This is typical of responses I got when I posted about it before, and it misses the point. * I'm not defending Dorner. The police have a right to kill someone

This is typical of responses I got when I posted about it before, and it misses the point. * I'm not defending Dorner. The police have a right to kill someone who's actively trying to kill them. But what level of force is acceptable? Obviously guns are ok. Maybe setting fires is ok too? What about drone strikes? * If it's acceptable, why would police deny it was intentional, and under what other circumstances would it be acceptable? Is it ok because he killed a cop? * How certain were they no one else was in the building? As we saw earlier that week when they shot up two cars that resembled Dorner's they weren't exactly being careful to avoid collateral damage.