One dead in movie theater shooting in Florida

[Jiro]

The older man was seated directly behind the 43 year old. The 43 year old was "in his face".

The wife's hand was shot. She was holding her husband back when he was shot, she did not stand up in a split second and attempt to protect her husband when she saw a gun. She knew her husband was getting out of control. if she was trying to protect her husband from a gunshot, her hand would not have been shot, she would have stood in front of him.

we have all seen this ... numerous times.

ah... so you're not reserving your judgement at all because you believe these "facts" are exactly what had transpired....

 

[Steinhauer]

ah... so you're not reserving your judgement at all because these the "facts" that you believe have transpired....

Nice try to insert something into my mouth that was not stated or implied Jiro. My judgement is still reserved, as was clearly indicated in post #37 (or did you not read that?).

I will repeat it anyway. I am not saying the shooting was justified, I am not saying the 43 year old "had it coming", I am not saying the retired police officer is innocent.

What I am saying, is that the 43 year old was not shot for texting - he was doing something else when he was shot.

there, now you have me saying the same exact thing ... twice.

 

[Steinhauer]

I do highly suspect that the 43 year old was angry. maybe he was arguing with his daughter? maybe he just wanted to lash out at someone, and what appeared to be a harmless old fart telling him to put his phone away was a good target for him to direct his anger? he felt he could do anything he wanted to do .. told the old codger to go <expletive> himself.

It isn't hard to imagine ... :roll:

 

[Jiro]

Nice try to insert something into my mouth that was not stated or implied Jiro. My judgement is still reserved, as was clearly indicated in post #37 (or did you not read that?).

I will repeat it anyway. I am not saying the shooting was justified, I am not saying the 43 year old "had it coming", I am not saying the retired police officer is innocent.

What I am saying, is that the 43 year old was not shot for texting - he was doing something else when he was shot.

there, now you have me saying the same exact thing ... twice.

your subsequent posts nullified your Post #37.

I do highly suspect that the 43 year old was angry. maybe he was arguing with his daughter? maybe he just wanted to lash out at someone, and what appeared to be a harmless old fart telling him to put his phone away was a good target for him to direct his anger? he felt he could do anything he wanted to do .. told the old codger to go <expletive> himself.

It isn't hard to imagine ... :roll:

see? you're focusing on 43-years old and you're painting him as an angry man with anger issue. nowhere in the article said anything about a wife holding him down either.

Bay News 9 spoke to a neighbor of Oulson's who said the dead man was a very nice guy who he couldn't envision being involved in an incident like this.

"Always smiling. I've never seen him angry," Bill Costas said. If I needed help with something he was always there.

"Totally different guy. Like I said, it just doesn't make sense to me. Not from what I know of him."

 

[Steinhauer]

your subsequent posts nullified your Post #37.



see? you're focusing on 43-years old and you're painting him as an angry man with anger issue. nowhere in the article said anything about a wife holding him down either.

What if the rude asshole 43 year old was about to punch the 71 year old and pound his head in to the floor? Would that make the shooting justified?

I am sure he stood up to verbally confront the 71 year old for completely noble reasons :roll:

So yea, I think every angle should be looked at, and not immediately paint the 71 year old as an old grumpy control freak retired officer used to bullying people around like you were painting him as.

 

[Jiro]

What if the rude asshole 43 year old was about to punch the 71 year old and pound his head in to the floor? Would that make the shooting justified?

I am sure he stood up to verbally confront the 71 year old for completely noble reasons :roll:

So yea, I think every angle should be looked at, and not immediately paint the 71 year old as an old grumpy control freak retired officer used to bullying people around like you were painting him as.

weren't you going to reserve your judgement until facts come out? I've never stated that I'm going to reserve my judgement but you did.

here's what the witness has described about Curtis (old man)

Two seats away Charles Cummings and his son watched the squabbling.

When Reeves returned, he was without a manager.

"He came back very irritated," Cummings said.

I don't know about you but he was texting his young daughter and it must be something important. maybe that was rude to do that

 

[Steinhauer]

I would be irritated too if someone had a glowing lcd screen floating around in front of me during a movie.

And yes, I have still reserved judgment. Where have I stated the shooting was justified? Where have I discussed the innocence, or guilt, of either party?

 

[Jiro]

I would be irritated too if someone had a glowing lcd screen floating around in front of me during a movie.

And yes, I have still reserved judgment. Where have I stated the shooting was justified? Where have I discussed the innocence, or guilt, of either party?

simple - stay home and watch a movie

 

[Steinhauer]

There was a recent ruling by the United States Supreme Court on the 2nd Amendment. It is an individual right to carry a firearm. Also, signs prohibiting firearms carry no legal weight. None.

Just thought that maybe it should be put in this thread as we are discussing yet another shooting. And, just in case anyone thinks that this retired police officer was somehow breaking a law by carrying a gun in a movie theater.

Still reserving judgement.

 

[Steinhauer]

simple - stay home and watch a movie

Perhaps people who become irate at being told to follow the rules that apply to everyone, and initiate a confrontation when told to follow the rules, should stay home and watch a movie so they can text all they want to?

 

[Jiro]

There was a recent ruling by the United States Supreme Court on the 2nd Amendment. It is an individual right to carry a firearm. Also, signs prohibiting firearms carry no legal weight. None.

Just thought that maybe it should be put in this thread as we are discussing yet another shooting. And, just in case anyone thinks that this retired police officer was somehow breaking a law by carrying a gun in a movie theater.

Still reserving judgement.

in other word.... you're condoning people to disregard any signs?

 

[Jiro]

Perhaps people who become irate at being told to follow the rules that apply to everyone, and initiate a confrontation when told to follow the rules, should stay home and watch a movie so they can text all they want to?

initiate a confrontation? that would be Curtis... the old man. perhaps he should stay home and watch a movie. and perhaps seek a therapist because he seems to have trouble adjusting and coping with the fact that he's no longer a police officer.... no badge to carry around to push people around

 

[Steinhauer]

initiate a confrontation? that would be Curtis... the old man. perhaps he should stay home and watch a movie. and perhaps seek a therapist because he seems to have trouble adjusting and coping with the fact that he's no longer a police officer.... no badge to carry around to push people around

Where did you get that he was pushing anyone around? Asking someone to follow the rules is not bullying.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Texting for getting shot. Oh my god!! Those people who have guns and carry it to anywhere are losing their marbles.

 

[Reba]

He apparently was not shot for texting. He was not texting when he confronted the old man. He was doing something else. Threatening? Throwing popcorn? Yelling and screaming?

The old man did ask him to stop texting, then went to complain. The 43 year old's wife even tried to hold him back from confronting the old man, so even she knew he was getting out of control.

regardless, all we know for certain right now is that he was not texting when he confronted the old man, and that words were exchanged. The old man did not shoot him for texting ... he had already asked him to stop and went to complain about it. It was when he returned that the 43 year old got irate. So, until the facts come out, I am going to reserve judgement.

The shooter was a former cop. He knew that throwing popcorn and yelling is no justification for shooting someone in a theater. That's ridiculous.

 

[Reba]

It is different when you are using words in a physical altercation. Suppose the 43 year old said "I am going to (expletive) strangle you if you don't shut up !!!" then threw popcorn?

That is a threat. Now, we still don't know what was said ... and it is important that the facts come out first. If the old man shot him simply because the guy was being an asshole, then yeah, the old guy needs to go to prison. However, if the 43 year old was making physical threats, and/or was physically threatening the old man, then the entire scenario is different.

A verbal threat is not the same as a physical threat, and you need to use rational judgment in these situations.

Also, even if it were a stand your ground situation that doesn't mean a gun carrier has to throw away common sense and judgment.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Who cares if anyone text at the theater but gun?? what heck is that. The old retired cop should belongs to the prison. It sounds like the retired cop is very serious depression and lost his marble.

 

[Reba]

The older man was seated directly behind the 43 year old. The 43 year old was "in his face".

The wife's hand was shot. She was holding her husband back when he was shot, she did not stand up in a split second and attempt to protect her husband when she saw a gun. She knew her husband was getting out of control. if she was trying to protect her husband from a gunshot, her hand would not have been shot, she would have stood in front of him.

we have all seen this ... numerous times.

Pure speculation. Wait for the witnesses' testimony and forensic analysis.

 

[Reba]

I do highly suspect that the 43 year old was angry. maybe he was arguing with his daughter? maybe he just wanted to lash out at someone, and what appeared to be a harmless old fart telling him to put his phone away was a good target for him to direct his anger? he felt he could do anything he wanted to do .. told the old codger to go <expletive> himself.

It isn't hard to imagine ... :roll:

That's just it--imagination, not facts.

 

[Beowulf]

That's just it--imagination, not facts.

You should listen to MY "version".