In fact, few meet the criteria for the insanity plea, it gets a lot of attention, but only used in about 1% of murder cases and usually fails.

...," Dorner wrote. "Unfortunately, this is a necessary evil that I do not enjoy but must partake and complete for substantial change to occur within the LAPD and reclaim my name."

Dorner called Randall Quan and told him that that he "should have done a better job of protecting his daughter," an innocent woman he gunned down. This was calculated revenge.

I'm not sure what you need to know, he clearly had issues, we all do, he chose not to take correct action and blame others. Society isn't the blame here, he was a murderous coward, now a dead coward.

of course and why not? Is the L.A. PD more or less racist than the:

-Frankfurt PD:

http://www.thelocal.de/national/20121108-46055.html


- Baden-Württemberg state PD:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-847831.html

- Dessau PD:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/01/oury-j11.html

- Berlin PD:

http://www.freedominfonetwork.org/pr...acy-in-germany

It seems like the body has been confirmed as the baddie. That's good. :yep:

In the light of this confirmation, his manifesto starts looking pretty sad. I mean he ranted for what seemed to be an endless wall of text about how he is practically invincible, always a step ahead and always has the initiative. I suppose his infallible masterplan had one fatal flaw: the reality.

Remember the guy that shot up the other police down in LA and Riverside:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ornia/2024341/

Now they say they won't pay due to Dorner killed himself before they could arrest him ... :hmmm:

Quote:

Some California donors, including the city of Riverside, have withdrawn their part of more than $1 million in reward money offered for the capture and conviction of cop-killer Christopher Dorner, who committed suicide after a 10-day shooting spree in Southern California last month. The city of Riverside had pledged $100,000 in reward money for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Dorner, who was suspected of killing four people

Don't trust gov't, what a novel idea. :D

Even if they arrested him that wouldn't have meant a payout.
"Arrest and conviction"...terms and conditions always apply.

Always read the small print