Retired FL cop shoots man for texting at movie

View · by **heavy metal daze** on Wed Jan 15, 2014 10:06 am

Wow, I feel pity for the daughter. Does not surprise me however.

View · by **greenfarmer** on Thu Jan 16, 2014 10:31 pm

BigBlue wrote:I think the article was enhanced since it was first posted, but what I read now seems to make it sound like a reasonably legitimate self-defense situation. Mr. Obnoxious won't stop texting when asked, gets verbally abusive when the older guy tells management, starts arguing and becomes physical with him. Take the 'cop' part out of the equation and then look at it the way that gets hypothetically talked about around here a lot... Elderly person accosted by younger bully that eventually uses a gun in self-defense. Doesn't sound like the shooter started the physical part of the confrontation. He probably had a legitimate concern for safety.

Who knows? All we know is what is in the article, which is always subject to inaccuracy and bias by the media.

BB

Even if that is what happened, the older guy who "shot" the other one, could have still just turned around and walked away. You still have that card you can use. Walk away. Just because you have a permit to carry, and you have a gun on you, doesn't mean you need to draw your weapon. You can always turn around and walk away. If the guy won't let you, attacks you from behind, then yes.... Then you have your right to defend yourself. But if you don't make an attempt to walk away, your didn't do your part to diffuse the situation.

View · by **Nougat** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:22 am

turn your back on them when your getting jumped? he's saying the old guy thought the guy had pulled his arm back or something(after he had threatened him and physically assaulted[even if it was popcorn]), thats all it would take to kill you. you do know getting punched in the head/face can kill/seriously harm you right(especially if you have your back turned/''aren't ready''?

people arguing against being allowed to defend yourself really shouldn't. sure deescalating is preferred but is everyone you encounter reasonable/trustworty_nice :twisted:

? without being an eyewitness or having multiple viewing angles with audio all anyone can do is speculate as to what really happened or what they would really do.

the title which is copied from the 'news' and the lack of detail helps it skew toward the 'goal' no? it seems most here have agreed the old coot was over the line? theres no facts though really we have no idea. just being led...

View · by **tman** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:22 am

FL is a stand your ground state, isn't it?

View · by **connsolo** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:52 am

Assault with a deadly concession. Old fart had to defend himself from the lippy whippersnapper.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

View · by **Hmac** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:12 am

"Stand your ground" doesn't apply. The guy's going down for second degree murder and rightfully so.

View · by **BigBlue** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:33 am

Later news reports after my prior posting in this thread seem to describe the situation as a verbal confrontation with popcorn being thrown between rows, which is definitely different than a in-your-face physical threat of harm up close and personal. So based on current media info it seems like he was not justified. As with any media-reported event, we really don't know the whole story. I was just saying that if things were just slightly different and the lippy texting guy would have been physical with the older guy there may have been justification for shooting due to age disparity and threat of bodily harm. But who knows.

What this all boils down to is lack of respect for other people. You're in a theater. Shut your damn phone off or get up and go to the exit area to use it. Don't get pissed off when someone you're irritating calls you out for being a jerk. Be humble, be respectful, and be responsive when asked to stop offensive behavior. In other words, be courteous. If Mr. Jerk hadn't been a dick he'd be alive now and multiple lives would not be ruined. I'm not saying the old guy has no fault, but he wasn't the root cause. Lack of respect was.

BB

View · by **Hmac** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:19 pm

BigBlue wrote:
What this all boils down to is lack of respect for other people. You're in a theater. Shut your damn phone off or get up and go to the exit area to use it. Don't get pissed off when someone you're irritating calls you out for being a jerk. Be humble, be respectful, and be responsive when asked to stop offensive behavior. In other words, be courteous. If Mr. Jerk hadn't been a dick he'd be alive now and multiple lives would not be ruined. I'm not saying the old guy has no fault, but he wasn't the root cause. Lack of respect was.

BB

So you're saying that we are rude to people at the risk of our lives? We should expect that being impolite might reasonably be met with lethal force? That's OK?

I don't care how big a jerk the cell phone guy was being. He was killed by this cranky old sociopath. Based on reports so far, and the reaction of the judge, prosecutor, and his fellow cops, he's a straight-up murderer and I hope he dies in prison where he belongs. He has no place in a civilized society.

View · by **captnviper** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:27 pm

I got an idea! Let the judicial system decide.

View · by **jshuberg** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:38 pm

I agree that in this world that if you're being a jerk, throw popcorn or "disrespect" the wrong person, you can be killed for it. It's not right, it's not justified, but it can happen. The best defense from this happening is to simply be polite, which is a good idea even if there wasn't a threat some nutjob might murder you if you don't.

View · by **BigBlue** on Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:41 pm

Hmac wrote:
BigBlue wrote:
What this all boils down to is lack of respect for other people. You're in a theater. Shut your damn phone off or get up and go to the exit area to use it. Don't get pissed off when someone you're irritating calls you out for being a jerk. Be humble, be respectful, and be responsive when asked to stop offensive behavior. In other words, be courteous. If Mr. Jerk hadn't been a dick he'd be alive now and multiple lives would not be ruined. I'm not saying the old guy has no fault, but he wasn't the root cause. Lack of respect was.

BB

So you're saying that we are rude to people at the risk of our lives? We should expect that being impolite might reasonably be met with lethal force? That's OK?

I don't care how big a jerk the cell phone guy was being. He was killed by this cranky old sociopath. Based on reports so far, and the reaction of the judge, prosecutor, and his fellow cops, he's a straight-up murderer and I hope he dies in prison where he belongs. He has no place in a civilized society.

No. Just that being a jerk is more commonplace these days and causes problems. People think it is OK to act like that. It isn't. Stop being jerks, people.

The cell phone jerk has no place in civilized society either. Not the same level of problem as the guy who shot, but still...

BB

View · by **Hmac** on Sat Jan 18, 2014 8:14 am

BigBlue wrote:
No. Just that being a jerk is more commonplace these days and causes problems. People think it is OK to act like that. It isn't. Stop being jerks, people.

The cell phone jerk has no place in civilized society either. Not the same level of problem as the guy who shot, but still...

BB

The difference being that the old guy committed a heinous act, murder, while the other guy, while being rude, committed no crime whatsoever. Really, not even in the same ballpark, is it?

The most distressing thing about this incident to me is the number of people who somehow imply that the cell phone guy "got what was coming to him". I'm guessing that the attitude is more common on firearms forums like this one and not necessarily reflective of society as a whole.

In the meantime, that old cop/murderer has done a huge favor to the anti-gun campaigns. This is the kind of "carnage in the streets" that they predicted. If stopping a robbery with your handgun is your fantasy, this has to be your nightmare, huh?

View · by **photogpat** on Sat Jan 18, 2014 8:32 am

Hmac wrote: In the meantime, that old cop/murderer has done a huge favor to the anti-gun campaigns. This is the kind of "carnage in the streets" that they predicted. If stopping a robbery with your handgun is your fantasy, this has to be your nightmare, huh?

Actually, as a retired LEO, he's covered under a set of laws that the antis have never touched. Nationwide Carry Permit for Life!! (Aka Retired LEO Safety Act)

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enfo ... Safety_Act

I keep reminding the antis who mention this incident that they've all harped on LEO's as being the "only ones professional enough" to be armed.

View · by **Hmac** on Sat Jan 18, 2014 9:17 am

photogpat wrote:
Hmac wrote: In the meantime, that old cop/murderer has done a huge favor to the anti-gun campaigns. This is the kind of "carnage in the streets" that they predicted. If stopping a robbery with your handgun is your fantasy, this has to be your nightmare, huh?

Actually, as a retired LEO, he's covered under a set of laws that the antis have never touched. Nationwide Carry Permit for Life!! (Aka Retired LEO Safety Act)

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enfo ... Safety_Act

I keep reminding the antis who mention this incident that they've all harped on LEO's as being the "only ones professional enough" to be armed.

I don't think his status under LEOSA, if that was what he was carrying under, is a distinction that the media will play up, nor will the public. He was an armed citizen, non-LEO, that killed a law-abiding unarmed citizen that was committing no crime, breaking no laws whatsoever. He killed the guy simply because he pissed him off.

View · by **Nougat** on Sat Jan 18, 2014 11:29 am

he just forgot he was retired for a second give him a break.

Terrostic threats covers everything and is obviously punishable by death.

Really though how much can a person threaten someone before they are scared enough to shoot the threatener due to fear for their safety based on said threats especially if they have shown that they will do 'aggressive physical acts'?