Guns

Manifesto of Spree Killer Dorner: Work of Nut Job With No Connection to Reality

|

As Scott Shackford noted earlier today, the manifesto from Christopher Dorner, a disgraced former LAPD officer who has killed at least three people and is still at large, is the work of a deranged person. Dorner was bounced from LAPD for making false statements about a fellow cop and, judging from his writing, is no longer in contact with reality.

While various media outlets have posted excerpts from the document, the full text is online at Pastebin. It's a rambling catalogue of real and imagined sleights to Dorner, pro-gun-control statements, and shout-outs to and condemnations of a dizzying array of celebrities and public figures (Hat tip: Sooper Mexican blog).

Some snippets:

Mia Farrow said it best. "Gun control is no longer debatable, it's not a conversation, its a moral mandate."…

Willie Geist, you're a talented and charismatic journalist. Stop with all the talk show shenanigans and get back to your core of reporting….

Revoke the citizenship of Fareed Zakaria and deport him. I've never heard a positive word about America or its interest from his mouth, ever…

…give Piers Morgan an indefinite resident alien and Visa card. Mr. Morgan, the problem that many American gun owners have with you and your continuous discussion of gun control is that you are not an American citizen and have an accent that is distinct and clarifies that you are a foreigner. I want you to know that I agree with you 100% on enacting stricter firearm laws…

Jennifer Beals, Serena Williams, Grae Drake, Lisa Nicole-Carson, Diana Taurasi, N'bushe Wright, Brenda Villa, Kate Winslet, Ashley Graham, Erika Christensen, Gabrielle Union, Isabella Soprano, Zain Verjee, Tamron Hall, Gina Carano, America Ferrara, Giana Michaels, Nene, Natalie Portman, Queen Latifah, Michelle Rodriguez, Anjelah Johnson, Kelly Clarkson, Nora Jones, Laura Prepon, Margaret Cho, and Rutina Wesley, you are THE MOST beautiful women on this planet, period. Never settle, professionally or personally…. 

Jeffrey Toobin and David Gergen, you are political geniuses and modern scholars. …

The whole text is here.

If there is a message buried deep within Dorner's incoherent litany of recriminations, anger, and random name-checks, it's this: People who go on shooting sprees typically tell us very little about society at large. They are by definition far, far beyond the range of normal (or even abnormal) behavior and, as such, shouldn't be used to generalize about larger social forces at work.

For all the psychologizing about the causes of Adam Lanza's deadly rage and what it supposedly says about video games, popular culture, divorce, absent fathers, Asperger's, and a million other things raised by commentators, it's highly unlikely that anyone will be motivated to connect the dots between Dorner's pathology and the world around him. If guns did not exist, or had not been in wide circulation for hundreds of years in America, he might be a poster child for tighter gun restrictions. But given that he was a former cop—and pro-gun control—he would not even be the sort of person that would fall under the net of even the most draconian proposals to make weapons tougher to get.

We can learn precisely nothing from Dorner's wild thoughts and horrifying, evil behavior (the LAPD may draw a lesson or two about personnel and keeping tabs on employees it fires). Recognizing that won't provide any solace to the families of the dead, but it may help the body politic react less hysterically the next time a terrible tragedy like this unfolds.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

196 responses to “Manifesto of Spree Killer Dorner: Work of Nut Job With No Connection to Reality

  1. I promise you this: when I go balls-to-the-wall, batshit crazy, my manifesto will also just consist of shout outs to my favorite porn stars. I anticipate it will run about 45 to 50 pages in 10 point font.

    1. I was stunned by his admiration of John and Ken and Bill Handel…

    2. I don’t think you should wait to do your manifesto, Go ahead and do it now.

      1. man I’m thinking about writing my manifesto. I mean hell, Ron Paul did it right?

      2. Well, with the upcoming storm, it looks like I’ll have nothing better to do. Since the power will probably go out, I’ll fetch the typewriter from the basement.

    3. I anticipate it will run about 45 to 50 pages in 10 point font.

      Single spaced? If so, that’s a serious manifesto, one that says to the world, “I mean business.”

      1. Well, there’s a lot of porn stars out there. I need to be thorough, while also trying to save the Earth by conserving paper.

        1. Well, there’s a lot of porn stars out there. I need to be thorough, while also trying to save the Earth by conserving paper.

          Fuck the earth. At that point, your sole concern is going out in a blaze of glory.

          1. Fair enough.

          2. besides the only genuinely attractive porn star is ariel rebel, and she’s a frog canadien, so every time I cum my soul dies a little.

            1. had never heard of her before so google imaged her; she’s definitely cute and sexy, but has a surprisingly plump rear end in some of those pix for someone so petite — looks like she might sit driving a city bus all day with mudflaps like that

          3. Fuck the earth. At that point, your sole concern is going out in a blaze of glory

            Like Jon Bonjovi?

            1. Like Jon Bonjovi?

              Exactly like Jon Bon Jovi.

    4. Can’t say I am not suprised everyone in media missed the original version that doesn’t have all this random stuff added to it.

      http://content.clearchannel.co…..213161.pdf

  2. He’s not out of his mind crazy. He’s a “wronged” narcissist who doesn’t give a shit and wants to hurt the people who “wronged” him. He thinks a ton of himself and that the people he praises should appreciate his appreciation.

    Except for Piers Morgan.

    1. Notice that his heroes are all arrogant douchebags.

      Birds of a feather….

    2. gee, has someone been reading TLP?

      Actually I think that he’s really taking his oath of office quite seriously, which may be a part of his narcissism. He does go on a diatribe about opinions towards the end, but it’s quite clear that those are secondary, and only “things he wants to say”. His reason for doing this shit is not so much that he’s been wronged (he only goes on about it for a paragraph or so in the beginning) but that he sees other people being wronged – or sees himself wronged in a way that he assumes is happening to others. The narcissism comes in where he thinks that he is the primary agent in his own movie – that he, is the only one who can make things right.

      The funny thing is, he may be right about it.

      1. also, I think he’s hiding out in deep creek hot springs – good place to mask IR signatures from the FLIR, out in the wilderness, can have stashed several days of supplies.

        He also probably bought a car using cash off of craigslist. If I were LAPD, I would go through the craigslist archives and find who successfully sold a car using petty cash over the last 4 months.

    3. He sounds like Keith Olbermann, but a little less batshit.

    4. Your correct. He’s basically waging a blood feud that would be culturally appropriate in the Swat Valley. My guess is that he’s been taking meds for bi-polar manic depression.

    5. This is a much better psychoanalysis of it than the “psychologist” they had on Piers Morgan. He basically said that the stuff didn’t make sense and the LAPD cares about public safety.

  3. There is some interesting commentary about the behavior of his former co-workers in law enforcement. Unfortunately, he’s so nutty, it’s impossible to know what is “real” and what isn’t.

    1. The guy has clearly gone off the deep end, but it would be nice if some journalists would do their putative job instead of just repeating bullshit propaganda. Here’s some questions I have.

      1) Why was the FBI involved in this today, less than eight hours after the cop was murdered in Riverside.

      2) Why is the LAPD sending armed officers into other jurisdictions on ‘protective details’.

      3) WTF is up with two cops spraying a truck with bullets, because they thought that it looked like Dorner’s

      4) WTF happened in Corona at 1am when Dorner got in a firefight with two LAPD cops, the official story smells of utter bullshit.

      5) Did Dorner lie about the incident that led to his firing.

      1. Move along citizen. Nothing to see here.

        Dorner was bounced from LAPD for making false statements about a fellow cop

        He backed up the story of some schizo who fell into a boot, against the word of a sister in blue.

  4. Manifesto of Spree Killer Dorner: Work of Nut Job With No Connection to Reality

    I’ll bet. Does he support open borders, to boot?

  5. He sure is fat.

    1. It’s kind of rediculous right, the cops are clearly distorting the picture as part of a psyop to make him less sympathetic. But when you see a fat guy, you rightfully don’t think someone who could set the cops up so masterfully (he’s been prepping this for years – he knows what he’s doing and is probably really fit)… AND it will make it tougher to ID him. Dumb cops.

      1. But he looks just like almost every cop now. Especially the shaved head and those sunglasses. They’re never going to be able to find him. He’s probably hired on to a new force already.

        1. In that picture he looks a little like the gay cop in Six Feet Under.

  6. Police confuse truck for Christopher Dorner’s, shoot at 3 people in Torrance in case of mistaken identity

    Twice in the same neighborhood before predawn light Thursday, police officers thought Christopher Dorner was coming at them.
    And both times they were wrong.

    In two cases of mistaken identity, two people were shot in a sleepy Torrance housing tract by undercover Los Angeles police officers protecting a potential Dorner target, and a third was fired upon by Torrance police responding to the first shooting.

    These are the only people who we can trust with “assault rifles”. The first truck wasn’t even the same make as Dorner’s.

    1. The fact that they were so trigger happy makes me think that they’re trying to cover up some sort of serious corruption.

      1. Considering that “officer safety is the first priority” I don’t think they want to try to stop his truck in the road the ordinary way. So they do it the way you would do it in a war zone.

        1. Shooting into a vehicle with unknown occupants without warning would probably be a violation of the RoE in a war zone

    2. Was there a dog in the back of the truck?

      1. OK, that got a laugh.

  7. it sounds like they are plain AFRAID. which is never an excuse for manslaughter/murder, which is what the pickup shooting sure sounds like. sure, it was trolling with headlights off. it was delivering newspapers. certainly enough to be scary, but not enough to SHOOT at. when clemons went on his rampage in the pac NW and killed 4 cops, we managed to handle it and to take out clemons in a justified shoot without shooting any innocents. LAPD needs to take a chill pill.

    the original allegation that got dorner fired, the black helicopter folk may instantly think conspiracy, but it probably is as it appears – he made a false accusation and got caught. the other possibility is he did report on an actual incident, and they covered it up and fired him.

    but considering how batshit crazy he clearly IS, the “smell test” story is that he made up the allegation against his training officer. we already know he’s fucking cuckoo for cocoa puffs, after all.

    1. have you actually read his manifesto? He’s not really all that crazy.

      1. OTOH, he wanted to vote for Jon Huntsman, so all bets are off, really.

        1. by crazy, i do not mean legally insane btw. i mean he’s just nuts, and murderous nuts, which is the worst kind

      2. Shackford and Gillespie are trained psychiatrists. I think they’d know he was really nuts better than you yonemoto.

        He referred to Margaret Cho as “beautiful” so he has met all the diagnostic criteria.

        1. I concede the point on Margaret Cho.

    2. Nobody died in the pickup truck shooting so it’s not manslaughter. It is absolutely assault with a deadly weapon/reckless endangerment plus attempted murder and a lot of other charges that one of us “civilians” would get thrown at us if we did something like that. I know for damn sure that if I put 30 high-powered rifle rounds into the back of a pickup truck because I thought it looked like that of a guy who threatened me, I’d be in PMITA prison right now.

      You wanna make any bets on the double standard in this case, Dunphy?

      1. no, im not going to play the dumb double standard hypothetical game, thanks.

        let the case play out. and you are right. they didn’t die. my bad.

        1. No need for a hypothetical. Are these officers in jail tonight?

        2. I’m not seeing any possible new facts that could come to light in this case that would make the officers’ actions justifiable.

          1. THEY WERE CHINESE SPIES!

            1. Yeah, I forgot about John’s yammering about how it’s OK for the PRC to send operatives to kill Chinese dissidents in the US.

            2. Damn that similarity.You can’t tell one from another. I read it in the NYTs.

          2. it was almost certainly NOT justified and probably criminal (im like 95% confident.)

            generally speaking, double standard or not, they are not going to JAIL cops for a shooting where they clearly fucked up, but clearly also acted with no malice.

            1. Somehow absence of malice doesn’t really offset the flagrant disregard for public safety.

            2. Absence of malice? Doing something they should have known was a criminal thing to do?

            3. generally speaking, double standard or not, they are not going to JAIL cops for a shooting where they clearly fucked up, but clearly also acted with no malice.

              1. Drunk driving isn’t a crime of malice, but watch me go to jail if I get caught doing it.

              2. Firing bullets at someone with the intention or piercing their hide is an act of malice. Often justified, sure, but you ARE intending to hurt someone.

            4. Acted with no malice? They didn’t even wait to ID their target before they opened up. That’s CLEARLY malice. As bad as this guy is, the cops aren’t allowed to just execute him, especially in a away that endangers innocents.

              Fuck those callous, reckless fucking assholes.

              1. Oh, and FUCK YOU for defending them you shitfaced rat fuck.

            5. generally speaking, double standard or not, they are not going to JAIL cops for a shooting where they clearly fucked up, but clearly also acted with no malice.

              If they’re not getting jailed BECAUSE THEY’RE COPS that would be a double standard.

              Acted with no malice? How far would that get a civilian who shot at a truck because they thought it was a guy who threatened them.

        3. If the person in the truck had shot back, it would have been justifiable homicide.

    3. …but it probably is as it appears – he made a false accusation and got caught. the other possibility is he did report on an actual incident, and they covered it up and fired him.

      Which is something that the media could actually investigate.

      Except that’s too much like work and won’t help anyone get future access; so they’ll just rewrite the press releases.

    4. “You also need to speak with her attorney, Rico, and his conversation with the BOR members and her confession of guilt in kicking Mr. Gettler. I’ll be waiting for a PUBLIC response at a press conference. When the truth comes out, the killing stops.

      Why didn’t you charge me with filing a false police report when I came forward stating that Evans kicked Mr. Christopher Gettler? You file criminal charges against every other officer who is accused and terminated for filing a false police report. You didn’t because you knew I was innocent and a criminal court would find me innocent and expose your department for suppressing the truth and retaliation, that’s why.”

      1. Dorner was bounced from LAPD for making false statements about a fellow cop

        Nick Gillespie is an IAD officer who investigated this case. I’d think he’d know more about Dorner’s false statements than you, yonemoto.

        1. Yeah, I kind of hung up on that, too. What we know is that he made accusations against a fellow cop. I’m not sure what evidence there is that they were actually false.

          And, no, I don’t take the corpulent blue line’s conclusion at face value.

    5. What’s scary about newspapers? That they still exist and someone was delivering them? Idiot.

      1. The pen is mightier than the sword.

        1. OH NOES WE NEEDS BAN ASSAULT PENS

  8. “If there is a message buried deep within Dorner’s incoherent litany of recriminations, anger, and random name-checks, it’s this:”

    Cops sould be unarmed.

    1. it’s not incoherent at all! It’s actually light reading. Come on. do you think most college students can organize their thoughts as well as this? There are clearly organized, distinct sections with coherent points, although there is not much segue between the distinct sections, but the Declaration of Independence teeters on that sort of a structure too (and contains a litany of recriminations, anger, and name-checks).

      1. He still has nothing on Kaczynski. Say what you want, but he made you think.

        1. Truth be told, I haven’t read Kaczynski’s manifesto. I’ve only read Marx’s, Ron Paul’s, George Sodini’s, and this guy’s.

          1. Here you go.

            In many ways, Kaczynski was ahead of his time. I think that if he was born a little later, he would have happily been part of the whole “Prepper” movement. I have a feeling that part of what drove him to murder was his feeling of isolation in that no one, at the time, shared his views concerning self-reliance and autonomy, at least no one that was less “crazy” than, say, Ragnar Benson.

          2. I liked Tristan Tzara’s.

      2. Nick Gillespie has a PhD in English. I think he’s more qualified to identify incoherent writing than you yonemoto.

        1. I have a PhD in biochemistry. Trust me, I read more incoherent shit in journals in a week than Nick Gillespie has in his shielded ivory tower life, and that even takes into account the postmodern dick-measuring minefield that is literary criticism.

          1. What are you diddling around here for? Cook us up some designer drugs.

        2. SIV, you’re a credentialist now? The whole world’s going crazy now.

          1. I’m pretty sure it’s sarcasm.

            SIV| 2.7.13 @ 11:58PM |#

            Shackford and Gillespie are trained psychiatrists. I think they’d know he was really nuts better than you yonemoto.

            SIV| 2.8.13 @ 12:07AM |#


            Nick Gillespie is an IAD officer who investigated this case. I’d think he’d know more about Dorner’s false statements than you, yonemoto.

            SIV| 2.8.13 @ 12:02AM |#

            Nick Gillespie has a PhD in English. I think he’s more qualified to identify incoherent writing than you yonemoto.

            And I must say that this post by NG is way too accepting of authoritah and the conventional wisdom

            1. Nick is just practicing for his dinner date at the Y with Janet Napolitano.

              1. “Man, that’s just MEAN.”

        3. Nick Gillespie has a PhD in English. I think he’s more qualified to identify incoherent writing than you yonemoto.

          You’re all wrong. Cavanaugh’s the only one qualified for the job. And Cavanaugh left town.

          1. what about the jacket giving nick super powers?

    2. Well that, and Giana Michaels has a nice rack.

  9. There are an amazing number of war mongers over at the FluffPost tonight. A lot of them put cytotoxic to shame with their giant war boners.

    I thought Liberals were anti-war?

    1. When did that happen?

      WW1, WW2, Vietnam, Korea, Bosnia, and Libya were all started by Dem presidents.

      1. You left out Somalia. Bush I sent in troops to pass out MRE’s and clean water. Clinton and Madeline Albright “creeped the mission” and tried to impose the UN government and take out Adid and his clan militia

        1. Yeah, Clinton would do that, but when Sudan called and said “Hey, we have this guy, I think his name’s bin Laden, and he’s been talking shit about y’all…” Clinton just let that drop to voice mail.

          1. Didn’t Clinton bomb some shit in Sudan? Not enough, I guess.

      2. I said Liberals, not Democrats. HuffPost is a liberal blog, no?

        1. Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Clinton and BO aren’t liberals?

          1. They’re politicians. I am talking about ‘real’ liberals, you know, the sort that are supposed to hang out at HuffPo?

            1. Ok, I see I am not getting anywhere with this. My point is, when Booosh was prez, the ‘liberals’ at HuffPo were all anti-war. Now, they make the worst of the Neocon war pigs look like Peaceniks. And I am talking about the same posters.

              1. Are you looking for… consistency… amongst the denizens of HuffPo?

                What fucking drugs are you on?

                1. None yet, scroll up, I am waiting on the designer ones that SIV has yonemoto cooking up for us.

                  1. uhm, you don’t want to be on my drugs.

          2. no, they’re progressives

            1. Well, I know that, but they still refer to themselves as liberals.

          3. Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Clinton and BO aren’t liberals?

            No, they were progressives. Clinton was the most liberal of the group.

          4. I’d call them progressives. If liberal is to still mean anything.

      1. This one is great:

        Oh my God I really think God pretty soon is gonna run out of patience and end this world

        Liberals are so funny. In one sentence they say:

        ‘There is no god, you stupid bible thumping, anti-science, rednecks!’

        and in the very next sentence:

        ‘If Jesus was here today, he would tell you that he is a Liberal!’

        1. No. By “God” the poster clearly means “Obama”.

        2. No, he wouldn’t.

          1. OMG, you’re here! You did come back! Can I have a free pony and one eternal life potion?

            Oh, and please smite all of my enemies now, especially Tony and derider.

            1. No, none of that, but for being a Reasonoid, when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness.

              1. Waaaaaait a minute – some other guy was hustling that.

  10. He’s worried about missing shark week. I want that investigated. Could shark week somehow prevent a future freak outs?

    1. SHARK YEAR. SHARK DECADE.

      SHARK. THE NEW BACON.

    2. Could shark week somehow prevent a future freak outs?

      Nah. Don’t forget that nut who went on a rampage in the corporate offices of the Discovery Channel because Gaia, or something.

    3. Watching the Mid-Atlantic rift drift apart at 3 inches a year is more interesting than watching shark week.

      If he had to watch shark week a lot, no wonder he went on a murderous rampage.

      1. I swear they use the same GD footage of sharks eating a whale carcass year after year.

        1. Well, in all fairness, how much can sharks do? Swim around in a circle and look menacing seems to be their favorite activity. Making an entire show out of them is just stupid.

          1. They could have a Valentine’s Day special that’s just 3 hours of sharks fucking.

          2. Menacing AND terrifying. The shark has been menacing and terrifying for years.

            1. I never get tired of the footage of those great whites tag-teaming the South African surfer off his board.

    4. Maybe a public service announcement reminding people not to freak out over shit because nothing is worth missing the next Game of Thrones series.

  11. I wonder if there is any way to verify this comment: “They take photos of your loved ones recently deceased bodies with their cellphones and play a game of who has the most graphic dead body of the night with officers from other divisions. This isn’t just the 20 something year old officers, this is the 50 year old officers with significant time on the job as well who participate.”

    If so, that’s some sick crap, and indicative of a true lack of character on the part of the LEOs.

    1. Sounds like he’s a bigorati.

      1. What’s a “bigorati”? Urban dictionary doesn’t even have it.

        1. It’s a dunphii generis term. Like ATFPAPIC, which I still haven’t figured out the meaning of.

          1. yea, sad to say i haven’t made urban dictionary with bigorati yet. it’s kind of mixture of cognescenti (sp?), bigot, and intelligentsia.

            or something.

            it’s got flavor.

            1. “assuming the facts present are proven in court”?

              Am I close, even?

              1. assuming the fact pattern as presented is correct.

                iow, assuming that allegations and the “story” we are being told is accurate, the conclusion is …

                1. Wow, at least I had most of the words right.

                  1. 3/8 isn’t ‘most’ where I come from.

        2. It’s Officer Fuckface’s (aka Dunphy) word for people who don’t automatically prostrate themselves in the presence of their betters, the police.

          1. no, it’s my word for people who don’t like a person just because of their choice of career… in this case – cop.

            they prejudge cops, and in any situation where an allegation is made, the worst about the cop is always assumed. the complaint, if against a cop , must be true.

            it’s why so many people here come to ridiculous conclusions about police uof. mine are almost always in line with prosecutors and courts, because i don’t PREjudge, but look at evidence.

            1. The only evidence you look at is whether or not they wear a badge. Fuck off you shitstain.

              1. if that was true, my analysis wouldn’t so closely match that of prosecutors and judges. y’know the people that look at the evidence.

                1. Your conclusion matches theirs because they look at the same evidence. Have a badge, get off free.

            2. no, it’s my word for people who don’t like a person just because of their choice of career… in this case – cop Communist Party spokesman.

              One’s job isn’t genetic, like one’s race. Clearly, it’s possible to hold a job inherently worthy of contempt.

            3. I also prejudge rapists, armed robbers, and child molesters. Why should cops get a pass?

              Prosecutors and the courts? You mean the people who rubber stamp your thuggery.

      2. sounds like gallows humor, which is why i don’t doubt it’s true at all.

        like i try to explain to sarcasmic, it’s a well documented syndrome.

        personally, i would never do something like that, of course. it’s dishonorable.

    2. From stories my buddy who was an EMT has told me, that’s not surprising at all.

      1. i totally agree. reminds me of stuff wambaugh would write about

    3. AND NOTHING ELSE HAPPENED.

    4. I don’t have a problem with this behavior.

  12. This almost plays out like Conspiracy Theory, where the whacko really was onto something. Hell, it is LAPD and Hollywood. Has everyone forgotten Richard Pryor’s take on the LAPD?

  13. again, this guy is DEMONSTRATING that he’s nuts. so, that would tend to make me think his original claim about his supervisor (the one that got him fired for lying) probably was also fanciful. he may have been looking to make a name for himself by inventing the story, who knows?

    it COULD be true, but id like to see the file. for them to actually fire him (iow certain t hat it was false), i’d suspect there was probably forensics, iow something solid. like he said she kicked the guy and yet there was no medical evidence whatsoever or something like that.

    LAPD especially post consent decree is hardly “tough” on whistleblowers. but as the rampart scandal proved (when it turned out he fabricated a LOT of the alleged bad acts to make his story better), it is not uncommon for people to just plain make shit up

    1. This really does not sound crazy to me. It sounds like he was simply fed up. Violence is a very bad thing, but it’s not inherently crazy, either

      “No one grows up and wants to be a cop killer. It was against everything I’ve ever was. As a young police explorer I found my calling in life. But, As a young police officer I found that the violent suspects on the street are not the only people you have to watch. It is the officer who was hired on to the department (pre-2000) before polygraphs were standard for all new hires and an substantial vetting in a backround investigation.
      #

      To those children of the officers who are eradicated, your parent was not the individual you thought they were. As you get older,you will see the evidence that your parent was a tyrant who loss their ethos and instead followed the path of moral corruptness. They conspired to hide and suppress the truth of misconduct on others behalf’s. Your parent will have a name and plaque on the fallen officers memorial in D.C. But, In all honesty, your parents name will be a reminder to other officers to maintain the oath they swore and to stay along the shoreline that has guided them from childhood to that of a local, state, or federal law enforcement officer.”

      That sounds like a man who knows what he is doing.

    2. the LAPD has a long history of corruption and racism (remember Rodney King?), his claims are hardly far-fetched.

      1. rodney king was an example of a bunch of cops who went overboard with a violent resistant felon. it was hardly some kind of proof of “corruption”.

        LAPD has warts, like all agencies, and it got handed a consent decree. it is, on the whole, an excellent agency.

        after all, they invented the SWAT concept 🙂

        1. Jesus, Dunphy – the LAPD “excellent”?

          Corruption is an honored tradition in that dept.

  14. So how about the paragraph near the end where he describes cops as overtime whores and sharing pictures of dead people for shits and giggles?

    1. sounds about right. i work with tons of overtime whores and the picture sharing thing rings true. gallows humour. we aint saints.

      1. Other than the overtime whoring and pension double dipping… and the gypsy status for some of them, I’m sure they’re still upstanding people.

        1. they sure are. cops are great people, but they are far from saints.

          it’s hard to be a saint in the city after all. the gallows humour, the boyish hijinks, the cop groupie sex (booya!). it’s all there. it’s not a job for blushing flowers.

          1. Boyish hijinks like beating homeless people to death, opening fire on innocent people because they drive the wrong car, and shooting people’s dogs. You know, little things like.

            1. yawn.

              1. Yeah, cops opening fire on innocent people because they happened to be driving the wrong car sure is yawn-worthy, you duplicitous bastard.

                1. no, that’s most likely egregious and criminal, as i already said. your tired wanking is what makes me yawn

                  1. Egregious and criminal. But it’s perfectly just that they don’t go to jail for it, right?

            2. oh btw, i love stuff like “shooting people’s dogs” as if that isn’t entirely justified/necessary sometimes.

              i posted a video the other day of a dog who attacked an officer and got capped. sad, but clearly the officer was in the right and was being attacked. even the dog’s owner UPON SEEING THE VIDEO conceded the officer was right in shooting the dog. it’s sad when dogs get shot, but dogs sometimes act violently , understandably, in warrant etc. situations and shooting them is a tragic, but necessary thing.

              it’s easy to criticize from the safety of your couch.

              1. Dunphy, you have to be the dumbest motherfucker to come in here. I don’t even think Space Tony is as moronic as you.

                Posting one example of a time when it was justified does NOT make up for every single damn other time it was not, you fucking retard.

                And let’s not forget all those times you defend the police when they kill someone and the fact pattern clearly shows they were not only in the wrong but were being murderous fucking bastards.

                YOU are the reason people hate police. YOU and your cowardly, shitstain brethren who stick up for cops who should be rotting in the deepest darkest fucking cells we could find, but are still walking the streets because cops like YOU refuse to do anything about it. You exemplify everything that is fucking wrong with our so-called justice system. You would do the entire world a favor if you were to go suck-start a fucking shotgun, you pathetic little sorry excuse for a human being.

                1. i defend cop uses of force when they are justified.

                  not murderous, but justified. and the courts/prosecutors agree with me

                  peopple don’t hate police. i get accolades all the time from people i serve, and the public on the whole LIKES police.

                  you have no idea about how i do my job, but i do it well, and i treat people with respect, which is what needs to be done in police work. i almost never get complaints, but get cited for bravery, etc. my record speaks for itself. exemplary.

                  every time i have defended a police uof , it has been justified. every time i have criticized a police uof and /.or called for prosecution, the same applies.

                  most cop shootings of dogs are not caught on film. the point is that it isassumed that cop shoots dog = bad shoot, which is ridiculous. cops have a right to defend themselves from vicious dogs.

                  and again, most people don’t hate police. i happen to work an area where people are very appreciative of us. it’s part of what makes the job so rewarding is that i get positive feedback from the community and from the people i serve.

                  i love my job and i love service, and you have no idea how i do it, you just make assumptions because you disagree with my UOF analysis (which is in agreeance with those that matter – death inquests, prosecutors, etc.)

                  i stand by my UOF analysis. you need to get a life and get over your hate. and i’ll continue to serve with dignity and honor, thanks

                  1. It must be real nice to be able to rely on a UOF continuum that basically clears you of any wrongdoing if you have the right piece of tin.

                    Like that time where you said it was totally cool when the cops smoked a dude for answering his door with a gun in his hand, when they failed to identify themselves and shot at him before they could even realistically see the gun.

                    Or that time when you defended the cop who rolled up on a despondent, unarmed individual, started firing beanbags at him for absolutely no reason, then shot him in the back as he ran away (a fact pattern that was agreed to BY EVERYONE INVOLVED).

                    Or today, when you stated that cops who clearly intended to execute an individual and ended up shooting two innocent people as a result of their callous recklessness in failing to ID their murder target shouldn’t be jailed.

                    You really are a piece of work, you know that? You have to be the most disingenuous person on here.

  15. So, we hope to keep whackos from owning guns by our new restrictions and background checks.
    Am I to believe they are better than the background checks the LAPD has been using? Exactly how are they better?

    1. if LAPD is anything like my dept. they do pretty extensive background and psychological testing. i had to take MMPI, rorshach, psych interviews, etc. etc.

      that being said, it’s still an imperfect “science”. no way you can screen out potential wackos anywhere near 100%

      1. Isn’t that done to weed out anyone too smart or likely to spill the beans about abuses perpetrated by their fellow officers and higher ups?

        1. spare me. ONE agency didn’t hire a guy because he had too high an IQ and became a national laughingstock. fwiw, i was told by my pysch that i got one of the highest stanford binet scores they’d ever seen. and they hired me.

          are you devolving into copcritic cynic mode?

          the MMPI, etc. are used to try to weed out people with personality disorders, people who are overly aggressive, or not aggressive enough (both are dangerous for a cop), shit like that. it’s important stuff.

          it’s rigorous and there are a lot of tests. the psych screens out a LOT of people according to the recruiter i spoke to. many seemingly “normal” people do not have the psychological chops , so to speak.

          different agencies fine tune what they want of course. for example, agencies that run two man cars look for a different psycho profile to some extent than an agency that is more spread out and runs 1 man cars with minimal supervision.

          i’d bet dollars to doughnuts a lot of reasonoids would fail the psych 🙂

          1. i was told by my pysch that i got one of the highest stanford binet scores they’d ever seen. and they hired me.

            Morgan Fairchild never tires of losing at chess.

            1. golf clap.

              i am 100% super cereal btw.

              it’s just an attribute.

              fwiw, the only study i have read on the subject estimates cop IQ to be average 110. not particularly high, but higher than the average bear

          2. I would be relieved to fail that. I would be horrified but not surprised if I was to pass the process despite veiled hostility.

          3. are you devolving into copcritic cynic mode?

            I’ve always been a skeptic of police. In a place like this, surrounded by people bearing a burning unquenchable hatred for cops, I might appear to be a lover of cops, but that is a juxtapositional illusion.

            1. being a skeptic is fine. just don’t be a kneejerk bigot if you can help it.

              fwiw, i was and still am a critic of a lot of stuff the cops do, but in my time as a cop, i have come to learn that they are much more skilled than i suspected, and frankly, on the whole, a group of people to be damn proud of. i have been very pleasantly surprised by what i have seen over the years, on the whole.

              if you haven’t, do some ride-alongs, and see for yourself. i did 2 ride-alongs with LAPD back in the day, and the guys i rode with were whipsmart (STREET smart which is what matters) and awesome street cops.

              i had to deal with a cops a lot in college, since i played in a band, and every time i was cool with them, they were cool with me., the one time i was a dick, i got it back in spades, which taught me a simple lesson – the golden rule applies to cops, too

              granted, i think it’s our moral duty to treat everybody with respect and love. it’s amazing how much attitude makes a difference. i suspect a lot of cop haters go into every cop encounter seething and confrontational, which helps nobody. show some love. it works

      2. That you want the job is proof you are psychologically unfit for the job.

  16. At large indeed.

  17. Why is it that when someone turns to violence everyone assumes the person is “deranged”? Violence is a continual part of the human condition. If anything, violence is unfortunately totally normal. His manifesto is quite coherent despite the author claiming it isn’t. He’s well aware of the consequences of his actions and it sounds like he’s fed up with the corruption in the LAPD, which when he tried to confront, wasn’t supported by the justice system. I’ve witnessed the corruption and racism in the LAPD first hand as have many others; I doubt his claims are fabrications. I have to sympathize with him, without necessarily agreeing with his course of action. The only thing that doesn’t make sense is his support for gun control, when the second amendment was put in place for the exact reason he is using arms now…to confront an unjust and oppressive government as a last resort.

  18. He’s passed the point of no return. Do you know what that is, Nick? That’s the point in a journey where it’s longer to go back to the beginning. It’s like when those astronauts got in trouble. I don’t know, somebody messed up, and they had to get them back to Earth. But they had passed the point of no return. They were on the other side of the moon and were out of contact for like hours. Everybody waited to see if a bunch of dead guys in a can would pop out the other side. Well, that’s him. He’s on the other side of the moon now and everybody is going to have to wait until he pops out.

    1. I thought it just meant he was Joker on fuel.

    2. with apologies to Michael Richards.

  19. You allow an officer, T… S…., to attempt to hack into my credit union account and still remain on the job even when Det. Zolezzi shows the evidence that the IP address (provided by LAPFCU) that attempted to hack into my account and change my username and password leads directly to her residence. You even allow this visibly disgusting looking officer to stay on the job when she perjures (lies) in court (Clark County Family Court) to the judge’s face and denies hacking into my personal credit union online account when I attempted to get my restraint order extended. Det. Zolezzi provided the evidence and you still do nothing.

    This implies some type of organized harassment prior to his dismissal and 1) the alleged crime seems to be more serious than the one that led Ortiz to threaten Swartz with 30 years imprisonment. And 2) It is provable and a point of investigation for a real journalist.

  20. OK, here’s a scenario for you.

    Say I’m driving my blue Toyota pickup through Pittsburgh delivering newspapers at dawn. All the sudden I get a shower of bullets coming through my windows, doors, everything. One of the bullets goes into my arm, another into my back, and I pull out my 357 revolver from the glove compartment, and take out one of the people shooting at my vehicle with a head shot. Unfortunately it turns out that the shooter was a cop who thought I was an evil criminal madman because I drive a similar truck.

    Question: do I go to jail for this?

    1. hopefully not, and most likely not

      btw, i had a citizen use of gun in self-defense last night. he went a LITTLE overboard, but i can guarantee if it was a cop, and we let him go you would think it is was a double standard.

      clearly, the cops in LA are afraid and the pickup truck shooting is a travesty, and almost certainly deserves prosecution (i don’t know many facts about it, but hard to imagine what could justify it).

      cops are imperfect, and the last thing you want is a scared cop. fear is the mind killer after all.

      1. How do you figure. We had people on death row for killing cops who were crashing around in their houses with drawn weapons in the dark of night, unannounced.

    2. Answer: No, you don’t go to jail, you go straight to bodybag.

    3. Not if I’m on your jury, you don’t.

      -jcr

    4. Question: do I go to jail for this?

      I’d give you about 90% odds, yes.

  21. The fact that someone like Dorner can get a gun and a badge is why disarming civilians is an insane idea.

    -jcr

  22. The original pastebin posting was set (probably mistakenly) to allow anyone to edit it. I’m guessing a fair amount of the shout outs were added by random viewers.

    1. Really? Not a good thing. If true, I wonder about the veracity of some of the more important and controversial sections. Does pastebin keep a changelog?

    2. Here is the orginal

      http://content.clearchannel.co…..213161.pdf

      If you read it, it is a whole lot more coherent and missing all that other bullshit

  23. This guy hates the police and thinks they’re corrupt, yet he thinks only they should have guns?

    1. Rosie O’Donnell thinks the government killed 3,000 of its own citizens on 9/11, yet she also thinks only they should have guns.

      Leftards gonna leftard.

  24. This guy specifically calls out NFA firearms as particular risks. If he truly did acquire suppressors and SBRs legally (he claims to have used a trust to sidestep the background check, which can be done), I still don’t see how his possession of them in California is lawful.

    1. How can a trust obtain a Class III license for a suppressor? By getting an FFL license as a Class III dealer/manufacturer? Class III licenses for individual receivers require fingerprints and all sorts of identification.

      1. Read up on the registration process. A Class III dealer’s license is *not* required to own NFA firearms. You’re using the wrong terminology.

        Trusts and corporations can register Title II (colloquially –and incorrectly– referred to by some as “Class III”) firearms without background check requirements. The trust or corporation then designates specific authorized individuals who may possess the firearms owned by the trust or corporation.

        1. There are different types of Federal Firearms Licenses, each of which authorizes a different set of activities, but they are all related to engaging in firearms related business. None are required for simple possession or purchase of any kind of firearm.

          An FFL licensee can opt to pay additional taxes (Special Occupational Taxes, or SOTs) to obtain authorization to deal in NFA regulated firearms. These have different classes, and are typically what people think of when they talk bout a “Class III” FFL. There really is no such thing as a “Class III FFL.” That would be an FFL (Usually a Type 07 FFL) combined with a Class III SOT, which authorizes the user to deal in NFA regulated firearms. A Class II SOT authorizes manufacture and dealing in NFA firearms.
          In order to purchase an NFA regulated item, however, a purchaser need not obtain an FFL nor an SOT. The registration process is performed per firearm purchased, and no license exists to possess the item. It’s just purchased, taxed, and registered.
          Certain categories of NFA firearms are forbidden to own for non FFL/SOT holders. For instance, machineguns manufactured in the USA prior to May 19, 1986 are permissible for any person who meets the legal requirements to own, but those manufactured after that date may only be possessed by FFLs who have also paid the appropriate Special Occupational Tax.

        2. I’m aware you don’t need an FFL dealers license to own a Class III device. In the mid-90’s I owned a fully automatic MP5K that I had converted from a semi-auto HK SP89. The Class III ‘license’, which was really just a tax stamp, applied to the firearm’s trigger pack. I had to get the approval of our local county sheriff and then submit fingerprint cards processed by a law enforcement agency and submit identification. I was under the impression that suppressors are Class III devices, but I see that they are Class II devices. I was just trying to figure out how a trust could acquire a Class III device. Still, that is a bizarre loophole.

          1. I have several NFA items, and have been through the process a bunch of times. One of my transferable MGs was purchased from an LLC. The registration paperwork (form 4) registering it to the LLC has no photo, etc., and they were not required to submit to the check.

            MGs and suppressors are regulated exactly the same, and so are SBRs. There is no functional difference in how these firearms are registered other than the paperwork calls out the category of firearm (Machinegun, SBR, silencer, SBS, AOW, etc.)

            1. IOW, there is no such thing as a “class II” or “class III” device. Those are classes of SOT, and they regulate the types of business that can be done with NFA regulated firearms, not the types of items that can be owned or dealt in.

  25. Why you call him a nut job? Dude is a hero!

    http://www.AnoTimes.tk

    1. If only there were a way to get it to spam this response in a topic about Hitler or something.

  26. Here’s a motive for Adam Lanza’s massacre ? Adam was raped by a local, convicted Catholic priest, Fr John Castaldo, when Adam was 6 years old, and was taking revenge against other 6 year olds. Here’s the verified evidence:

    http://neilallen76.wordpress.c…..-a-theory/

    It can’t be proven yet, but it is the best explanation yet for why Adam would want to take revenge against the parents of other 6 year olds, since those parents didn’t help him since he was raped at 6 years old.

  27. How many versions/revisions of this manifesto are there? I’ve read three different ones so far. . .

    1. Individual news organizations edited the original Facebook manifesto before posting it to their websites which explains the different versions.

  28. I had a very different reaction to Dorner’s manifesto which I read from the perspective of a criminal defense and civil rights trial attorney with over twenty years of experience evaluating police reports and EEOC complaints. The manifesto did ramble, but I found it to be surprisingly lucid – as far as mass shooter manifestos go – and felt that his specific detailed grievances have the ring of truth. Other lawyers I spoke with agree with me. Many of the comments on Reddit, and blogs that have posted the uncensored version of the manifesto, are supportive of his allegations of LAPD racism, harassment and corruption.

    I have represented LEO’s in employment disputes and, in my experience, his allegations of being treated unfairly are consistent with how an officer with a “difficult” personality can be drummed out of a major metropolitan police department after offending his superiors’ expectations of loyalty and conformity. While nothing justifies Dorner’s actions, either morally or legally, his manifesto raises a legitimate question of whether this is a case of the LAPD’s corrupt chickens coming home to roost.

  29. Jennifer Beals, Serena Williams, Grae Drake, Lisa Nicole-Carson, Diana Taurasi, N’bushe Wright, Brenda Villa, Kate Winslet, Ashley Graham, Erika Christensen, Gabrielle Union, Isabella Soprano, Zain Verjee, Tamron Hall, Gina Carano, America Ferrara, Giana Michaels, Nene, Natalie Portman, Queen Latifah, Michelle Rodriguez, Anjelah Johnson, Kelly Clarkson, Nora Jones, Laura Prepon, Margaret Cho, and Rutina Wesley, you are THE MOST beautiful women on this planet, period. Never settle, professionally or personally….

    I don’t think I’ll ever be able to stop the puking. This is like a text-based ipecac.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.