General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFellow shot at theater was texting his 3 year old daughter
Snip>
The argument was over Chad texting his daughter, deputies said.
Reeves, 71, a retired Tampa Police officer, was also accompanied by his wife.
Sheriff Chris Nocco told ABC Action News that Reeves left the theater in an effort to find an usher that could tell Chad to turn off his phone. Nocco added that when Reeves returned, the men exchanged words, popcorn went flying, and that is when Reeves pulled out a .380 pistol and opened fire.
"For a retired or off duty officer, who has that training and all that, it should have never escalated to that point," said Chad's friend Joseph Trapani.
"Chad doesn't carry weapons, doesn't hold weapons," he said.
According to witnesses, when Reeves pulled out the gun, Chad's wife lunged to protect him. She reportedly put her hand over his chest but the bullet ended up going through her hand.
Chad, according to witness Alex Cummings, took a few steps and blurted out, "I can't believe I've been shot."
Chad fell down and died seconds later.
"She's a wreck. I mean she just lost her husband, the father of her little girl over something that should have never happened," Trapani added.
Read more: http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_pasco/friends-of-chad-oulson-who-was-shot-dead-at-a-pasco-movie-theater-are-speaking-out-tonight#ixzz2qLsMJt00
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
kelly1mm
(4,733 posts)
JI7
(89,252 posts)parents probably do things like send images which kids are taught means that it came from their parent.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)and they were relaying the message to her? Who knows.
firsttimer
(324 posts)Maybe he was texting the babysitter .
Neoma
(10,039 posts)You'd be surprised...I had three year old twins who loved my phone. If it was in a protective case I wouldn't have cared if they played around with it...
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)After we got Iphones and Ipads, we really didn't care what happened to the 3-4 year old Ipod. We gave it to my 4 year old.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)And nothing of value is spoken ...
kelly1mm
(4,733 posts)I am a gungeonite? Here is my profile page snippet:
Account status: Active
Member since: Sun Aug 9, 2009, 05:29 PM
Number of posts, all time: 2,471
Number of posts, last 90 days: 158
Favorite forum: General Discussion, 125 posts in the last 90 days (79% of total posts)
Favorite group: Gun Control & RKBA, 2 posts in the last 90 days (1% of total posts)
Last post: Tue Jan 14, 2014, 01:51 AM
My comment was based on not understanding why a 3 year old would be texting. Other posters gave their views but you felt the need to call me names based on 2 posts in a group out of 158 posts in the past 90 days?
I guess 3 year olds can join DU as well ......
Lasher
(27,602 posts)Ignore the pileon.
What was that good point? To me it seemed like a flippant, irrelevant observation designed to express a lack of concern with the actual topic.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I agree with poster above, what difference does it make what he was doing on phone? He didn't deserve a bullet from a freakin gun toter.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Someone commented on a curious detail that was in the subject line of the OP. For that, he gets a bunch of shit for posting twice in one of DU's groups. I don't see how that's related to anything.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Why even make the comment but to deflect attention from the fact another murdering gun toter killed an innocent man for no reason.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Was your attention deflected? Do you think anyone's was?
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)and if it didn't happen to all gun threads by gungeoners and those of the same mindset, against common sense progressive support of gun control --it wouldn't be so infuriating.
and the thing is, some here, among that cohort, don't want gun control discussed here, because they are outnumbered by supporters of gun control.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)I'm not surprised.
AleksS
(1,665 posts)Don't you mean:
"A responsible gun owner heroically stood his ground against a villainous villain of villainy?"
(I just translated it into gungeon-ese.)
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Aristus
(66,403 posts)FREEDOM!
LIBERTY!
RIGHTS!
SECOND AMENDMENT!
PROTECTION!
I'm sure there's more, but you get the idea...
This country is starting to make Idiocracy look like Utopia...
DragonBorn
(175 posts)I always find it hilarious when fathers of small children are killed.
Aristus
(66,403 posts)That was cynicism. The kind brought on by the relentless idiocy of people who think that their right to bear arms somehow supercedes the right of others to not get shot for no reason at all.
DragonBorn
(175 posts)The kind brought on by the relentless idiocy of people who think that their right to bear arms somehow supercedes the right of others to not get shot for no reason at all.
This guy was a former police officer, not your typical gun owner. I've seen quite a few people already that miss that point entirely or willfully ignore it as if it has no bearing on this case. So your cries of 2nd Amendment! and Rights! seemed to be quite crass and inaccurate as typically police officers are not decrying laws related to the 2nd Amendment because most of them don't apply to police officers.
Police officers are exempt from a host of gun laws. They are automatically granted concealed carry permits upon retiring. Civilians who want to conceal carry can face either impossible hurdles to obtain a CCW to shall issue states that require the individual to complete a class regarding the law pertaining to carry in their area and a competence test.
How much do you want to bet this guy didn't have to go to that class because he was a former officer? Ignoring the fact this guy was a police officer while simultaneously trying to denigrate guns rights is disingenuous and dishonest.
Lochloosa
(16,066 posts)Of course he's the one that changes her screen in the first place.
And he does know what he is doing.
It frustrates her to no end.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)I can't see a 3 year old having a phone that can text. Maybe it was the babysitter and he/she was reading it to the little girl, but of course the title makes it even more dramatic.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)reading at fourth grade level when he was three. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the child isn't able to read or to manipulate an electronic device.
tblue37
(65,418 posts)everyone thought I was developmentally disabled (a nastier word was used--I remember hearing it and wondering what it meant).
My first words were "Mommie, can I read you a story?" The story I read was from an edition of Grimm's fairytales that had small print and virtually no pictures, except for small black and white images at the top of each new story.
I only got to read a few sentences from the story before I was interrupted with questions, but I certainly could have read a text if such things had existed back then.
I didn't realize my daughter was also reading at three--until we were at a store and she asked me to explain something she had just read on a sign in the store.
Kids develop different skills at different ages, and there is often a genetic predisposition involved when certain skills are mastered precociously.
Dorian Gray
(13,496 posts)who might read the text to her.
Horrible story.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)but yes they love that.
TBF
(32,070 posts)My kids are under 12. Phones, Kindles, DSi, Nintendo ... They are more adept on the computer than most adults. I encourage them because they are both on track to work in technology or even own their own technology companies someday. Frankly I'd prefer that - I really don't want to see them working at Walmart for $3/hr.
Now, when the "pragmatic" wing of the dem party comes out and declares that they need charter schools and standardized testing so that our kids understand technology it is all fine and dandy ... but now guns are involved so all the gunbots will be going on about limiting texting.
This is getting so fucking old.
When are we going to declare the NRA a terrorist organization? They are responsible for more killing than anything else I've seen.
sunnystarr
(2,638 posts)that he was actually texting his daughter's pre-school to check on her. I personally assumed that they went to the matinee in the afternoon and they wanted to let the school know in case it overlapped with her normal pick up time.
JI7
(89,252 posts)so tired of these fuckers. one has to be fucked up to in the first place to got here with a gun.
the fucker wanted to kill someone.
riversedge
(70,247 posts)the answer nowadays. Horrible.
DallasNE
(7,403 posts)Once the popcorn went flying the outcome was cast in stone. The retired cop will never be tried due to stand your ground. It is a license to kill and people are taking full advantage of that fact.
firsttimer
(324 posts)because he reported him to the manager or so he thought.
He is the one who got out of his seat and confronted the 71 year old man in a fit of anger.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)Snip> Two seats away Charles Cummings and his son watched the squabbling.
When Reeves returned, he was without a manager.
"He came back very irritated," Cummings said.
The man who had been texting, Chad Oulson, got up and turned to Reeves to ask him if he had gone to tell on him for his texting. Oulson reportedly said, in effect: I was just sending a message to my young daughter.
Voices were raised. Popcorn was thrown. And then came something unimaginable -- except maybe in a movie. A gun shot.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting/
Wow, he really sounded threatening and there was NO shove. Please don't lie.
firsttimer
(324 posts)
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)chest? Have you people lost your ever-loving minds? How would a shove explain or justify or even modify what happened?
firsttimer
(324 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)chest to over whatever. There is an there is a moral absolute that I abide by. People should not shoot other people. That's it. The end. If you are charged with the crime of killing another human being with your gun, I'm voting to send you up the river.
firsttimer
(324 posts)
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)because he went to the movies and annoyed someone that we allowed to carry a gun. Face it, it is highly unlikely that the guy killed was in anyway likely to kill the asshat confronting him.
In my view, the asshat is a victim too, of people like you that think he should have the "right" to carry a gun anywhere, anytime without frequent mental and psychological evaluations.
In fact, if we did them correctly and frequently enough, many police officers wouldn't have guns either and Kelly Thomas would be alive too.
malaise
(269,067 posts)
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)own damn home a murderer, but here you're making excuses for a guy who shot someone in a theater because he was threatened with popcorn.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Why do you fuckwads come back? We are just going to verbally beat you down more and cause you to feel more self loathing and a greater state of self-worthlessness...is that what you crave as a cowardly gun humping troll? You guys crave failure so badly that you want...no...NEED an admin to show you your ass and the door?
You will be back, all you small brained assholes always come back...like moths to a flame. And you will always get hammered down by the truth and the admins.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)There are a lot of younger men when you are a callous, old 71 year old with a gun.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)I am just wanting to find out where you got your information.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)to his reaction to a story about a guy using his bare hands to defend his family against three thugs breaking into his home:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024290208#post2
There is nothing you own worth killing another human being over.
He should have just ran out the back door
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Someone gets pissed because you told them to stop texting in a movie = HOLD THE LINE
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)to use a gun=murder"
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)DallasNE
(7,403 posts)That is not what any news accounts I have seen are saying. Indeed, we don't even know who's popcorn it was that went flying. The witness two seats over described the retired cop as the one who was angry and escalated this then finally shot the younger man dead. I think we can be sure that the old man will attempted to invoke stand your ground and when the popcorn went flying there is a good chance that he will be successful.
JI7
(89,252 posts)Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)If the dead fellow had been black I bet you a million bucks they would have considered 'stand your ground' a lot longer.
Snip>
Nocco said his detectives considered if this could be a 'stand your ground' case but decided the criteria did not apply.
Read more: http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/24435641/2014/01/13/shots-fired-at-wesley-chapel-movie-theater#ixzz2qLzUTnKe
Follow us: @myfoxtampabay on Twitter | FOX13TampaBay on Facebook
But you can bet your ass his lawyers are going to say he feared for his life when the popcorn went flying.
firsttimer
(324 posts)davidn3600
(6,342 posts)The article really doesn't go into a whole lot of detail of what happened when Reeves came back to the theater other than an argument began. Oulson is a big guy. If he made a move to attack the older man and that guy felt threatened of life or limb, the law may very well consider it self-defense.
There were likely witnesses there. Ultimately it will be decided by a jury.
firsttimer
(324 posts)
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)for standing and raising his voice.
firsttimer
(324 posts)A courtroom is a lot different when people begin to be cross examined.
Lies come out , people say I guess it could have happened like that , well no I really didn't see that....etc
You can't base your decision on a couple of news articles unless you have in your mind found him guilty already.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)The gun should have been used as a last resort. Even if the fellow had lunged at him (and there is zero witnesses saying he did) there were dozens of people around that could have pulled him off. The fact that you are even considering that it was okay for him to fire a kill shot under these circumstances is absolute sick.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)then the low post-count gungeoners discuss it and parse the situation for what might have been the excuse to blow the unarmed chap away. I cannot believe this shit is allowed to go on on this board. These gun people seem comfortable with the idea that if a person makes a "threatening" move, the appropriate response is a bullet to the chest. I'm flabbergasted by the whole thing. Every shooting its a similar parsing of the situation. It makes me sick to my stomach thinking about it.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)THIS case, per the witnesses, looks like a fairly cut and dried unjustifiable application of lethal force in self defense.
I turn my back on that dude. Not my fellow. Not me, not people I have trained. Lethal force is the LAST resort, because, well, look at this case. A life was lost, and it didn't need to be, to protect another life. Not at all. And you can't recall that bullet once you pull the trigger. It's a done deal. Can't go back.
No, I support self defense, through a variety of means, but this incident doesn't sound like self defense to me.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)I actually carry a gun in my truck because I travel a lot and worry about breaking down out in the middle of nowhere. I understand there are times when using a gun for self defense is most certainly warranted but not in this case. They had to show that Zimmerman's head was being pounded into the ground for self defense to be considered. In this instance bullets flew before anyone was even touched.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)That his former vocation is going to be a factor.
I'm not going to predict the outcome of the trial, but I agree, the Z case had to at least suggest a level of threat that simply isn't present in the info we have here, from the witnesses, in the media.
This was just a ... terrible damn deal. Nobody won. Everyone lost. Some lost more than others.
exboyfil
(17,863 posts)Based on that case it is not justified to shot if someone grabs you by the throat and takes you down. Of course Dooley's victim was also white.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)2. The MMA fighter should be charged with murder
There is nothing you own worth killing another human being over.
He should have just ran out the back door
Gothmog
(145,345 posts)I am corporate attorney and not licensed in Florida but I really doubt that the legal standard for self defense was met in this case. This old man may have felt threatened but the legal standard that the jury will have to judge him by is whether a reasonable person in the same circumstance would feel threatened. I really doubt that a self defense charge would be successful when this case goes to the jury.
BTW, the fact that the judge denied bail for this old man says a great deal as to the initial review of the facts. If it was clear from a legal standpoint that the old man had a self defense case, then there would have been bail ordered by the judge. The fact that the judge decided to deny bail at this stage is meaningful.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)firsttimer
(324 posts)That doesn't even sound right.
I think the news person who wrote this didn't get the facts correct.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts).380 6.0 g (90 gr) JHP 304 m/s 200 ft·lbf (270 J)
9mm 7.50 g (116 gr) JHP 377 m/s 393 ft·lbf (533 J)
Not quite as powerful as a 9mm Parabellum as you can see, but it'll still put a very much lethal hole in someone, in the right place. The additional meat of a person's hand is irrelevant and offers no protection whatever.
These are technical details that distract from the issue.
firsttimer
(324 posts)which I would think he would be .
I'm not a gun guy but from what I read the .380 will penetrate maybe 9 inches of gell ?
Going throughthe bone of a hand it will already start to tumble and deform
I'm not saying the .380 wouldn't kill a person but this shot where he dropped in a couple of seconds is not the norm
for this round.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)And those were carried by the police as service weapons for decades. There are also ammo variants like +P and the like. Who knows what the hell he used, other than him, and the police report/ballistics/autopsy?
It can certainly kill a person if hit in the chest, and you don't know where it went through his wife's hand. Could have gone through the soft tissue webbing by the thumb for all you know. All we know is that it was reported that her hand was penetrated by the round. That's all. That could mean a variety of things.
But I do know this; the thickest, burliest bone in a person's hand isn't going to reduce it to a non-lethal kinetic projectile. Not even close.
Again, this is a waste of technical detail/distraction. Contributes nothing to the issue.
RC
(25,592 posts)Tumbling and deforming at this range does not slow the projectile down much, just increases the damage.
NutmegYankee
(16,200 posts)There is still plenty of penetration, even through the bones of a hand. All it takes inside the chest is a hit to a major artery or the heart and the disruption of blood flow to the brain will cause rapid unconsciousness followed by death. And the chest is filled with large major arteries.
Bazinga
(331 posts)Never point a gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
If you think that a firearm can't kill the person it's pointed at because of it's small caliber, take a look some time at the number of people killed by .22 lr bullets.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Just ask the Warren Commission...
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You comments in this thread tipped your hand.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)about a month ago.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)But Never_Registered_on_DU_Before_I_Swear was a little too obvious.
Though EarlG has taken care of the problem.
dionysus
(26,467 posts) 
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)cvoogt
(949 posts)The guy is dead and the result is the same.
lob1
(3,820 posts)firsttimer
(324 posts)It said pop corn went flying , did he push and grab the 71 year old?
From the photo that's a pretty big guy......and it also sounds from the other article he was the one who
walked over to the 71 year old very angry asking him did you report me to the manager.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)Read what witnesses reported:
Snip> "It ended almost as quickly as it started," Tobin said.
Snip>Charles Cummings was at the theater for his birthday with his adult son and told a group of reporters that the show was still in previews when the two couples started arguing.
Cummings said the man in the back row got up and left the auditorium, presumably to get a manager. But he came back after a few minutes, without a manager and appearing upset. Moments later, the argument between the two men resumed, and the man in the front row stood up. Cummings said the men started raising their voices.
"Somebody throws popcorn. I'm not sure who threw the popcorn," Cummings said. "And then bang, he was shot."
A man sitting next to the shooter grabbed the gun out of his hand, and the suspect did not attempt to get away, Cummings said.
"I can't believe people would bring a pistol, a gun, to a movie," Cummings said. "I can't believe they would argue and fight and shoot one another over popcorn. Over a cellphone."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/13/tampa-bay-movie-theater-shooting_n_4590721.html
firsttimer
(324 posts)otohara
(24,135 posts)that's what all Florida gun nuts scream now isn't it?
firsttimer
(324 posts)In yours it says someone grabbed the gun out of his hand.
In this article it says..
Oulson staggered toward the Cummings and fell on them, Charles Cummings said.
The shooter sat down and put the gun in his lap.
It happened that an off-duty deputy sheriff from Sumter County was among the 25 people theater at the Grove 16 complex. He rushed to the scene to make sure no more shots were fired and the shooter would stay put.
That's why I said news articles are not very accurate with details that decide a case like this.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)saw no reason for a gun to be used. Period.
firsttimer
(324 posts)Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)You really want the gunman to get off? Really? You pointed to one discrepancy between several articles with the shooter placing the gun on his lap instead of it getting wrestled away from him. So what? Everything else described exactly the same in all the articles. Let me ask you, would you have fired if someone threw popcorn?
firsttimer
(324 posts)The only scary person I see in this thread is you......................
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)Just curious? 
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)disassociation while you work to convince the public A. there are some times when killing somebody is justified B. There is a good chance this was one of them. & C. There is most likely something wrong with the reporting therefore no opinion should be formed at this time.
Get a new script.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Not this time. I gave Z a 'wait and see, innocent until proven guilty' pass, and turns out, the general gut check consensus was dead on the money after all. Even though the jury didn't find that way.
In this case, yeah, he might technically get off due to his 'appreciation of an imminent threat' blah blah, but as a gun owner, and carry advocate, that shit clearly spiraled out of control, and beyond all reason. There's no way this situation should have ended with a gunshot, no way, no how.
This was, per the witnesses, a pretty clearly wrong, way way way fucking wrong application of force in self defense. That's not what the law is for.
But the odds of getting a conviction out of this... Man. I feel so bad for the mother and the child. Look what they lost. To a retired cop. I am skeptical they will get anything even resembling justice out of this.
Terrible.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Just a few weeks before Zimmerman murdered Martin, the Gungeoneers were in a discussion thread of how to react and what to tell police if you shoot someone. Basically, it was how to keep things so muddy that an attorney can get you off. Our gun fanciers had a lot of great ideas of how to get off if you are into preparing to shoot some unarmed teen.
Fridays Child
(23,998 posts)Are you seriously suggesting that blowing the guy away might have been justifiable? What next? "Stand Your Ground?"
Amazing.
firsttimer
(324 posts)not a couple of news articles which I have already shown in this thread are different from one to the next
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)Whether the gun was wrestled out of his hand or not. That is after the fact and according to the Sheriff in the video it was wrestled out of his hand. Maybe he put it on his lap but someone also lunged at the shooter to subdue him which only makes sense since he just fucking killed someone for nothing. Everything the witnesses say suggests it was a ridiculous shooting over an argument over a cell phone and popcorn flying.
firsttimer
(324 posts)As you already said in this thread
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)Yep, I am guilty of making up my mind on what every witness has said.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck not to mention it looks like a duck, then it is probably safe to assume its a duck.
Let's see angry old white man with a gun, dead young man and popcorn on the floor. All things point to angry old man shooting young guy. The reason just makes it even worse. What kind of human being shoots a person for texting in a theater? Oh wait he was taller then the old fart with the gun so old guy was scared or felt threatened so he shots him.
Stand your ground is a joke and needs to be expunged from this country's laws. There is no reason to take a gun to a movie theater unless you are a crazy person that is intent on killing someone.
If the young mans texting was causing the old guy such great bodily harm he really should have just left went to the management and gotten his money back. He surly did not have to kill the texter.
I don't care if the young man shoved the old fart, or that he (the old fart) was smaller the young guy. The old guy is NOT the victim, never was. The victim is dead. And why is he dead? Oh yeah this old guy shot him, that's why. Pretty clear cut.
Of course the old dude might have money and could hire Zimmerman's lawyer and argue his client is old suffers from post trauma from years service on the force, or maybe dementia alzheimer's ect... But that would then lead to the idea of maybe with these mental defects why was the old guy even allowed to own a gun?
Fridays Child
(23,998 posts)... shoving, angry questions, and knocked over popcorn are potentially exculpatory in this instance. Maybe you haven't noticed but, around here, not everyone is willing to sit quietly while you piss on their legs and tell them it's raining.
TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)Zimmerman never would've had a day in court if not for national outcry. He was treated and released. So will the retired cop face prosecution?
whopis01
(3,514 posts)At least this guy was arrested right away.
pacalo
(24,721 posts)disputes with guns. Even if the 71-year-old man was pushed, it doesn't rise to the need for a gun, but if the law can protect Zimmerman, it will also protect unstable monsters who like to throw their weight around with a gun as well. And each of the jurors may share your way of thinking. Nothing surprises me anymore.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)...piece of shit. Why do you feel compelled to defend a murderer?
Fridays Child
(23,998 posts)How can any sense be made of the daily acts of cruelty we perpetrate on one another in this country? Is this level of gun violence happening in other countries? What is it that the rest of the world knows that we just don't "get?"
Has unspeakable gun violence become so routine here that we now simply "archive" every tragedy and move on, each of us just a little more numb than we were the day before?
If Newtown didn't change us, what will?
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)This Friday, some friends and me walked to the corner store around 1:30 in the morning to get some energy drinks for our Jagerbombs. We walked because we were in no condition to drive. Nothing major. Just having a good time. Well, out of nowhere, a guy comes up and starts attacking us. It escalated quickly before he finally backed off and went home. Even now, I don't know what we did. We were just walking by his house and he randomly asks us what we said to him and then demanded we get out of his neighborhood.
It makes me think, "what if he had a gun?"
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2014, 03:28 PM - Edit history (1)
And on the other side, how did the father expect a three year old to be able to read a text message? Would he not have to be talking to her?
Or was the phone beeping and that was the problem? Perhaps the paper didn't get all the details.
Even then, it's not worth getting a fight in the first place. The link says the shooter went out of the theatre to find the usher to complain but then went back to the scene and got into a fight. Why not sit somewhere else?
Something is not right here, other than the obvious.
He was probably texting the daycare (since that is where they left their daughter). My son is 3.5 and he can handle working an ipad and such. If I sent him a picture, he would be able to see it, but I doubt that was the case here.
I imagine that because it was stated that this happened during the previews, he was checking on his kiddo and the other guy had a beef with him over it. I've done this, and never felt I needed to worry about someone getting angry since it was just the previews and the whole "put your phone away" bit hadn't happened at that time.
Am I now at risk for getting shot? I mean I live in Texas after all. CCL is a common thing here.
I think that girl deserved to have her father for the rest of her life, but apparently an arguement over a movie was more important. So important that someone had to die. I wonder what the wife of the shooter has to say about it all.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)That's why I'm questioning the logic or guessing the shooter had something else wrong with him, to go off while looking at someone doing a text.
And yes, the family will be scarred, the little girl will be traumatized like the mom trying to save her husband from a maniac, and the whole thing to me is another sign that people have no boundaries or respect for others anymore.
How in the world will the little girl be able to reconcile that her dad will not be coming home, that her mom was shot trying to protect him and that the man who did this was able to do such a thing? How will she organize her life to reconcile this tearing up their family, as she comes into adulthood?
Trying to figure out why the shooter went off is all I'm doing here. If he was so outraged, he should have moved to another seat. It's illogical.
Florida has SYG and the shooter reacted to 'popcorn flying,' which shows words were exchanged, and out of the blue he thought he had the right the kill someone over a slight or words. This wasn't just some wet behind the ears shooter. He was trained an LEO. I wonder if his wife tried to stop him?
There are no standards of behavior in public venues all will obey now, which is why I limit my time where there may be conflicts. I'm sure the victim and wife didn't expect their diversion to endanger their lives.
I may be wrong, but I don't think Texans are so likely do such things as these people were, but I can understand your concern. The gun culture is making the unarmed and peaceloving citizenry fear to go out in public and voice their opinion, or do regular activities. Like Obama said about the victims of gun crime that seem so random, 'They were 'not in the wrong place at the wrong time.' They were in the 'right place' living their lives, going to school, walking down the street or attending a movie.' Words to that effect, not a direct quote.
The purpose of gun culture is to militarize the public. When people freak over police weaponry, I can't forget this is the public they are facing, more and more. I see the NRA and other groups' insistence on guns as the only solution, as leading us into third world life, with the strong man with gun on every corner, able to intimidate and extort the public who are trying to work and get about their lives.
Life will be more confined and less free than it was without the guns for most people.
I avoid most public venues, though I'd had to deal with outliers in places where it was unavoidable, like getting gasoline or at the post office, where a loud mouth trolls the people there with their political opinion that has nothing to do with what people are there for. It's like worst of the internet, live.
If you go to a civic meeting, they attempt to disrupt and waste other people's private time they gave up to participate. This is social disintegration and unrestrained hubris in action.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It's very bright in a dark theater. That's why theater owners make such a big deal about NOT doing it. It's very distracting to other viewers, and you WILL notice it. Even if the screen auto-dims for 'night mode' or whatever your brand of cell phone calls it, it's still VERY bright in the theater.
Closest theater to my house states, flat out, near the opening previews, that if they catch you doing it, they will throw you out.
It certainly doesn't excuse what this shit escalated to, but I can see an argument arising out of it. It's extremely rude. I put my phone on silent, and leave it on, so I can be contacted if something goes wrong with the babysitter, but if the phone vibrates, I go the fuck out in the hallway to check it. Common courtesy to other people.
Response to freshwest (Reply #17)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)Get a better hobby.
Response to cyberswede (Reply #182)
Name removed Message auto-removed
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
NBachers
(17,125 posts)Another Gun Achiever gets his Golden Star!
This guy should never leave prison 'till he's dead, and his handcuffed body is taken out from the prison morgue.
Cha
(297,334 posts)
RedRocco
(454 posts)he may have left to get his gun.
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)firsttimer
(324 posts)Then it would be fact to you.....period....
Quixote1818
(28,947 posts)
Contrary1
(12,629 posts)
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)What the hell is your deal, anyway.
firsttimer
(324 posts)testimony fall apart from eyewitnesses.
I ran court runs for the DOC.
Some people are convicting this guy from a couple of articles.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Shit, look at Zimmerman. He's a free man.
Yes, innocent until proven guilty, but people forming opinions doesn't change innocence/guilt.
firsttimer
(324 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)If that sort of shit ever goes down, there will be no question of my intent or justifiability, by any reasonable person. None at all.
firsttimer
(324 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I can live with that risk.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Gun fanciers' defense of each other in cases like this is laughable. I think they all are afraid they might be the next Zimmerman or this old bully with a gun and chip on his shoulder.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)And thank you, EarlG!
firsttimer's Profile
Transparency Status
Posting Privileges Revoked
Jan 14, 2014 Gun nut troll. EarlG (Administrator)
avebury
(10,952 posts)I have reached the point where I actually think the shooter is guilty until proven innocent. There have been way too many unjustified shootings. We live in a gun culture society where it seems like if Person A even looks at a person, that person can shoot Person A because he/she fears for his/her life. Rational thought seems to have left the building. It is that lack of rational, common sense thinking that gives me a problem when I hear about shooting stories on the news.
3catwoman3
(24,007 posts)...even honk at idiots who do stupid and dangerous stuff in traffic because I have no idea which a$$h*le may have a gun on the seat beside, him.
kcr
(15,317 posts)uncle ray
(3,156 posts)emsimon33
(3,128 posts)I don't care how threatened the 71 year old was. He was in a theater full of people who would intervene if they thought he was going to be hurt.
This is disgusting and another reason NOT to visit or live in Florida.
avebury
(10,952 posts)Given that we live in a gun culture society, you never know who is carrying and how rational that person is. I for one do not automatically assume that gun ownership and rational behavior go hand in hand. While there are a lot of responsible gun owners, you can never assume that the one you meet up with is one of them.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)In a movie theater. Of course the lighted up phone thing isn't at all an inconvenience to other movie goers, is it? And of course whatever you must text is so incredibly important that it can't wait.
Makes you wonder how the species survived back in the days before things like texting, doesn't it?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)talking on the phone, picking your nose, etc. can be annoying. The point is, and please let me be clear, YOU DON"T KILL SOMEONE because they are annoying you. OKAY?
Response to Live and Learn (Reply #80)
AtheistCrusader This message was self-deleted by its author.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)Maybe a few texters will think twice about succumbing to their addiction in places where it shouldn't happen.
Pale Blue Dot
(16,831 posts)customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)"You keep your little flashlight that shines in my eyes in it's holster, and I'll keep my gun in mine"
Nothing I said is going to change what happened, and I now realize that nothing that happens to a texter is going to change their attitude toward their addiction, the nine or ten people a day (so far) being killed by texting and driving seems to have no effect on their behavior.
We just have to ban texting at the source, and that's at the cell phone companies. It might take President Hillary Clinton's daughter and unborn first grandchild killed in an accident caused by an obliviot to get such a law passed, but I hope it comes way before that time.
MineralMan
(146,318 posts)especially during the previews. I find it annoying. I do not, and would not, get into a confrontation over such a minor annoyance, much less pull a firearm and shoot someone for doing it.
Perspective is important. It seems as though you don't have a clear perspective on this.
old guy
(3,283 posts)I have seen this on numerous occasions and my harshest reaction is to shake my head and focus on the movie. Rude and inconsiderate as it is, it is no reason to shoot people.
MineralMan
(146,318 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)You could have a nice conversation about murdering people who do things that irk you.
marmar
(77,084 posts)....... n'est-ce pas?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)JI7
(89,252 posts)JI7
(89,252 posts)when he pulled the trigger.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)the shooter wasn't feminized. What a shame that would have been.
FatBuddy
(376 posts)it's best to avoid large groups of them.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)avebury
(10,952 posts)text message is not that big a deal (just as long as the person sending the text stops when the movie starts). It should never have become a death sentence. I have to wonder if the shooter had anger management issues. I think that allowing any and all gun owners to shoot other people at the least provocation is creating a lawless nation. While there are some situations where a shooting might be justifiable, there are far too many where it is not.
On Morning Joe they just stated the shooter has been charged with 2nd Degree Murder. I have no problem with that charge.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Get mad at somebody and how convenient, you have an instrument to transform your lost temper into a death sentence for the object of your ire.
in case it's necessary
BadgerKid
(4,553 posts)an armed public deliver its own justice for acts like this. More victims in the crossfire. 
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)And those of us who recognize the problem are powerless to fix it.
Catherine Vincent
(34,490 posts)And both never got to see the movie thanks to the killer's action.
Rest in peace.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts) 
get the red out
(13,467 posts)How important was his texting during a movie, that someone would end his life for it? How do people get to that point in their thinking? I am at a loss to understand.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)It requires use of the hammer.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)Even though I hate theater texters, this is not the answer.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)the second you pick up your phone in the theater (with no excuses - it's right there before the movie starts: use your phone or be disruptive, and you're gone), this wouldn't have happened.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)uppityperson
(115,677 posts)kcr
(15,317 posts)because the victim was doing something that irritated him, this wouldn't have happened.
Bazinga
(331 posts)He carries everywhere he goes and is one of the kindest, most generous people I know. He says constantly, "When you carry a gun, every situation you're in has a gun involved by default. Therefore your behavior must necessarily be beyond reproof."
This man's behavior was not beyond reproof. A polite reminder to turn off the phone followed by an understanding "Oh I have a 3-year old grandchild myself" was warranted. Provoking an argument was not.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)That poor family.
Orrex
(63,216 posts)And to hell with all the rest.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)What a piece of shit.
Gothmog
(145,345 posts)In order to be protected, a reasonable person must feel threatened. The fact that this individual old man felt threatened is meaningless
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Reeves' right to own a firearm and to protect himself.
What Reeves did was cold blooded murder and he should go to prison for it. No one deserves to die because of texting during movie previews.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)I am extra careful not to even make people angry when I go out. Too many guns floating around.
mainer
(12,022 posts)and the old guy couldn't stand someone texting in the theater. Even during the previews.
I bet the old guy's going to claim "stand your ground" because the victim was threatening him with popcorn.
There were 25 witnesses in the theater, so at least the old guy won't be able to claim something that didn't happen.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)Nope, "Stand your ground". Cannot get up and MOVE. A lot of old men in Florida have this attitude.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)prison, and have all of his worldly belongings seized, auctioned off, with the proceeds going to the victim's family.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)but I find it shocking that anyone would defend or even play the old "wait and see" game here, pro RKBA folks should run not walk from the likes of this crazy ass fool.
If you think this even might be acceptable behavior then I think you ought to take any and all firearms to be destroyed or redistributed to somewhat sane and responsible folks because you have clearly and utterly lost it and probably won't be able to find it any easier than Humpty Dumpty was put together again.
That old codger has no place in anything even vaguely resembling a decent society, There isn't the slightest hint of reasonable use, no plausible argument. The rationalizations are ridiculous here.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)killing someone in a movie theatre over popcorn and texting is now acceptable to even a tiny minority of people?
oh well, another day in paradise.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)firsttimer has been PPRed - "Gun nut troll."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=310529&sub=trans
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)Do you think it was really their first time here? 
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Like many here, I had that one pegged from the beginning.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,184 posts)That's my response to the line often thrown out by the gun enthusiasts, "Well, you can't just ban all guns."
Which is true. A total, blanket prohibition on all private firearm ownership is simply not feasible or possible. No elected official to my knowledge has suggested that because no elected official
However, to those who have chosen to own and/or carry a gun, it's time for a moment of introspection.
Have you witnessed a mafia murder? Has your house or neighboring houses been subjected to prior violent home invasions?
Then yes, you might need a gun. If I were in that situation, I might choose to buy a gun for my protection.
Are you an avid hunter? Are you an Olympic skeet shooting hopeful?
Then you don't necessarily need a gun, but owning a gun for those limited purposes is understandable.
If you aren't in any of those categories, then no, you neither have a need for a gun nor is it practical for you to own one for your own limited interests. And it's high time for you to consider whether your little lifestyle choice could end doing far more harm than good. Much like the man at this theater should have asked himself. Or George Zimmerman. Or the man who went into my office building last year and shot his wife and then himself.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)That includes encouraging folks to change their attitudes toward guns, quit carrying them when there is little need, quit accumulating more of them, quit teaching the next generation that guns are good, quit promoting them, demand NRA become responsible and not a right wing political and gun sales organization, etc.
Dash87
(3,220 posts)It's part of the tough-guy fantasy. They feel so meek and worthless that they need a gun to feel powerful. Remember that, to these pseudo-tough guys, power is everything. They buy into the paradigm that a men's worth should be judged on pretentious aspects such as aggressiveness and their ability to harm others. These are the "football mentality" types.
The gun is a cheat to them. They'll always feel masculine because they can kill anyone at a moment's notice. They also constantly fantasize about being the hero and killing bad guys.
Basically, it brings them closer to what they think the ideal man should be: a cheesy action movie hero.
Not all gun owners are like this, but the ones that are shouldn't be gun owners.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,184 posts)....who stopped an Aurora type shooting, single handedly. And look where it got him.
Meanwhile, in New Mexico yesterday, we have yet another teacher who was able to heroically diffuse a school shooting that could have been much, much worse than it already was. He did so without the use of a single gun.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)a daughter lost a father. Parents have lost a son. And the shooter may lose his freedom. Or at least have a bunch of legal fees. America loves its 2nd amendment rights. Everybody wins!!!
moxie.lu
(22 posts)instead of him getting shot for it, you're missing the point. this doesn't have anything to do with texting. if the shooter was mentally unstable enough to shoot someone for a minor offense, it could have been anything that set him off. the point is that SOMEONE GOT SHOT OVER THIS. FOR SOMETHING AS MINOR AS TEXTING IN A MOVIE THEATER. SHOT FOR NO REASON
HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY THIS
also it's great to see assumptions about the father who was texting, like 'he has a texting addiction' and sarcasm like 'it must have been so important.....'
kcr
(15,317 posts)Everyone has something that do that irritates someone. Even those who hate texters. Anyone could potentially be a victim.
Response to Quixote1818 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)and kill this guy?
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)in this case I suggest no trial (the facts are clear) and no need to worry about "unusual punishment". The perpetrator should be shot at sunrise without a last breakfast. Can we do it tomorrow please?
This is outrageous but it is the culture the NRA and certain political figures (2nd Amendment remedies) have created. It is where rather than resolve differences by calling the authorities you become a vigilante. The underlying premise is the person with the gun is in the "right" and of course right with God for striking down this father and husband because he was texting?
I have been frustrated with people in theaters, church, etc. that text or don't silence their phones but usually the glares from the others is enough to modify their behavior.
This 71 year old will now become a ward of the state of Florida with NRA members paying to keep him alive because he felt he had the right to use deadly force to resolve a texting dispute?
Really? This is the American mentality of 2014.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)It seems far too many people with guns in SYG states think this. One cannot run away, change their seats, leave, etc., because the state (with blessing of NRA) in a backhanded way is telling them NOT TO?
I wonder.
LAGC
(5,330 posts)That entire state has jumped the shark!
Of course this "could have happened anywhere," but it happened in Florida. Weird news strikes again. (And again. And again.)
And if Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman are any examples, the shooter will probably walk as well.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)inappropriate times 1,000,000,000.
Guy needs LWOP and to be financially ruined.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)He could have had someone talking on a cell, having a conversation with people with them, crunching on potato chips, snapping on gum, etc., etc. It could be ENDLESS things that could drive other people CRAZY. ROFL
Edit. My husband has fallen asleep a few times at movies and started SNORING LOUDLY. People around us just laughed at that. In Florida, it could get him SHOT????
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)
Mr Dixon
(1,185 posts)Very Sad and the comments are also horrible
rafeh1
(385 posts)Freepers were ready to blame Muslims/Obamas (key word amish) children. and then the news came out he was on old retired white guy they switched to coverup mode blaming Alzheimer etc..
Other idiots in Florida newspapers claim that if every one was armed in a darkened theater they could defend themselves. As to how exactly a bunch of armed people shooting in a darkened theater would shoot and aim let alone decide who is the good guy and who is the bad guy is lost on their tea bagged brains.
http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/24435641/2014/01/13/shots-fired-at-wesley-chapel-movie-theater?fb_comment_id=fbc_1475124986048189_294979_1475157002711654#f1321234a8
Gothmog
(145,345 posts)I am very sad. It is sad that this little girl lost her father due to the fact that some one who probably should be no longer carrying a guy lost his cool. From what I have read of the facts, I am glad that the judge denied bail for this person and I hope that he is kept off the street.
raven mad
(4,940 posts)We have OPEN carry. No real licensing/backgrounding required. Wear it to your grocery store, the movies, in the local kiddie park.........
A very contentious open hearing meeting last week included many so-called "sourdoughs" shouting over anyone with an opposing view. Many were packing.
Inadequacy? You got it. The bigger your handgun makes me wonder what isn't in your pants. I own guns. I use them to hunt. I eat what I hunt. That's it. A couple months ago, a dude was stalking the grocery aisle - in town, no danger of bears - with his about 2 year old in the basket. Not only carrying, but had a bowie knife strapped on, too. I asked him about the threat the avocados were posing................ 
