“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.
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.