actually, we have the radio conversations showing they purposely lit the cabin on fire. and then they also talk about how if he runs out of the building, to be ready to shoot him. point being ... they burned him alive, on purpose.
surrendering or not has no bearing, as the established legal definition of when police can use deadly force is immediate danger to innocent life. its not up to you, that's the law.
i explicitly stated at the start of my post i was not defending him. kinda confused how you think i am defending dorner. just because i don't think the police at any point in this case acted appropriately (and above the law) means i think dorner is justified in committing murder. :tard: the world isn't a sports game, its not roots for one team or the other. there is such a case where both sides can be dead wrong. or both sides are wrong, but one a little less so then the other etc etc etc.
Well, I think shooting at police is pretty much a clear case of immediate danger to innocent life.
I know it's cool for people to display this anti police attitude. But Dorner got what he was looking for.