Posted on 07/13/2014 10:21:09 AM PDT by Albion Wilde
The bad guy has already been offed.
LOL! Now you’re just trolling, Balding. :)
Indeed.
Self-absorbed, easily offended twits demanding the world revolve around them are deeply offended when their selfish behavior is called out. . .
You have evidence that he was in harm's way before he left his seat to complain to management?
If not, then he wasn't "reinserting" himself into harms way, but at most simply "reinserting" himself into annoyance way.
Plus she’s probably watching her movies at home now where it doesn’t disturb anyone else.
?
Self-absorbed, easily offended twits demanding the world revolve around them are deeply offended when their selfish behavior is called out. . ..Thank you. Get Off your GD CELL PHONE. You could be my friend.
IIRC the original story correctly, no I’m not trolling, simply restating what I stated back then.
The bad guy is already dead, the good (or at least innocent) guy is in jail.
In a civilized society he would only have been questioned.
Let’s see what I’ve learned.
Texting doesn’t bother because it doesn’t make noise.
Throwing popcorn is an act in and of itself and not a precursor to a battery.
A 71 year old guy should be ready to deflect the punch of a younger guy.
It’s ok to disturb people during preview, just not during the regular movie.
Not guilty!
I have dreamt that I would be shot in a theatre for telling someone to be quiet. And then pouring a large soft drink on them when they didn’t.
Still deciding if I will or won’t. Maybe I should just carry into the theatre.
He wasn’t on his cellphone when he was shot.
The old fart cop behind him got rebuffed by management and came back with the intent of picking a fight and when the guy in front of him wouldn’t bite the old fart cop kicked the back of his seat to try to get him to stand up and do something so he could use his gun which he had in his hand the whole time.
That’s your hero — coward to the core.
What part of the law and the facts of this incident do you not understand???
It was probably a "no snake" zone also. That doesn't change what can happen to you if you attack a snake.
Good point, I don’t know if he was in any harm. I was inadvertently giving the badge polishers something to cling to. Thanks for pointing out my false assumption.
There’s more to this than meets the eye. Especially since the retired police captain had never shot someone during his career. If you’re interested check out the book that in a chapter explains how Target figured out how a girl was pregnant before her parents did.
It explains where habits reside in the brain and why they are not under conscious control. It may also explain why Reeves shot the guy after being attacked. Even Reeves was shocked by what he had done.
He wasn’t on his cellphone when he was shot.
That’s your hero — coward to the core..... Where did I post he was hero? Please show me, I’m at odds. And I didn’t say he was on his cellphone, I posted where the perp knocked his popcorn out of his lap, which I would interpret as an overagressive act. But that’s just me.
In the days when a speedy trial really meant a speedy trial, and the victims on the sparsely-populated prairies were armed with shotguns and could shoot trespassers without themselves being strung up legally, your scenario worked a lot better. Now, alleged killers, rapists and child abusers are out on bail for months and years of legal maneuvering, discovery and orchestrated delays in densely populated, disarmed and indifferent urbs and suburbs with superhighways and virtally unpoliceable beltways and dozens of ways to search and intimidate victims, witnesses and even jury members. Even after a wrongful acquittal such as the OJ trial, legal "victors" can continue to harass and stalk victims or their families, and it OJ's case, wrest custody of his children from a secure home and raise them with the man later convicted of wrongful death of their mother. It's a different world.
I see nothing wrong with extended stays when there is a preponderance of evidence: in this case, eyewitnesses who were complete strangers and video. It might make the lawyers hurry up a little and go with the truth instead of shredding it into microscopic layers to find a loophole for a felon to walk through.
You are correct as far you’ve gone. You left out the attack by Oulson. FWIW, never throw popcorn into someone’s face that has just returned to a dark theater, whose eyesight had probably not adjusted to the dark and who had been through years of training to respond to a threat.
It got Oulson killed.
You’re ignoring the testimony of the retired Air Force intelligence officer.
She had her hand on her husband’s chest to try and calm him. Reeves only fired one shot.
OMG -- worse even than I imagined. He just up and shot him instantly after the popcorn was dumped. Neither guy was even standing.
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.