The incredibly foolish Chief Charlie Beck


By Kevin “Coach” Collins

LA Police Chief Charlie Beck has made a bad decision.

Life is a series of decisions. No one should understand this more than Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck. For obvious reasons, in any situation your ideal position is one of “win or break even.” Those who are in the public area, especially big city police chiefs, more often than not find themselves in the opposite position; “lose or break even,” but that’s part of the job.   

Since the “lose or break even” dilemma is virtually unavoidable as a rule, voluntarily placing yourself in one is especially foolish. When the best you can do is not lose you ought to not go there, but Chief Beck doesn’t seem to understand this simple logic.

Beck was in the unenviable position of overseeing the everyday functions of a big city police department AND supervising the most important manhunt in recent memory. But at the top of his “to do” list was finding Christopher Dorner, a hate filled mongrel who wanted to kill cops because he was fired from the LAPD in 2007.

As a rookie Dorner was judged to have falsely reported seeing his training officer kick a mentally ill man during an arrest. The evidence against Dorner was persuasive enough to get him fired.

So Dorner went on a killing spree aimed at getting even with those he believed responsible for his firing. He had already killed three people including the daughter of the police captain who unsuccessfully represented him in his hearing and her companion. A few hours later he ambushed two on duty uniformed police officers, killing one and wounding the other.

Clearly Beck had big problems, but he added to them by announcing he would review Dorner’s case. This was foolish beyond words! What could have happened as a result of that review? The firing could have been found to be unjust, but whether a correct conclusion or not, Beck would have looked like a sap and a weakling just at a time when his officers needed him to stand tall and strong.

If the review upheld Dorner’s firing, Beck would have gained nothing.  But more importantly, while men under his command were being killed by a monster and psychopath, Beck would have clearly made himself appear more concerned with the political correctness of a 6 year old internal review than with the lives of his officers. But apparently special allowances had to be made, Dorner being a black officer. After all, what if he were somehow justified in murdering those who had been “unfair” to him?

It’s bad enough that Beck voluntarily put himself and his department in a “lose or break even” box. Now every officer in the Department will wonder whether their Chief is more concerned with the safety of his men or the politics of the next life and death situation.

Beck might have caught Dorner, but he made his job one Hell of a lot tougher in the future.    



Be Sociable, Share!

6 thoughts on “The incredibly foolish Chief Charlie Beck”

  1. Absolutely on point, Coanch. Dr. Ben Carson was correct when he said “Political Correctness” is ruining our Country and suppressing free speech, but it is also lethal because of unnecessary speech in incidents like this! Was Charlie Beck afraid he was going to have Rodney King demonstrations? What happened to having a color-blind society, like we have in the Sports World? I’m glad it ended as it did, although horrible for the murder victims. At least we don’t have to endure another O J Simpson trial of a murderer! Nothing justifies killing people because you didn’t get what you wanted, so Chief Beck’s point was? Ridiculous!

  2. Thank you for articulating this so well. When I heard about Beck’s plan to revist the case, I thought — “I wonder what Captain Quan thinks about that?”

  3. The one thing that bothers me about this case is that in Dorner’s “manifesto” there were references to previous infractions by this same officer which he accused of kicking a mentally disabled suspect. If that were so, wouldn’t the accusation have been taken seriously and his accusation at least considered to have some validity? Would that have been investigated? Was there not a video of the man who supposedly was kicked where he indicated he HAD been kicked? I am not in any way condoning what Dorner did. His actions are reprehensible, but could this have been a contributing factor for him going “off the deep end?” I’m also concerned with the possibility of the LAPD protecting “The Thin Blue Line.” Police work is difficult at best, but there have been times where LAPD have come under scrutiny before. I pray for everyone’s sake that this was not something swept under the rug, because if it can happen once, it can happen again. And again, I am not sympathizing with Dorner, I just hope for the sake of all concerned that the truth came out, even though the media edited out some of the manifesto. One other thing; the order on police radio to “burn it down” referring to the house Dorner was hiding in, was a summary execution without his day in court. Did anyone else think about these things or am I alone in this?

    1. Yes, the burning of the cabin was kind of like a drone strike on an American citizen. but it was clear that he murdered family of the LAPD, innocent of anything to do with him.

    2. “One other thing; the order on police radio to “burn it down” referring to the house Dorner was hiding in, was a summary execution without his day in court. Did anyone else think about these things or am I alone in this?”

      You are certainly alone on this. Killing this heavily armed murderous monster in any way possible was appropriate. In your fantasy utopia, how many murders does one get to commit before lethal methods are used to protect society?

      The person that gave the orders to kill this dirtbag is a hero, and deserves a commendation for protecting his officers and the community at large. Bombing Japan for the same reasons set a perfect societal self-defense precedent.

      Mad dogs are shot and killed wherever they are found, not coddled and given leeway to kill others.

  4. Any decision concerning the firing of someone deemed not qualified to be a police officer is proven valid when the fired employee proves his instability by going outside the normal channels of judicial relief and instead starts killing innocent people. He was unsuited mentally for the position and was fired, and his actions prove his mental deficiencies. No one, no matter how wronged they feel, has the right to kill people to draw attention to their problems, that is what the court system is for. Anyone thinking this monster had any type of valid reasons or points is as equally deranged and dangerous as this former Law Enforcement scumbag murderer.

Comments are closed.