Retired FL cop shoots man for texting at movie

[Hmac]

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'?

He's a long-time LEO, ex-SWAT commander. The guy threw popcorn at him. Respond with lethal force? Nah, this is a road-rage incident. He was pissed, not fearful. Could have just walked away at any point. The judge, prosecutor, and cops on the scene all agree on that.

[BigBlue]

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?

I didn't say the texting guy 'got what was coming to him' or that the result was 'equivalent' to the initial action. You did read the "not the same level" comment, right? Obviously the old guy overreacted disproportionate to the situation, committed a crime, and was wrong. What I said was that the texting jerk initiated the problem. His attitude led to the end result. If he would have been more respectful the shooting would not have happened. My comments are not about the old guy's actions at all, they are about what the other guy did and what he could have done differently.

Yes, the old guy's actions will be fodder for the antis. That's unfortunate and sucky for us all. Nothing good can come from the situation. And it all started because someone had attitude. Blame the old guy all you want - I'm not defending him now that more details are known - but don't ignore the root cause of a lot of issues in today's society. Two wrongs happened here and one of them preceded the other.

BB

[Hmac]

I didn't say the texting guy 'got what was coming to him' or that the result was 'equivalent' to the initial action. You did read the "not the same level" comment, right? Obviously the old guy overreacted disproportionate to the situation, committed a crime, and was wrong. What I said was that the texting jerk initiated the problem. His attitude led to the end result. If he would have been more respectful the shooting would not have happened. My comments are not about the old guy's actions at all, they are about what the other guy did and what he could have done differently.

"If she hadn't been wearing those tight pants, I wouldn't have raped her..."

Blaming the crime on the victim.

[BigBlue]

I didn't say the texting guy 'got what was coming to him' or that the result was 'equivalent' to the initial action. You did read the "not the same level" comment, right? Obviously the old guy overreacted disproportionate to the situation, committed a crime, and was wrong. What I said was that the texting jerk initiated the problem. His attitude led to the end result. If he would have been more respectful the shooting would not have happened. My comments are not about the old guy's actions at all, they are about what the other guy did and what he could have done differently.

"If she hadn't been wearing those tight pants, I wouldn't have raped her..."

Blaming the crime on the victim.

Not the same thing in any remote stretch of the imagination. The texting guy did something he wasn't supposed to do, was rude to someone who was trying to get him to follow the rules, and then escalated the situation. And remember, I'm not saying the shooter was right, so again your analogy is flawed because I'm not defending anyone.

Do you really believe it was good and proper that the texting guy acted the way he did or are you just looking for fault in however I try to describe my dismay at the degradation of society??

[Hmac]

I didn't say the texting guy 'got what was coming to him' or that the result was 'equivalent' to the initial action. You did read the "not the same level" comment, right? Obviously the old guy overreacted disproportionate to the situation, committed a crime, and was wrong. What I said was that the texting jerk initiated the problem. His attitude led to the end result. If he would have been more respectful the shooting would not have happened. My comments are not about the old guy's actions at all, they are about what the other guy did and what he could have done differently.

"If she hadn't been wearing those tight pants, I wouldn't have raped her..."

Blaming the crime on the victim.

Not the same thing in any remote stretch of the imagination. The texting guy did something he wasn't supposed to do, was rude to someone who was trying to get him to follow the rules, and then escalated the situation. And remember, I'm not saying the shooter was right, so again your analogy is flawed because I'm not defending anyone.

Do you really believe it was good and proper that the texting guy acted the way he did or are you just looking for fault in however I try to describe my dismay at the degradation of society??

The texting guy did nothing illegal. He was being a dick, but he threatened no one's life and he was murdered. I don't think the way he conducted himself was "good and proper", but I reject the concept that he contributed to his own murder. Some people imply what you imply, but in a civilized society, we should treat people politely because it's the civilized thing to do, not because we're afraid we'll be murdered. You can be dismayed at the degradation of society, but to be equate being rude with murdering someone for being rude is off base. You imply that being murdered for rudeness is a consequence that might be expected. THAT is degradation of society, when we start killing people just for pissing us off.

[BigBlue]

The texting guy did nothing illegal. He was being a dick, but he threatened no one's life and he was murdered. I don't think the way he conducted himself was "good and proper", but I reject the concept that he contributed to his own murder. Some people imply what you imply, but in a civilized society, we should treat people politely because it's the civilized thing to do, not because we're afraid we'll be murdered. You can be dismayed at the degradation of society, but to be equate being rude with murdering someone for being rude is off base. You imply that being murdered for rudeness is a consequence that might be expected. THAT is degradation of society, when we start killing people just for pissing us off.

It's pretty hard to reject that concept, because it actually happened. You can say he didn't deserve the outcome but not that he didn't contribute.

As for the 'imply murder might be expected', you're just not getting it. I said nothing of the sort. I said the guy's actions had a result and if he didn't act the way he did the result would have been different. I said nothing about equating things or justifying the old guy's actions (other than hypothetical in my very first post before the additional details came out). He was wrong. His actions were worse than the texting guy's. The fact the texting/abusive/popcorn thrower guy was killed wrongly doesn't make his actions defensible though. He was still an ass. He just happened to be an ass in an unfortunate situation. Maybe the moral is "don't be an ass and you'll have less likelihood of getting into an unfortunate situation."

[Hmac]

. Maybe the moral is "don't be an ass and you'll have less likelihood of getting into an unfortunate situation."

You bemoan rude cell phone users, I bemoan people using lethal force to deal with them. I think the moral of the story is "lethal force is for protecting your life or the lives of others, not dealing with rude behavior".

[LarryFlew]

I think the moral of the story is "lethal force is for protecting your life or the lives of others, not dealing with rude behavior".

So you are you saying the OF shot him for his rude behavior, not because the cell phone jerk escalated it?

Not sure I am siding with either side of this disagreement without the COMPLETE story but guessing even a totally derailed ex LEO OF would not have shot the guy just for not following the cell phones off in the theater rule if the cell guy had not escalated. I know a lot of OF's that would feel VERY threatened by a young angry guy and even a small shove could be considered by an OF to be threatening to life and limb. Could he turn and walk away, yes, if the guy came after him would he stand a chance at his age, no, so facing him and standing his ground was likely the only option in his mind. He did after all have some kind of training with his LEO record. Should he face murder charges, can't tell by the short storys told IMO but likely he should if it really went down without any physical confrontation besides the popcorn.

[tman]

Remember, it's not what happened, it what the shooter REASONABLY thought was happening.


Sent from my iPhone using that app which shall not be named.

[20mm]

Remember, it's not what happened, it what the shooter REASONABLY thought was happening.


Sent from my iPhone using that app which shall not be named.

Yeah lets not hang this guy until all the facts are in. This guy is retired law enforcement and probably a good judge of character. What would you guys do if you were a frail senior and some young texting thug in a theater threw popcorn at you and was about to assault you?

This guy didn't have to run, he could stand his ground and defend himself!

[connsolo]

Remember, it's not what happened, it what the shooter REASONABLY thought was happening.


Sent from my iPhone using that app which shall not be named.

Yeah lets not hang this guy until all the facts are in. This guy is retired law enforcement and probably a good judge of character. What would you guys do if you were a frail senior and some young texting thug in a theater threw popcorn at you and was about to assault you?

This guy didn't have to run, he could stand his ground and defend himself!

Seriously, next time someone tosses popcorn at me I'm going to unload.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sietch]

What would you guys do if you were a frail senior and some young texting thug in a theater threw popcorn at you and was about to assault you? This guy didn't have to run, he could stand his ground and defend himself!

I can't tell. Are you serious or just bullsh¡tting?

This guy is retired law enforcement and probably a good judge of character.

Same question.
ETA: My concern being that judge of character has zero to do with "am I actually being attacked, GBH, death, stuff that a reasonable person would perceive as threats, etc.?"
One will tell you if you'd be comfortable with the guy dating your daughter. The other will tell you whether or not you're going to prison after shooting the guy.

[Pat Cannon]

I have read that the stuff they put on popcorn nowadays can kill you.