One shouldn’t be surprised, shocked, or indignant that leftists claim “We are all Chris Dorner.”
Taken out of context his claims of injustice sound credible and if the claims were correct I can understand his rage and could even let pass a statement of “We are all Chris Dorner”. But he murdered innocent people who had nothing to do with his complaints against the Los Angeles police department. He, an individual, did this. He did this to innocent individuals.
People on the left have a mindset bordering on and many times crossing well into a personality disorder such that they cannot readily distinguish between themselves and others who share some or most of their beliefs. “Individual” is a term that, in their mind, translates into “not one of mine”. This is why they are confused by and ignore the concepts put forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
This is why they speak of a “right to health care”, a “right to a job”, and even “freedom from want“. Individuals, for all intents and purposes, do not or should not exist outside of the collective. Leftists cannot easily distinguish between their “one true collective” and themselves. And the collective should care for itself just as we believe an individual should care for itself and their immediate family. Those outside the collective or belonging to a different collective are to be shunned if they are no consequence. If they impede its objectives they should be reeducated, put in mental institutions, or disposed of.
Dorner did not view “the collective” that supposedly wronged him as individuals. The families of supposedly racist police officers and of his lawyer were just as deserving of punishment as the primary actors who perpetrated the injustices upon him. In his mind all members of a collectives, either his or of another, are equivalent.
The leftist collective identifies Dorner as one of theirs and hence “We are all Chris Dorner” makes perfect sense in their mentally disturbed universe. There are tens of millions of examples in the 20th century where leftists used violence to dispose of “not one of mine.” That leftists identify with him and cheered him on should only be a surprise to those that do not understand the mind of the leftist and/or are ignorant of history.
So if “We are ALL Chris Dorner,” does that included Small-Penised Gun Owners?
It’s funny because I see the Rightists using Dorner as an example of why they need weapons and the Second Amendment. Would it be to join him or to fight against him? They never say.
Do you have a citation for Rightists making this claim?
How many do you want? I’ve seen it all over the place.
He’s an irrefutable argument in favor of high-capacity magazines”
Publius can be obscure sometimes. This is one of those times. I have no idea what he was talking about.
Do you have another example or two?
Uhhhh, the only thing I’ve seen is either they need to defend themselves against him, or that its an example of how if gun owners had to fight back, how much damage they could do if they wanted.
You misunderstand what the liberals meant – what they mean is that any one of them could go off the rails on a killing spree at any time, and that that is why they can’t be trusted with guns.
When they say “We are all (that murderer),” they are leaking their true beliefs.
Minor quibble: you meant to write “indignant” NOT “indigent” in the title.
Correct. Fixed. Thanks!
An LAPD K-9 officer who lives across the street once told me about sending his dog into a garage to take a suspect, then shooting and killing the suspect when he used a hammer to bludgeon the dog after it ripped open his leg. German Shepherds in police service enjoy the privilege of being a “special human being” – that is, a cop – when it serves the purpose of the cops serving the regime.
All institutions in western civilization publicly profess adherence to a bogus universal morality. Useful idiots of both Con and Libtard persuasion believe this crap. Dorner himself apparently believed it at one point, at least to the extent that it was useful to him as a young black man of 22 or 23 years of age. But reality is that the morality of all entities – groups and individuals – is dual. That includes the LAPD, despite its public statements to the contrary. As a cop Dorner transgressed the LAPD’s dual moral code when reporting his female trainer for kicking a mentally handicapped suspect, and was therefore ostracized by the group (fired) at age 27 or 28. The firing had a direct, negative impact on his government security clearance and career as an officer in the Naval Reserves. Not getting any younger at age 33 he correctly saw his life severely and permanently impacted in terms of future social and economic opportunities, mate selection, children, etc. The only other things the LAPD could have done to him would be to jail or kill him. In view of that his “declaration of war” against the LAPD is understandable. Those who publicly profess a universal morality to protect their privilege while privately practicing a duality that includes ruining a young man’s career are hypocrites, at best.
So, are you saying that firing someone from a job should be a capital crime? Are you saying that anyone who cannot pursue the career they wanted should go out and kill everyone associated with anyone they chose to blame? Normal rational people don’t go out and kill people because they lost a job, or even a career.
It sounds like you are a perfect example of the collective identity thinking discussed in the post. Even if Dorner’s grievances were factual, they do not justify murder, certainly not the murder of people who had nothing to do with those grievances.
In general, I like police, but I think the LAPD has been corrupt and is probably still corrupt. I think Dorner decided to be a martyr for “the cause”. Was he right or wrong? I think he was probably a bit of both — wrong to go after families, right to expose corruption. Without doing what he did, would anyone even care about LAPD corruption? Probably not, so he did good in that respect, but it really hurts that he took out people who had nothing to do with LAPD corruption, so that part was bad.
People kill for all sorts of reasons but frequently it’s over something they are passionate about. .
“[LAPD] is probably still corrupt.”
“It sounds like you are a perfect example of the collective identity thinking discussed in the post.”
Not a perfect example. I’m not a Libtard. But neither do I subscribe to hyper-individualist Ayn Rand or Austrian School propaganda.
I practice a dual morality just like the LAPD. The difference is I’m honest about it.
LAPD management had Dorner fired for transgressing “the blue code” after blowing the whistle on his female trainer. That cost him a government security clearance, and careers as a cop and Naval Reserve officer. That left him with the career option of becoming what? A bank security guard? A janitor?
The LAPD had it coming. Liars implying that they follow a universal morality while “serving the public interest” but are, in fact, following a dual morality as demonstrated when they kill a suspect for defending himself against a canine “police officer” or destroy the life of a whistleblowing cop who the passed the background checks, probation, and merely followed the “whistleblower” policies of state and local government, deserve exactly what they got.
Morality is dual. Real politics is low intensity warfare. Warfare kills. Leftist Libtards understand this, but will never admit it. The Cons of the so-called “Right” don’t understand. Today’s Con is nothing more than yesterday’s Libtard. They have combined their irrational hyper-individualism with the same universal morality of the racially egalitarian Left. They are inconsistent and divided. That’s one reason why they have lost almost everything over the past 60 years.
They shall lose the rest by 2020.
Being seeing ya – that is to say, assuming you guys ever get your bullbiscuits together.
You’re right, Joe. The gang, or tribe, mentality is very common and always results in hypocrisies. So and so may be a lying, cheating bastard, but he’s OUR lying, cheating bastard. So and so may be murderer, sure, but he’s OUR murderer and that makes him worth trying to understand.