Posted on 01/17/2014 6:10:16 AM PST by Anton.Rutter
Guns don’t kill people, popcorn kills people. Or maybe it’s texting. Or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time with some fool who thinks he needs to take a gun to the movies.
(Excerpt) Read more at touch.latimes.com ...
This was a former (20+ years since, but still volunteer) cop. Even if they only leave the cops armed, he would’ve had a gun.
Does the theatre have a detention section???
I wonder how many people were killed in Chicago between the time of the theater shooting and the publication of this anti-gun trash.
How many times have you thrown popcorn on somebody in a theater? How many of your family members or friends have done so? Doing such is an assault; a crime.
Without knowing more, the evidence would seem insufficient to justify shooting, but you don't have to wait for someone who is attacking you to cause injury. You just have to have a reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death.
What do you think that the attacker was going to do AFTER throwing the popcorn? Just sit down and enjoy the movie? Would he break off the attack and leave the theater? Did he have anything else in his hands?
What was the reasonable thing for the ex-cop to do? Stand there and absorb whatever punishment was to follow the popcorn? Sit down and make himself more vulnerable? Run away and make his wife the possible target of whatever was coming?
The ex-cop was in a place where it was legal for him to be. I don't believe he had any legal duty to retreat and since his wife was with him, retreat may have been a problem. THAT is a "stand your ground" situation.
Is throwing popcorn a felony? Is it a violent felony? What further attack could be expected? Is deadly force permitted to stop someone who has or is about to commit a violent felony from doing so?
It’s not how they’re treated, at least here in Canada it’s how they’re trained. It’s us vs them attitude now.
“How many times have you thrown popcorn on somebody in a theater? How many of your family members or friends have done so? Doing such is an assault; a crime.”
None of that is germane. The guideline for the use of deadly force is the person using it must be in genuine fear of his life or great bodily harm. Thrown popcorn is a real stretch. Nor did the shooter challenge the other party: “I have a gun, freeze @#$#@@#!”.
The shooter will die in jail, I’d be willing to bet on it. He exhibited very poor decision making. Most likely there should be a yearly exam for CCW after 65, just as there should be for driving.
It is certainly germane as to whether or not the victim was "a royal prick", which was the comment to which I was responding.
I also disagree vehemently with the ignorant Sheriff's statement that "stand your ground" is not relevant because there were other seats to which the shooter could move.
The whole point of "stand your ground" is to relieve the burden of someone who is attacked. There is certainly an obligation not to shoot somebody without justification. There is no obligation to retreat from a place where you have a right to be. The sheriff is improperly dismissing the "stand your ground" claim without admitting that the burden of proving that "stand your ground" does not apply is HIS. If a "stand your ground" claim is made by the defendant (which has not happened yet), then the prosecution will have to convince a judge that "self-defense" does not apply. The judge would not be interested in how many empty seats there were in the theater.
Florida theatre killing proves COPS with guns are primed to shoot
FIXED IT.
Interesting that you should suggest that.
The principle that I was taught is that, "if you are justified in drawing your deadly weapon, then you are justified in using it".
You can't use a deadly weapon as a means to get your way in an argument. There is a crime called "brandishing a weapon". This crime is committed by showing a weapon in a situation in which it is not justified.
There are jurisdictions which are considering changing their brandishing laws so that a person might be justified in showing a weapon at a time when they are not justified in firing the weapon. I don't know of any place which has done this yet.
If you are going to suggest an alternative for the shooter, I don't think this one works.
The sheriff takes issue with your histrionic description of the encounter:
‘Why didn’t he just sit somewhere else?’ Sheriff rips apart ‘Stand Your Ground’ defence of ex-cop who shot dead father for texting in movie theater
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3112725/posts
La Times writing proves guys with pens are primed to be idiots.
5.56mm
The Sheriff is wrong.
"Stand Your Ground" provides immunity from prosecution for people who may have had an opportunity to retreat but choose not to do so.
The burden is on the prosecution to prove that self-defense was not justification for the shooting. There is no burden for the defendant to prove that he couldn't retreat.
Prior to passage of the "stand your ground" law there was probably a legal duty to retreat, if it could be done safely, rather than use deadly force. That legal duty no longer exists. Whether the Sheriff likes it or not, a person who is attacked is not obligated to retreat (subject to some exceptions).
A part of the "stand your ground" law also details how an accused may avoid prosecution. I'm not sure of all the details of who has the burden of proof and what level of proof is required.
Ohhh Okay --
"Stand Your Ground" provides immunity from prosecution for people who may have had an opportunity to retreat but choose not to do so.
You have the right to SYG in your home and your car but not in a theatre with a No Weapons Allowed sign on the front door that you are in violation of by sneaking your weapon in.
The burden is on the prosecution to prove that self-defense was not justification for the shooting.
self defense from what?? -- a thrown bag of popcorn.
Even his lawyer knows that that is ludicrous especially since after he threw it, he was all out of popcorn -- essentially unarmed.
Now the shooter has the popcorn -- if it was such a deadly weapon then why didn't he pick it up and throw it back??
Somebody clever posted on another thread:
"I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy."
God forbid he should have to do the work of researching the actual statistics of how many crimes have been prevented by the Second Amendment.
I had a consulting job with a metropolitan police department in one of the largest U.S. cities. One day I was out on a highway overpass with one of the police lieutenants discussing possible photo angles for some public relations stuff. Police had shut down two lanes for the protection of some workers on the roadway, and a lot of traffic was being funneled into the other two lanes. I saw huge muscular truck drivers lean out of the cabs of semi's and either curse the police or flip the bird right in their faces. It astonished me, but the lieutenant said, "It happens all the time. You just have to ignore it." He was a home town working class guy who had sent himself through school and then law school at night, so it's not like he felt he was socially insulated from this abuse. He simply had become a professional.
Living proof. I call it my "lost weekend."
You also need to take into account the other theory of the popcorn, which is that the popcorn flew into the shooter's face at the moment the bullet impacted the unarmed victim's chest and not before.
They actually have jail cells in the security HQ in most major sports stadiums. Fans get too drunk or too rowdy, clank!
Where did I see that — I think it was Disneyland that has the same thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.