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]
Too bad he got shot before he was able to break that old man’s neck. Boo. Hoo.
—Do those ‘goons’ bother you also? Should those ‘goons’ be shot to?—
Yes, people who don’t know how to act in public or have raised their kids to act poorly in public are on the list, thanks for asking!
You don’t know what was said in the theatre or anything else that went down besides “popcorn” and “bang”. You’re just as bad as the people who convicted the Duke LaCrosse team and Zimmerman before the facts came out.
Maybe if the dead texter was black instead of a cop, you’d be all for “waiting until we know the facts”.
Don’t you interfere with my viewing of previews and commercials or I KILL YOU!
Next time you go to the theater, if this 'texting' stuff happens, mention to the texters that your Father is an retired cop who carries a gun, and that he will be in to take his seat after he gets through at the concession stand.
—The retired goon did the exact opposite. He instigated the confrontation, then escalated it. -—
No, you dolt, the texter started the confrontation by violating the rules of the cinema. Try to keep up.
Sorry, but my parents are alive and well... after all, they do not assault movie goers with popcorn.
—You must be very young. You cannot seem to imagine what it is to live in a free country—
You must be very old and senile, because I never hear any other old timers talk about how great it was back in the day when people just went around ruining everyone else’s day by acting like arseholes.
Her hands must be faster than a speeding bullet. RME
I thought the shooter was an excop. Since when is the dead guy a cop, too?
The dead texter was not a cop.
And he knows that’s why he can’t be free.
Me too. I think it warrants a ban.
Thanks.
Great bodily harm .... from popcorn?
Look, I'm not out to bash the police. They've got a tough, largely thankless job. So c'mon already -- a retired cop escalating a situation, being "assaulted" with popcorn shoots to prevent great bodily harm?
That's just not believable. Especially from a cop with his lengthy experience.
You make a great point. You know, that fake butter that the movie theatres use does have a way of getting through bullet proof vests.
I think you're onto it: The 71 year old retired cop was in fear of his life due to deadly popcorn being thrown at him.
Yep, Fire away!
My initial point in my first post #7 on this thread was that the gun-grabbers are going to point to this tragic instance and claim it's time to end conceal/carry. They're gonna make as much political hay out of this as they can.
Others who compare this situation to George Zimmerman completely miss the point: Zimmerman was attacked using lethal force from the get-go. There was no escalation. Trayvon Martin blind-sided him and told him flat out he was going to kill him as he banged his head on the cement. That is what the court testimony bore out and that's also what Zimmerman's injuries bore out.
That is a far cry from being 'assaulted' for lack of a better term, with a bucket of popcorn.
Further, the retired Cop has been reported to have had complaints with other movie goers (as was reported in our news) recently over texting and phone calls in movies. Perhaps his "frustration" got the best of him. Or maybe his finger twitched on the trigger and he shot the man unintentionally.
Or maybe ... just maybe ... he shouldn't have had the gun out in the first place as NOTHING that's been reported thus far indicates any reason for the retired officer to pull his weapon. So why was the weapon out in the first place? That's the real question to be answered here. Either there was a direct threat, or the retired cop was being a bully. It's one or the other, there's no grey area in situations like this.
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 ......
All hypothetical. Not worth considering until more facts come out. However as I said above, there was either a direct threat, or the retired officer was being a bully on a power trip and thought he could intimidate someone into complying with what he wanted. It's going to be one or the other.
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.
Now I think *that* is a spot-on observation. When the facts finally come out, if there was some justification for the shooting it should be readily and easily apparent. (I'll be damn'ed if I know what "justification" there could be in this case ... but then all the facts aren't out.
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.
Ours is becoming an increasingly hostile society which is the problem. One ignorant person acts rudely to someone else and the next thing we know the escalation starts. I see it every day. Someone thinks they got "dissed" and they feel like they need to strike back in some way whether verbally or physically. It's no wonder we have shootings like this. Civility is gone. Talking through our problems is gone. It's all about who can shout someone else down or escalate higher than the next guy until the other guy backs down.
None of this ends well.
“As a society, now that this guy has been killed, I’d say we are a little more polite.”
True. Next time when somebody tries to be rude, assuming they have heard of this story, they surely will think twice that their rudeness can escalate into their own death.
The gun equalizes.
There is no lack of a better term. If a person angrily throws popcorn at you, that is an assault. The severity of the assault depends upon the other factors I mentioned.
If that young angry man was approaching rapidly with intention to physically attack, I would definitely anticipate the possibility of great bodily harm. If the popcorn throwing occurred in such a manner that I believed that the person would continue approaching, then I can see being justified in drawing and firing.
What is your evidence that the incident was going to end after the throwing of the popcorn?
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.