Argument in cinema results in gunshot death

[Telstra]

According to the pic, the victim looks like a gentle giant.
The old bastard may have abused many people in the past. We'll see.

 

[peeonme]

What ever happened to the idea of just changing seats if someone annoys you? Yes it was rude of the father to text his daughter, we can only speculate as to how the ex cop requested that he stop texting.
Maybe he ordered the deceased to stop, that's a good way to provoke some resistance. What ever transpired it is sad that a little girl lost her dad just because some asshole lost his self control.
What ever happened to the idea of being the "bigger" man by taking the high road? Do some guys fear that they become emasculated if they let some other guy have his way?
I would hope that we could handle the thought that it is not worth the loss of a human life just to prove that we are men.

 

[BFizzle]

But, if the other person had a gun as well, he could have defended himself.

 

[peeonme]

But, if the other person had a gun as well, he could have defended himself.

Maybe we should just shoot people that we don't like?
If someone has the drop on you and pulls his gun first you are hardly in a position to pull yours, the party of the first part is hardly likely to let you do this.
It is not a good thing to have two angry asses shooting it out in a movie theater, what the in the hell has happened to our logic?

 

[DonQuixote]

Both/And, people, not Either/Or.

The guy who got shot DID aggravate and thus precipitate.
Does that give the ass who escalated and shot him a pass - no fucking way.
It also doesn't give a pass to the ass who had no common courtesy for the rest of the people.

We're fast approaching the Wild West, with court approvals in certain jurisdictions.

Telly, if you can't see that the "victim" brought the anger of the other patron on himself, you are a fool.
That's NOT that same as justifying him being shot by any stretch, so don't try.

Buzzer - I can see Deja's argument and the pure reasoned logic in his statements. I'm sorry you can't.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Buzzer - I can see Deja's argument and the pure reasoned logic in his statements. I'm sorry you can't.

You were reading something else then.

 

[JayHawk]

This is all hogwash to throw your hands up and say people are going to misunderstand anything when I have been addressing what you said, not vague impressions or fictionalizations of what you said. Nor did I even mention the NRA or make any comment of any kind as to whether you have a gun.

Yes, your statements directly imply an apathy to murder if you feel the victim was rude or broke a rule of common consideration of his neighbors. You're careful to hide that behind saying you don't legally defend what the shooter did, but we're not addressing whether or not the law covers what he did. I'm addressing whether in a civil world this was a remotely reasonable or even understandable response to the offense and the answer in your posts leans somewhere between "yes" and "neutral."

Boy, down these a ways, yuns can get you'self shot over viena sausages much less assaultin' a mans sensibilities with popped buttery horse feed, (pause to spit long line of tobbaccy), nahhwp I wouldnt recommend it ...nawhp

 

[zoltanspawn]

Both/And, people, not Either/Or.

The guy who got shot DID aggravate and thus precipitate.
Does that give the ass who escalated and shot him a pass - no fucking way.
It also doesn't give a pass to the ass who had no common courtesy for the rest of the people.

We're fast approaching the Wild West, with court approvals in certain jurisdictions.

Telly, if you can't see that the "victim" brought the anger of the other patron on himself, you are a fool.
That's NOT that same as justifying him being shot by any stretch, so don't try.

Buzzer - I can see Deja's argument and the pure reasoned logic in his statements. I'm sorry you can't.

If the rude behavior isn't a justification, and doesn't give Reeves a pass, why bring it up?

Or...so what if Oulson pissed Reeves off?

 

[xbuzzerx]

If the rude behavior isn't a justification, and doesn't give Reeves a pass, why bring it up?

Or...so what if Oulson pissed Reeves off?

My point exactly.

"I'm not saying I defend the guy who shot him to death, but I am saying he was a big huge dick and bore some responsibility here" is really beating around the bush. People are rude every single day. It's either understandable to shoot them even if some inconvenient laws are against you, or it's completely unacceptable.

 

[JayHawk]

NOTHING that occurred is worth being shot, drawing a weapon, any of it.....

BUT when I am watching a movie if your whiny little creation cant behave then fucking leave, if they cant be left alone for two hours then don't go.... simple advice.

Again, nothing justifies shooting a man for a movie theater argument, no matter how dickish the person is being or has been. But, the level of uncivilized, social misfit, and discourteous asshats everywhere, has climbed to new heights in the last decade.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Pretty sure most theaters are pretty strict about cell phone usage in the theater. Any time I go to the movies there is stuff on the screen about it. Is it really that hard to speak to a Manager to do something about it? As much as this guy was rude the people irritated hardly handle these situations as "adults" and only have their self to blame.

 

[JayHawk]

If the rude behavior isn't a justification, and doesn't give Reeves a pass, why bring it up?

Or...so what if Oulson pissed Reeves off?

I think the reason why is along the same lines as road rage, acting punkish and what not..... folks these days appear to have something to prove, when you put two weak minded asshats together then one decides they will do what they want and the others can put the fuck up with it..... then the other decides they wont be insulted..... then it leads to issues. Ever driven down the highway these days? Cars kill as many people as guns and yet you dont see anyone having a hissy each rush hour when half the drivers are criminally aggressive.

The point is the world does not occur in a vacuum, NOTHING is black and white, and if you cannot see all the contributing factors then we are doomed to have these incidents over and over. Or get rid of the gun.... you do see how realistically optimistic we should be about removing guns, right? So therefore you have to talk about and deal with underlying factors.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty sure most theaters are pretty strict about cell phone usage in the theater. Any time I go to the movies there is stuff on the screen about it. Is it really that hard to speak to a Manager to do something about it? As much as this guy was rude the people irritated hardly handle these situations as "adults" and only have their self to blame.

Agreed. And for theaters ever movie has screen info but some do not do a damn thing. And no I dont return to those places.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Again, nothing justifies shooting a man for a movie theater argument, no matter how dickish the person is being or has been. But, the level of uncivilized, social misfit, and discourteous asshats everywhere, has climbed to new heights in the last decade.

I would not disagree that people have gotten ruder and that cellphones have been part of that. But I would say that's a far lesser offense than the equal upward trend in the last decade of people feeling it's their personal duty to "correct" public etiquette or deputize themselves as a rent a cop as they go around with a gun on them. People don't die because someone used a cellphone rudely.

 

[zoltanspawn]

I think the reason why is along the same lines as road rage, acting punkish and what not..... folks these days appear to have something to prove, when you put two weak minded asshats together then one decides they will do what they want and the others can put the fuck up with it..... then the other decides they wont be insulted..... then it leads to issues. Ever driven down the highway these days? Cars kill as many people as guns and yet you dont see anyone having a hissy each rush hour when half the drivers are criminally aggressive.

The point is the world does not occur in a vacuum, NOTHING is black and white, and if you cannot see all the contributing factors then we are doomed to have these incidents over and over. Or get rid of the gun.... you do see how realistically optimistic we should be about removing guns, right? So therefore you have to talk about and deal with underlying factors.

In the context of this particular incident, Oulson's rudeness really isn't relevant.

If we are broadening the discussion to gun violence and other social/cultural problems, fine.

 

[bankside]

I dunno.

Calling someone to account for their poor behaviour is sometimes counselled against, enduring rudeness being held as a form of etiquette in its own right. But pointing out someone's poor behaviour is never, ever as rude as the offending behaviour itself.*

It appears one argument at play here is more about the victim not having had his day in court. i.e. "It's a shame a court didn't sentence him to death for mobile phone douchebaggery, because then we would be celebrating this outcome."

I must say that is a very tempting position, especially when the alternative proposition is that we just grimly endure the rude behaviour of others as the price of living in society. No, I don't think I will.

What about ushers? What about people being told "No?" That they cannot indulge every whim at any moment. What about social and institutional constraints that would give other moviegoers confidence that these things would be dealt with? A society has to accept a certain indulgent baseline of behaviour for these things to even happen. Really, this is a story of indulgence on both sides.





*You might say it is ruder to speak up if the first person shows an obvious disability that would prevent him from observing the norms of public decorum. But in that case I'd say the first person's behaviour isn't rude so much as unwelcome.

 

[Kahaih]

. . . .

Where did the bullet enter the victim's body? According to the posted article, he was sitting directly in front of the shooter. Was he shot in the back, or did he stand up and turn to face the shooter?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting/

In a dimly lit Florida theater, Curtis Reeves got into an argument with another moviegoer over texting. The two men exchanged words that gradually became more heated and Reeves felt something hit his face.

Reeves, who minutes earlier had gone to seek a manager's help to stop the texting, this time reached into a pocket in his pants for, police say, a pistol.

He later told police he feared the man was going to attack him.

Reeves, a former police officer, pulled a gun and shot once, hitting Chad Oulson in the chest and Oulson's wife, Nicole, in the hand she was using to grab her husband in an attempt to calm things down.

. . . .

Call me old fashioned, but I'd much rather see facts than speculations.

 

[Kahaih]

Is there really a big issue with cellphones in movie theaters these days though? I would understand that people got upset more if it was a common thing but I go to the movies a few times a month and there's almost never a problem with people using cell phones. At the most someone forgets to put theirs on soundless but it is usually dealt with right away.

On the other hand, I usually don't go to see the same movies that annoying teenagers do so that might explain some of it, but even when I do go the see the blockbusters people are very civil. Then again, I also don't live in a country where people are on a constant alert level to the point that they feel they need to bring a gun to the movies. To me that's on the same level as bringing an axe or a crossbow for protection.

Actually, in the article from CNN (see post #67 that posted out of order) it was yet unclear if the detaining officer, who was also sitting in the theater to watch the movie, was armed at the time.

As for carrying firearms into that theater, I don't know, but there may be an exception for police officers.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Respectfully, the topic was never narrower. The thread title plainly states "Argument in cinema results. . . " The precursor and causation were fundamentally part of this thread from its inception.

Nope.

Discussion of the cause of a particular murder doesn't somehow mean one is automatically generalizing about society's ills at large.

 

[dereperez]

It was the perfect storm. The wrong people happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

What do you mean? Someone was obviously armed, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The other officer, the detaining one, who was sitting a few seats away...

 

[sixthson]

If he had just bitchslapped him instead of shooting him, he likely would have gotten a standing ovation.