As referenced in post 40 
Posted on 01/14/2014 2:04:00 PM PST by centurion316
A 43-year-old father was shot dead by a retired cop in a Florida cinema after a row about him texting his three-year-old daughter as they waited for the movie to start, witnesses said.
Chad Oulson was shot in front of his wife and horrified movie-goers during an argument with 71-year-old Curtis Reeves.
The victim's wife, Nicole, was injured in the shooting after holding her hands out to try to shield Mr Oulson during the confrontation at a movie theater near Tampa on Monday.
After Reeves fired at his chest the victim was heard saying: 'I can't believe I got shot', according to Fox News.
Reeves, who is facing life in prison if found guilty, has been charged with second-degree murder. During a hearing on Tuesday he appeared via video link, wearing a green suicide smock - a fire resistant outfit that can't be torn or turned into a noose.
The judge ruled he should be held without bond because of the severity of the charges, but the no bond ruling can't be confirmed until a live hearing with Reeves.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
And speaking of "bathroom", why the heck did the old geezer Reeves follow the woman texter to the bathroom three weeks before the murder? Whazzup wit dat?
Well I have to agree with that post and neither effin nutz or being sarcastic.
You want to throw something, which is assault, be prepared to get something back. The old man obviously felt threatened by more than just popcorn coming from the texting ass.
Who was the initiating aggressor?
The manager may have told the old guy to calm down because the show hadn’t even started yet.
Throwing “anything” at someone constitutes assault. Maybe the texter also verbally threatened the old man and the old man felt he was in danger.
Betn this gets thrown out.
In a theater full of people right? You're awesome! I hope you don't live in my community. I'm all for 2nd amend., but you don't shoot me, or my kids, because of texting or flying popcorn or harsh words.
As referenced in post 40
That does not rise to the level where deadly force is justified. Under the law you have to be in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death. Verbal threats and popcorn don't constitute that.
Betn this gets thrown out.
Bet it doesn't.
The retired cop --
At a press conference on Tuesday afternoon, Detective Timothy Harris said:
‘There were words that were exchanged but no phsyical contact [between Reeves and Mr Ouslon].’
He could have moved to another seat. The conflict would have ended there. Shooting a gun in a theater without a clear, immediate danger to your life, is grossly irresponsible & risks the lives of the audience. Popcorn is not a clear, immediate, life threatening danger - far from it. Had the texter wanted to hurt the guy he would have thrown his fist, not popcorn.
If you go to a movie intent on an enjoyable evening & your seating neighbor is being disruptive, why would you increase the disruption for everybody by having a verbal altercation? What authority do you have to stop your neighbor from texting or talking or being a disturbance beyond Shhhh? Regardless of outcome, wouldn't such an argument pretty much ruin the evening for you and everybody nearby? Wouldn't a simple seating change end your problem quietly & immediately?
Now, let's say the texter was, instead, two women giggling & talking. The retired cop asks them to be quiet, but they curse at him & throw popcorn at him. Is he then justified in pulling a gun & killing them? How about 2 kids? When does the guys actions become unreasonable, if ever?
As for popcorn throwing, it is an age old juvenile custom in theaters. I doubt anyone considers it a deadly assault except those who shoot someone in a theater.
The idea that personal offense for a minor disturbance is justification for extreme violence is barbaric. Whatever happened to turning the other cheek, moving to another seat, asking for your money back, or just ignoring the minor disturbance? This is the very same mindset as Liberals have: That any PERCEIVED offense is a crime deserving extreme punishment.
All the ex-cop had to do was go ask an usher to do something. Or even **god forbid**, not worry about someone sending a text and breaching good manners.
The texting guy committed no crime, he was just mildly impolite to text during coming attractions. The jackass carrying the gun had a responsibility to have a thicker skin. It goes with carrying.
It doesn’t make you the manners enforcer. It makes you able to respond to actual danger. It does not make you the enforcer of no smoking indoors, no texting, putting your feet up on the seat, etc.
Carrying CCW should make you the exact opposite. This guy deserves life.
If in fact these are his words, he does not consider a bag of popcorn to be physical contact — and neither do most people in the real world.
From the above police report. ....When the defendant returned additiional words were exchanged between the victim
and the defendant and the victim turned and threw a bag of popcorn at the defendant.....
The report says the wife was shot through the hand that she had on her husband’s chest. The old man was seated behind the texter, which means the texter had turned around toward the old man and his wife was trying to restrain him, the texter, with her hand.
Do you have any details of the confrontation beside what was in the report at link?
Of course I'm being hypothetical imagining Reeves position at that time and you know that.
Of course If I had been in Oulson's place I would apologize for my rude behavior and stop it or remove my self to a place where I'm not annoying theater patrons and breaking theater rules.
The elderly man went to the manager/usher and was hounded by the other guy on his return. It escalated into a shouting match, popcorn was thrown (I have my suspicion which couple launched the volly).
Maybe he should’ve taken a beat down.
It’s like saying Zimmerman shot St. Trayvon because he was walking in the neighborhood. When the confrontation turns violent, that’s when the shooting begins.
I don’t defend the shooter’s actions (they sound excessive, although the “stand your ground” defense isn’t being applied here and wasn’t in Zimmerman’s case either). He shot both members of the other couple. Maybe it was triggered by steroid rage (being a former cop and all).
But the headline “shooting a man for texting” is misleading at best.
If some one threw something at your face would you close your eyes? Would you fear if they were expressing threats at the same time?
Unless, of course, the management told him it was not against the law to text during previews and mind your own f'n business.
No where in the report does it say the old man got threateningly aggressive FIRST. Some can read into plain English whatever they want it to say.
It says the texter was turned around to the old man seated behind him and threw something that hit the old man and that the texter’s wife was trying to restrain her texting hubby . That my friend was the initial and justifying aggression. Telling some idiot to turn off the damn phone in the theater was not threatening.
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.