Looter murders retired police captain

[Derec]

Charges filed in murder of retired St. Louis police captain David Dorn

Stephan Cannon, 24, of Glasgow Village, has been charged with first-degree murder. He is being held without bond.
As downtown St. Louis descended into violence and chaos Monday night into Tuesday morning, Dorn, also a retired municipal police chief, attempted to protect the pawn shop from looting.

I bet Jarhyn will explain to us how the looting of the pawn shop was "justified" like he did with the Minneapolis Target ...

He was shot multiple times, and his killing was broadcast on Facebook Live. According to a police probable cause statement, Cannon was seen on surveillance footage pulling up and entering the store with others, and then stealing several televisions. Once Dorn arrived at the store, Cannon walked toward the street corner with a gun in his hand.
“At the time the shots were fired, (Cannon) was the only person standing at that corner,” the probable cause statement reads. “Multiple plumes of smoke” could be seen coming from where Cannon was standing, and shell casings were recovered from that same spot, police said.
[...]
Cannon was also charged with robbery in the first degree, burglary in the first degree, three counts of armed criminal action and felon in possession of a firearm.
[...]
[David Dorn] was friends with the owner of Lee’s Pawn & Jewelry and would show up at the shop when burglar alarms sounded to check on the building and make sure it was secure, his widow, Ann Marie Dorn, previously told the Post-Dispatch. He arrived at the shop early Tuesday to protect it during widespread unrest and violence in the city that night in the wake of the death of a black man while in police custody in Minneapolis.

On the left, the murderer, on the right the victim.

 

[Trausti]

 

[Elixir]

On the left, the murderer, on the right the victim.
View attachment 28136

Of course if he was white he'd be "the accused murderer".

 

[Trausti]

On the left, the murderer, on the right the victim.
View attachment 28136

Of course if he was white he'd be "the accused murderer".

That’s it, Elixir. Deflect, deflect, deflect.

 

[laughing dog]

Is there a subtle point to this OP? Or is the suspect a member of Antifas? Because I don't think anyone condones looting or murder on this forum.

 

[Jarhyn]

On the left, the murderer, on the right the victim.
View attachment 28136

Of course if he was white he'd be "the accused murderer".

I think we already saw that with Derec's treatment in the thread about the murdered jogger. Retired Police Officer Lynches Black Man.

Of course, this is tragic. Opportunistic looters are certainly a problem. Some people defending businesses from looters inevitably got injured. But rather than marching with protestors and Focusing on protecting businesses from looting, St. Louis cops focused on dispersing protests and engaging in "crowd control".

Of course, St Louis citizens have a right to protest, especially when their police department has incidents such as this one:

On September 17, 2017, these men put their sadistic language into practice, according to an indictment filed against them last week.

“The defendants threw L.H. to the ground and then kicked and struck L.H. while he was compliant and not posing a physical threat to anyone,” it states. “This offense resulted in bodily injury to L.H. and included the use of a dangerous weapon, that is: shod feet and a riot baton.”

They most likely would still be on the street, with their badges, their guns, and the ability to inflict lethal force, if not for the fact that L.H. happened to be an undercover police officer.

So, it's a little understandable that the St. Louis police had a fair bit of ire pointed their way.

Then, this particular incident IS tragic. I also have some recollection of how a particular crowd here seems to justify the deaths of civilians and other tragic outcomes in wars. I don't think this is justified. I think it is tragic. Do I think it was avoidable? I certainly do.

How was it avoidable? A police focus on preventing looting rather than suppressing the protests would have been a good start. A far better course would have been a more widespread investigation of STL cops, especially after Ferguson. But that didn't happen, the STL police didn't get the chemo necessary to remove the cancer of white supremecy and racist enforcement, and here we are, with more protests and the unrest that comes with it

 

[Elixir]

That’s it, Elixir. Deflect, deflect, deflect.

That's it Trausti - accuse others of what you're doing. WWDJTD? Exactly that.
You don't want to talk about the racism any more than Derec does.

 

[Elixir]

How was it avoidable? A police focus on preventing looting rather than suppressing the protests would have been a good start.

A slightly egalitarian economic system would have been a good start. But that horse pretty much left the barn in 1776.
There is no chemo for white supremacy, no exorcism for racism because it's not an individual problem, it's systemic. It results in racist individuals, but as we see here, many if not most of them sincerely don't think they're racist.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

On the left, the murderer, on the right the victim.
View attachment 28136

Of course if he was white he'd be "the accused murderer".

That’s it, Elixir. Deflect, deflect, deflect.

What’s to deflect? A guy murdered someone who was trying to make things better. That is awful. I suppose I could try to spin it with #notalllooters but trying to score political points over someone’s death seems stupid.

 

[zorq]

Why does it seem that the more conservative posters on this board have a fundamental misunderstanding of the more liberal posters on this board? Just because they defend the depraved behavior of authority figures (and psudo-authority figures,) doesn't mean that the more liberal posters actually defend the depraved behavior of non-authority figures.

You guys know that it's possible to be opposed to depravity in all its forms right?

 

[Derec]

Why does it seem that the more conservative posters on this board have a fundamental misunderstanding of the more liberal posters on this board? Just because they defend the depraved behavior of authority figures (and psudo-authority figures,) doesn't mean that the more liberal posters actually defend the depraved behavior of non-authority figures.

Jarhyn was quite explicit that hes supports looting and arson when done by black people.

You guys know that it's possible to be opposed to depravity in all its forms right?

Sure. I think that when police officers and other authority figures do wrong they should be held to account. I also think looting and arson is wrong no matter the race of the perps.

 

[Derec]

A slightly egalitarian economic system would have been a good start. But that horse pretty much left the barn in 1776.

What do you even mean by "slightly egalitarian"?

There is no chemo for white supremacy, no exorcism for racism because it's not an individual problem, it's systemic. It results in racist individuals, but as we see here, many if not most of them sincerely don't think they're racist.

Because most people are not really racist. Simply disagreeing with left-wing orthodoxy on racial politics is not in itself racism.

Also, this thread has nothing to do with racism. That you have to bring the cudgel of racism into everything, says a lot about you. It says even more that to you racism is always one sided, the so-called "white supremacy". The existence of black anti-white racism is even denied to be possible by the far left!

 

[Derec]

You don't want to talk about the racism any more than Derec does.

Well this thread is not about "racism". Why do you always want to talk about racism? That's the better question here.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I don't care for Rev. Al Sharpton, but he was on Morning Joe today and made a comment I agree with, to the point that all police should not be judged by the actions of the policeman who kept his knee on George Floyd's neck for 8 minutes (add the other well-known, notorious cases here), and the BLM marchers should not be judged by a criminal element that has rampaged during some demonstrations.

 

[Derec]

Of course, this is tragic. Opportunistic looters are certainly a problem.

You said in the other thread that black looters were justified. Which is it then?

Some people defending businesses from looters inevitably got injured. But rather than marching with protestors and Focusing on protecting businesses from looting, St. Louis cops focused on dispersing protests and engaging in "crowd control".

Crowd control of protestors[sic] is a necessary part of managing protests. And you can't separate looting from protests when the looters are hiding among the protesters.

Of course, St Louis citizens have a right to protest, especially when their police department has incidents such as this one:

Anthony Smith's shooting was justified and Stockley should not have been charged. He was rightly acquitted because Smith was going for his gun. Also, it is quite distasteful to violently protest an acquittal. Such riots seek to change things, and criminal trials (and charging decisions) should not be influenced by street pressure. That would be a perversion of the criminal justice system, which should not be a popularity contest, much less a contest to see whose supporters are more prone to violence!

That said, it is quite unfortunate what happened with those three cops. BUT it would never have come to that had an angry mob not rioted in support of a career violent criminal Anthony Lamar Smith.

So, it's a little understandable that the St. Louis police had a fair bit of ire pointed their way.

There were also violent riots when a convenience store robber attacked a police officer before getting shot in self defense.
There were also violent riots when a few miles away, a man shot at a police officer with an illegal gun before getting shot himself.
Rinse and repeat with a different thug.

Somehow violent rioters LOVE to support violent thugs. Kindred spirits and all that.

How was it avoidable? A police focus on preventing looting rather than suppressing the protests would have been a good start. A far better course would have been a more widespread investigation of STL cops, especially after Ferguson. But that didn't happen, the STL police didn't get the chemo necessary to remove the cancer of white supremecy and racist enforcement, and here we are, with more protests and the unrest that comes with it

Officer Wilson did nothing wrong when he defended himself against Michael Brown. There is also zero evidence that he is any kind of a "white supremacist".

In any case, this murder had nothing to do with race.

 

[Derec]

I don't care for Rev. Al Sharpton, but he was on Morning Joe today and made a comment I agree with, to the point that all police should not be judged by the actions of the policeman who kept his knee on George Floyd's neck for 8 minutes (add the other well-known, notorious cases here), and the BLM marchers should not be judged by a criminal element that has rampaged during some demonstrations.

Fair enough, as distasteful that old racist fleabag is in general.
However, #BLM at large CAN be judged for their lack of selectivity of the causes they choose. When they make a big deal about the likes of Michael Brown, Mario Woods, Alton Sterling, Keith Scott, Quanice Hayes etc. then their advocacy for cases where there is real police misconduct is much more suspect. They are like the boy who cried police brutality.

 

[Derec]

Is there a subtle point to this OP? Or is the suspect a member of Antifas? Because I don't think anyone condones looting or murder on this forum.

In the Minneapolis thread Jarhyn explicitly said that looting and arson by black people in Minneapolis was justified.

 

[Derec]

Of course if he was white he'd be "the accused murderer".

The guy is on video looting the store and shooting the captain. There isn't ambiguity to justify the "accused" modifier. It has nothing to do with him being black, white or purple.

 

[Jarhyn]

Is there a subtle point to this OP? Or is the suspect a member of Antifas? Because I don't think anyone condones looting or murder on this forum.

In the Minneapolis thread Jarhyn explicitly said that looting and arson by black people in Minneapolis was justified.

"was justified" Provide the quote that contains these words, please?

I said I don't mourn two specific instances of looting. To say that I think they were justified is a lie, and one I would see you retract.

It is similar to my views on wartime actions: Sometimes something needs to be done. It is not that this action and its outcomes were good. But because earlier ethical action was not taken, later violent response became unavoidable. I can't speak for the pawn shop, or its circumstances and whether or not the owners failed their ethical obligations to the community in such a way that violent responses against them were inevitable. I doubt it in fact.

I can, however, speak to the continued unethical actions taken by Target on East Lake in Minneapolis, and I can speak to the unethical actions taken by Wells Fargo. These actions provoked a response from the community, and I think that violent response was unavoidable. Was it "justified"? I don't believe justified is an appropriate descriptor for such events. I've been pretty clear on that front.

What I can say is that Target will probably reevaluate their donations and their way of applying shrinkage policies, and that many communities across the city will have the banking niche open within them for better more community-focused businesses. Mine certainly did, and is, and will be better for it. These are certainly positive outcomes.

Conversely, There was looting at Midtown Global Market, and all the wonderful taquerias on east lake also fell victim, and this IS truly tragic. Many good businesses went out with the bad, and largely this is a function of police escalation and the ensuing chaos of a protest-turned-riot. If instead of firing CS gas into a crowd, (and point blank directly into protesters for the sake of causing injury or death) and inflaming passions against the police, things probably would have turned out differently. If police had cared more about defending businesses than arresting protesters for protesting, things would have turned out differently. This is explained because MOST of the people present were there to protest, not loot or riot. And of course, if the police (either those present or those at the precinct who saw the video of the murder) had actually immediately arrested the cop who unambiguously murdered a person on camera, there wouldn't have been protests, rioting, or looting in the first place as the last desperate response to an untenable situation.

But these views have nuance, so I don't see them making any impact on you.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think we already saw that with Derec's treatment in the thread about the murdered jogger. Retired Police Officer Lynches Black Man.

Of course, this is tragic. Opportunistic looters are certainly a problem. Some people defending businesses from looters inevitably got injured. But rather than marching with protestors and Focusing on protecting businesses from looting, St. Louis cops focused on dispersing protests and engaging in "crowd control".

Nice job of avoiding the issue.

1) The guy is dead, not merely injured.

2) He was a retired officer. He wasn't engaging in crowd control.

Of course, St Louis citizens have a right to protest, especially when their police department has incidents such as this one:

On September 17, 2017, these men put their sadistic language into practice, according to an indictment filed against them last week.

Whataboutism.