Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Older incident, back in the news it seems. Two people got into an argument in a movie theater, one threw popcorn, the other one threw a bullet. This sums it up the best:
"The main argument that the state is going to make is, popcorn is not a deadly weapon. Therefore, he did not have the right to use deadly force," legal analyst Jeff Swartz told CNN affiliate WFTS.
"The claim of the defense is that Mr. Oulson was committing a felony against Mr. Reeves by abuse of the elderly when he threw his cell phone at Mr. Reeves," Swartz said.
Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law allows people to use deadly force when they fear death or great bodily harm.
Though true popcorn is not a deadly weapon, fists sure can be.
Before Oulson was shot, she said he was leaning toward them, and it appeared that he was going to go over the seat toward them.
“It happened very quickly, and his whole upper body just came forward, and I thought that he was coming over,” she said.
Coming over your seat at someone could conceivably make them fear great bodily harm.
Of course the dead guy's widow has a different story:
Witnesses told police that Oulson threw a container of popcorn at Curtis Reeves before he was shot, police said. His widow, Nicole Oulson, was also shot in the hand. She told ABC News in 2014 that her husband was texting the babysitter, who was watching their young daughter.
"It was a couple of words. No threats. No harm. No nothing," Nicole Oulson said in 2014. "In the blink of an eye, 30 seconds, it just shattered my world."
Will be interesting to see how this one goes.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
The old man is a retired cop and should know his escalation of force better than that. Harsh words and popcorn to require an escalation to lethal force. Now, using lethal force in self defense only requires that the defender felt that there was a reasonable imminent threat of bodily harm it doesn't require that the attacker be armed or in the process of attacking only that it was reasonable to believe that the attacker was about to commit an aggressive act of violence that would result in the bodily harm of the defender. So the defense of the shooter is that the attacker was verbally aggressive, threw objects at him and was about to attack him physically and try to hurt him so the defender shot first to prevent that imminent physical attack from happening. Was that a reasonable perception of an imminent threat of bodily harm? The jury is going to have to sort that out. Stand Your Ground just means that the shooter didn't have a legal obligation to run away from the popcorn thrower to avoid a confrontation. Stand Your Ground laws don't mean that lethal force is justified it just means that only the defender doesn't have to flee from an altercation instigated by the attacker.
More to the question, why the feth would you take a gun to a movie theater? Seems like yet another case of a person who thinks using a gun first rather than defusing the situation like any sane person would usage best course of action.
Hope the idiot gets jail. There's enough tragedy with guns in the world without some idiots thinking using one in a trivial situation like this is justified.
Freddy Kruger wrote: More to the question, why the feth would you take a gun to a movie theater? Seems like yet another case of a person who thinks using a gun first rather than defusing the situation like any sane person would usage best course of action.
Hope the idiot gets jail. There's enough tragedy with guns in the world without some idiots thinking using one in a trivial situation like this is justified.
To answer your question:
Because he is allowed to. Even in states with very high restrictions on carrying, retired police tend to get an exception. Believe it or not, folks get mugged/robbed in movie theater parking lots.
The situation is only 'trivial' if the argument stopped with the guy being asked not to text stops texting. Once he got physical, even just by throwing popcorn, 'trivial' probably is not a good term to use. If he did threaten to come over his seat (or indeed did hit the retired cop) 'trivial' does not come close. If the old guy was unarmed, and got his face caved in, 'trivial' would again not be a good term.
As for defusing the situation, by all accounts the old guy attempted to do so, even getting up and informing the management. The texter seems to have been pissed the guy 'told on him' and further escalated.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
I can say from personal experience that being struck on the head from a thrown mobile phone is not a pleasant experience.
It's not like being hit by a rock but it still bruises and can knock you off your stride.
Popcorn on the other hand is unlikely to have the same effect.
This whole case is a messy, tragic business, and I wonder how it will play out...
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I can say from personal experience that being struck on the head from a thrown mobile phone is not a pleasant experience.
It's not like being hit by a rock but it still bruises and can knock you off your stride.
Popcorn on the other hand is unlikely to have the same effect.
This whole case is a messy, tragic business, and I wonder how it will play out...
Agreed. When you factor in that elderly people are much more fragile, a cell phone could do some serious damage that wouldn't happen with a younger person.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I can say from personal experience that being struck on the head from a thrown mobile phone is not a pleasant experience.
It's not like being hit by a rock but it still bruises and can knock you off your stride.
Popcorn on the other hand is unlikely to have the same effect.
This whole case is a messy, tragic business, and I wonder how it will play out...
Agreed. When you factor in that elderly people are much more fragile, a cell phone could do some serious damage that wouldn't happen with a younger person.
I get the elderly being fragile argument 100% but from my very limited knowledge of this case and Florida gun law in general, it seems odd that a former policeman like this, could not have de-escalated the situation 'better.'
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
He's going to jail. This was a seriously bad shoot and he's not protected by badge armor any more.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I can say from personal experience that being struck on the head from a thrown mobile phone is not a pleasant experience.
It's not like being hit by a rock but it still bruises and can knock you off your stride.
Popcorn on the other hand is unlikely to have the same effect.
This whole case is a messy, tragic business, and I wonder how it will play out...
Agreed. When you factor in that elderly people are much more fragile, a cell phone could do some serious damage that wouldn't happen with a younger person.
I get the elderly being fragile argument 100% but from my very limited knowledge of this case and Florida gun law in general, it seems odd that a former policeman like this, could not have de-escalated the situation 'better.'
Yep, it's a crazy case. I was once in a theatre where a loud and spirited, but otherwise harmless group in the back was confronted by a cop who jumped up and yelled at them to shut up while flashing his badge. He was ignored, and that was as far as things went.
Freddy Kruger wrote: More to the question, why the feth would you take a gun to a movie theater? Seems like yet another case of a person who thinks using a gun first rather than defusing the situation like any sane person would usage best course of action.
Hope the idiot gets jail. There's enough tragedy with guns in the world without some idiots thinking using one in a trivial situation like this is justified.
Personal protection - for example, there was the whole aurora Colorado shooting about 4 1/2 years ago. Some people concealed carry 'just in case'.
That being said, someone willing to shoot a man dead over a thrown bowl of popcorn wasn't paying attention in his concealed carry class. I'm personally stunned that the guy was a former police captain, if I had to guess, I would have expected some twitchy methhead.
Having said that, I 100% agree with you - this idiot sounds like he deserves jail.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by.
Wait, I just read an account of this and it was during the previews? So the old guy was complaining that the guy in front was using his phone.... during the previews.... he called the manager before the lights had even been dimmed.
I mean it'll be interesting to see how it plays out and obviously it's pretty hard to judge with limited information, but it does sound a bit like the old guy picked a fight for no good reason (and obviously the dude who got shot shouldn't have bothered arguing with the old guy as well).
It is curious how in a world where you're allowed to shoot someone just because you're afraid they might hurt you.... the elderly suddenly become the most terrifying people, not only do they scare easy but they're often not all with it either.
Frazzled wrote: He's going to jail. This was a seriously bad shoot and he's not protected by badge armor any more.
In Florida, though? I give him 40% he skates.
40% he skates and the widow has to pay his legal fees.
Yea, I forgot...Florida. 40% sounds right.
the elderly suddenly become the most terrifying people, not only do they scare easy but they're often not all with it either.
Child run every time they see me.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/24 16:15:08
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Ouze wrote: There's video, which isn't 100% ideally situated but still fairly good.
Yeah, while not the best video, my first reaction to it is: the old man could be seeing some serious jail time.
The dead dude was probably a dick, but all he did was toss the popcorn on the old man. The old man quickly drew and shot him after that. Look at 1:02 to 1:06. Popcorn-Bam! He did not appear to be in eminent danger. IMHO, YMMV, OMG, BBQ.
Ouze wrote: Hell, I'm not without some level of sympathy. People texting in the movies are the fething worst.
Chewing crunchy foods with your mouth open is the fething worst!
Ouze wrote: Hell, I'm not without some level of sympathy. People texting in the movies are the fething worst.
You mean during the movie previews before the lights have even dimmed.
I was speaking in general. For me, I think you're good to text until the trailers, and then I think it's irritating but socially acceptable to text during the trailers (I wish people wouldn't because I love the trailers but I also can see why people think it's OK, so whatever).
But actually texting during the movie... I wouldn't say you deserve to get shot, but I definitely wouldn't have a problem with the police dragging you out into the street and hitting you in the mouth with a nightclub, either.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/24 17:09:41
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Ouze wrote: Hell, I'm not without some level of sympathy. People texting in the movies are the fething worst.
It sounds like the texting occurred before the movie started and neither man could let it go. If the article you posted earlier is accurate, and Reeves followed a woman who texted in a theater to the restroom to intimidate her, then it sounds like he had some irrational hang up that prevented deescalation.
Regardless of.when the texting happened, escalating and then shooting a person for throwing popcorn is unacceptable. This man thought he would deal with it himself instead of letting the management do their job. I have no sympathy for the man, hit him with the full force of the law.
It seems a bit lazy to believe he escalated and shot the guy for throwing popcorn.
Heck, at a minimum the 'throwing popcorn' actually was the texter standing up to face the shooter, reaching into the shooter's lap grabbing his popcorn then reaching back towards the shooters face to throw the popcorn into it. Once you start coming over the seat and grabbing/throwing into someones face that person very well could become worried about being physically harmed.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
CptJake wrote: It seems a bit lazy to believe he escalated and shot the guy for throwing popcorn.
Heck, at a minimum the 'throwing popcorn' actually was the texter standing up to face the shooter, reaching into the shooter's lap grabbing his popcorn then reaching back towards the shooters face to throw the popcorn into it. Once you start coming over the seat and grabbing/throwing into someones face that person very well could become worried about being physically harmed.
To the point of blowing him away however, feth no. You'll get hit with some popcorn, boo-hoo.
And, honestly, if he hits you, still not justification to kill him, IMO. Run away and call the cops. The only time a gun is the correct response is when they are actively trying to kill you.
There was no justification for this whatsoever, and this fether should be in jail for a long time, and never allowed to own a gun ever again.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/02/24 18:25:26
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
CptJake wrote: It seems a bit lazy to believe he escalated and shot the guy for throwing popcorn.
Heck, at a minimum the 'throwing popcorn' actually was the texter standing up to face the shooter, reaching into the shooter's lap grabbing his popcorn then reaching back towards the shooters face to throw the popcorn into it. Once you start coming over the seat and grabbing/throwing into someones face that person very well could become worried about being physically harmed.
To the point of blowing him away however, feth no. You'll get hit with some popcorn, boo-hoo.
And, honestly, if he hits you, still not justification to kill him, IMO. Run away and call the cops. The only time a gun is the correct response is when they are actively trying to kill you.
There was no justification for this whatsoever, and this fether should be in jail for a long time, and never allowed to own a gun ever again.
If a guy comes over his seat to beat you senseless, and you are sitting in a movie theater seat, it is a bit difficult to 'run away and call the cops'. And frankly, the whole point of Stand Your Ground laws is you have NO obligation to run away. Period. If he hits you you have no obligation to assume he will only hit you once or twice and does not intend to really hurt you.
The question the judge/jury are looking at is did the shooter have a legitimate fear of being beaten? That is it. If he did, the law should protect him. If not, he will go to trial for murder. You're dislike of guns and belief folks should not have the right to defend themselves have no bearing on the legal issue being looked at.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
I suspect this little man goes around being a fething asshat because he has a gun in his pocket to make him feel tall. If he was not allowed to carry then he wouldn't have been such an arrogant little gak. YMMV.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
374th Mechanized 195pts 
