Posted on 01/15/2014 5:09:04 AM PST by Anton.Rutter
Edited on 01/15/2014 6:21:09 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
The elderly man accused of shooting a movie theater patron in Florida after an argument over text messaging told police that he fired because he "was in fear of being attacked."
Pasco County Sheriff Chris Nocco said at a news conference today that the victim, Chad Oulson, 43, was texting his young daughter's babysitter when an argument erupted with Reeves over texting during previews before the movie "Lone Survivor."
(Excerpt) Read more at gma.yahoo.com ...
Na, st. tv was... dare I post it??? Black
OMG I’m “rasis”
See My Post #378
That is my take. You never know when someone is going to snap. You might be right, but dead right. In an instance like this, I would have moved to another seat. If another seat wasn't was available, I would have requested a refund and came back later.
Yeah. Ammo is expensive, too.
I knit so that I don't kill people.
Call her a troll too. Might as well give her a complete summary of your online intellect.
Who the heck can afford to throw movie theater popcorn anyway?
Justin Bieber maybe.....
Sorry, courtesy ping
If you shoot at a bank robber because you are in fear for your life or the life of others, and miss striking and killing the child down the street;
The bank robber has committed the murder. You may have committed manslaughter or even aggravated manslaughter but you have not committed murder.
was it Trafficgate in NJ that distracted you (sarcasm)
no worries bro
Obviously not, I’m suggesting that stories that people bring to the press about their own runs ins may very well have not happened, or happened in such a way as it isn’t nearly quite so one sided as they make it out to be. Let’s get them under oath and then let’s see what they have to say. We still have trials don’t we?
If I did it I would consider it murder because of my carelessness. I was trying to make a point about accountability and you mince words...waste of time.
At least you have the decency to suggest that it might have been the thrown popcorn and not the texting to which the defendant was responding. People have been arrested for barking at police dogs. If you throw popcorn or anything else at a cop, you are going to jail. The same should apply to movie patrons assaulting other movie patrons.
I would like to hear more about the seating arrangements in this theater.
If, for example, the defendant returned to the theater and DID choose to sit somewhere more distant from the texter, and the texter is the one who sought out the defendant for a second confrontation, and if the texter outweighs the defendant by 100 pounds, and if the texter is accompanied by an accomplice, and if the texter closes the distance to the defendant to an intimidating degree, and if the popcorn was deliberately thrown into the face of the defendant in a possible attempt to temporarily blind him, then there might be more to "self-defense" than otherwise appears.
For those who think that there was time for the defendant to assess the situation while drawing his gun, I can assure you that I can draw my .380 from a pocket holster and fire in just over one second. Not much is going to change in that one second and the justification for shooting is unlikely to disappear if it did, in fact, exist.
Also, I was taught in my self-defense classes that one shoots to stop an attack by firing two shots to center-of-mass of the attacker and then assess the situation. Any situation that justifies one shot should be able to justify a double-tap. Guns are not magic wands. It's very possible to be killed by a wounded attacker.
As others have pointed out, this is probably a lose-lose situation not only for the actors in the drama, but for the entire nation. Concealed carry takes a hit. Cops take a hit. Even texting and movie-going take a hit.
You have offered one of the most thoughtful posts in this discussion. Thank you.
But the gun grabbers will ride this horse as far as they can take it.
The libs called the Travon incident a murder, few words are worth mincing, murder is one of them, sorry if I offended you. (and that is sorry as in I didn’t mean to, not in a sarcastic tone, it’s hard to tell on the internet)
Oh yes he did struggle.
From a linked article:
Cpl. Alan Hamilton, an off-duty Sumter County sheriff’s deputy who had come to see the movie with his wife, secured the weapon and detained Reeves, the sheriff’s office reported.
...Hamilton identified himself and grabbed the barrel of the gun, Greiner said. Reeves resisted initially, but then let go of the gun, Greiner said.
...Greiner said the gun was jammed and could not have been fired again. He was unsure whether Reeves planned to fire a second shot.
IMO he’d have popped off the whole clip if it hadn’t jammed. And just as likely would have shot the deputy too! Otherwise why resist?
IMO he crossed the threshold of murdering a cell phone user long before entering the theater.
Re: manager talking with Reeves prior to the shoting.
It’s settled.
“The sheriff’s office confirmed that Reeves talked with a manager to complain about Oulson’s cell phone use, Detective Timothy Harris said.”
http://tbo.com/news/crime/suspect-in-theater-shooting-goes-before-judge-today-20140114/
He took the theater’s ‘no cell phone usage’ request to heart and enforced it the only way he knew how. ...By being a trigger-happy, irresponsible a-hole menace to society.
Heck, even a 1911 will do that if you limp wrist it, but it also might smack you in the head on the way out of your hands!
When the Pasco County sheriff was asked whether Hamilton was armed, he smiled and declined to answer the question. One could infer that Hamilton may have pulled his own weapon on Reeves.
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.