Florida Man Is Shot to Death for Texting During Movie Previews

[Exophase]

Just a reminder...... There were lots of similar BS that came out after trayvon got himself shot, where people were coming out of the woodwork making all sorts of claims and almost all turned out to be false.

Sounds like Jamira has some issues herself. We need some hard evidence here, not random nutter gun grabbers trying to jump on the race brigade train.

And unlike that incident this one had a lot of direct eye witnesses. If you're waiting for the revelation of some extraordinary incident it's not going to happen.

Why are you so determined to absolve a man who has done a terrible thing? You don't need to defend every gun shot made to keep the gun grabbers from winning. They're not going to take your guns because of continued isolated incidents where people badly misuse them, and if they ever do you're not going to stop it by pretending that the misuse never happened. All you're doing is showing that there are big gun rights proponents who are willing to defend terrible use of guns, you are NOT helping anything.

 

[Venix]

I guess this guy had some serious issues with texting. Seriously this guy is fucked in the head.




http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/15/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting/

That doesn't sound unreasonable. She acted like an obnoxious ass, so he confronted her when she left the theater (or is she saying that he followed her around but was silent? That would be pretty weird).

Anyway, this wouldn't be admissible in court but if it were the defense could probably use it to their advantage. "My client has confronted many texters but never once resorted to violence. He only did so this time because his life was in danger from the deadly popcorn projectile!" or something.

Also, people tell lies or misremember things to inject themselves into the news all the time. I remember seeing a JFK documentary about a lady who claimed to have seen the "grassy knoll" shooter, but video showed that she never even looked in that direction. This certainly could be true, but I wouldn't put too much faith in it without corroborating evidence. It seems unlikely to me that she would remember some random old guy's face weeks after such an insignificant encounter.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

And unlike that incident this one had a lot of direct eye witnesses. If you're waiting for the revelation of some extraordinary incident it's not going to happen.

Why are you so determined to absolve a man who has done a terrible thing? You don't need to defend every gun shot made to keep the gun grabbers from winning. They're not going to take your guns because of continued isolated incidents where people badly misuse them, and if they ever do you're not going to stop it by pretending that the misuse never happened. All you're doing is showing that there are big gun rights proponents who are willing to defend terrible use of guns, you are NOT helping anything.

It is very likely that the rude texter was trying to attack the 70 year old man. Evidence indicates that his wife was trying to hold him back and deescalate.


What kind of guy goes after a 70 year old man, throwing things at his face, clearly instigating a confrontation after the old man notified management of the young buck's behaviour?


Sorry but he doesn't get the 'benefit of doubt' from me. Everything looks like young buck did everything possible to get a confrontation, and he got one.


Now I'm not specifically saying it was definitely a good shoot, yet, but I'm leaning that way thus far.

 

[sze5003]

It is very likely that the rude texter was trying to attack the 70 year old man. Evidence indicates that his wife was trying to hold him back and deescalate.


What kind of guy goes after a 70 year old man, throwing things at his face, clearly instigating a confrontation after the old man notified management of the young buck's behaviour?


Sorry but he doesn't get the 'benefit of doubt' from me. Everything looks like young buck did everything possible to get a confrontation, and he got one.


Now I'm not specifically saying it was definitely a good shoot, yet, but I'm leaning that way thus far.

Until witnesses or evidence support that the younger guy was trying to attack the 70 year old, this is a pointless claim. I dunno what kind of person would even think of attacking an older person..that's no respect right there.

We don't know that only those that were there will be able to specify.

 

[Daverino]

It is very likely that the rude texter was trying to attack the 70 year old man. Evidence indicates that his wife was trying to hold him back and deescalate.


What kind of guy goes after a 70 year old man, throwing things at his face, clearly instigating a confrontation after the old man notified management of the young buck's behaviour?


Sorry but he doesn't get the 'benefit of doubt' from me. Everything looks like young buck did everything possible to get a confrontation, and he got one.


Now I'm not specifically saying it was definitely a good shoot, yet, but I'm leaning that way thus far.

When Nebor wonders why I get my panties in a twist about gun carry laws, it's because people like you, with your fucked-up gun use logic, are allowed to carry.

 

[Jaskalas]

Now I'm not specifically saying it was definitely a good shoot, yet, but I'm leaning that way thus far.

A simple assault without injury is not grounds for justifying murder.

 

[nehalem256]

Until witnesses or evidence support that the younger guy was trying to attack the 70 year old, this is a pointless claim.

You mean except for his wife trying to hold him back?

Seems like his wife was worried he was going to go after the old guy.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

A simple assault without injury is not grounds for justifying murder.

You are very wrong about that, at least in my state and Florida.

I'm a little surprised that we're circling back around to "he wasn't assaulted enough to defend himself" type arguments.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

When Nebor wonders why I get my panties in a twist about gun carry laws, it's because people like you, with your fucked-up gun use logic, are allowed to carry.

Get used to it. Gun laws have only gotten stronger, and better defined to allow for people to protect themselves.

And, even if this old man ends up guilty, it doesn't change the fact that guns save innocent lives every single day. One death of a rude, idiotic texter doesn't outweigh the rights of innocent people who want to protect themselves.

 

[Venix]

When Nebor wonders why I get my panties in a twist about gun carry laws, it's because people like you, with your fucked-up gun use logic, are allowed to carry.

I doubt that you're the type of asshole who would text in a theater, refuse requests to stop, and then start an argument when someone complains about you and throw popcorn at the guy, so there's not much to worry about.

I'm not saying it was a legitimate shooting (it's almost definitely not), but the chance of a polite and civilized person getting capped by a crazy bastard with a CPL is extremely low. Also remember that this guy was a cop so he's not governed by the same carry laws as the rest of us, and that cops are statistically more likely to commit crimes than CPL holders in general.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Until witnesses or evidence support that the younger guy was trying to attack the 70 year old, this is a pointless claim. I dunno what kind of person would even think of attacking an older person..that's no respect right there.

We don't know that only those that were there will be able to specify.

We know that the old man asked the texter to turn off the phone. We know that the rude texter refused, to the point where the 70 year old man went out and notified management. We know that when he returned, there was some altercation that involved throwing objects at the old man which required the young buck's wife to hold him back.

Plenty enough evidence right there to support self-defense...... With what has gone on in Florida lately I'm not surprised that the old man was charged, but it's way too early to guess any outcome.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I doubt that you're the type of asshole who would text in a theater, refuse requests to stop, and then start an argument when someone complains about you and throw popcorn at the guy, so there's not much to worry about.

I'm not saying it was a legitimate shooting (it's almost definitely not), but the chance of a polite and civilized person getting capped by a crazy bastard with a CPL is extremely low. Also remember that this guy was a cop so he's not governed by the same carry laws as the rest of us, and that cops are statistically more likely to commit crimes than CPL holders in general.

I think that a lot of the young buck supporters are similar to this guy... They go around picking on old people, and don't want someone to be able to legally defend themselves.

You said it exactly right... Don't want to get shot? Don't pick on crazy old men.


Young buck got shot for a reason. It may not have been a good reason, but it certainly wasn't out of nowhere.

 

[JManInPhoenix]

Not that I agree with it but I have a strong feeling the shooter will be found not guilty.

 

[bshole]

Spatially is doing an exceptional job of convincing me that all conservatives should be completely disarmed. They simply can't be trusted with firearms. Leave the firearms with liberals and make the world a better place.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Not that I agree with it but I have a strong feeling the shooter will be found not guilty.

Especially 'cause florida.

Jury is going to be full of old fogies who can understand the fear of being in a dark theater and some young person attacks them.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Spatially is doing an exceptional job of convincing me that all conservatives should be completely disarmed. They simply can't be trusted with firearms. Leave the firearms with liberals and make the world a better place.

LOL take a look at the statistics of concealed carry. Law abiding citizens who carry guns aren't going anywhere.

Keep that in mind the next time you throw popcorn in some seemingly defenseless old man's face.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

It can't be off the table in Florida. The defendant invokes it and then the judge makes a ruling on it.

I believe the DA has said this doesn't appear to be a stand your ground instance and the judge denying bail is a good indicator

 

[Venix]

Speaking of concealed carrying, a gun owner stopped a mass shooting in Portland yesterday. Funny how the media ignored that in favor of this bullshit story.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Speaking of concealed carrying, a gun owner stopped a mass shooting in Portland yesterday. Funny how the media ignored that in favor of this bullshit story.

Yup. This story is catered to get a rise out of the emotional and illogical.

 

[TerryMathews]

use of lethal force because you're afraid you're going to be attacked.

The law is very clear, you may use deadly force when you "reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm."

Why would I need to cite anything? Look at what you wrote.

I rest my case.

 

[TerryMathews]

Spatially is doing an exceptional job of convincing me that all conservatives should be completely disarmed. They simply can't be trusted with firearms. Leave the firearms with liberals and make the world a better place.

Libertards gonna tard. Amirite?

 

[TerryMathews]

I believe the DA has said this doesn't appear to be a stand your ground instance and the judge denying bail is a good indicator

Regardless, by law it cannot be off the table at this point.

 

[Daverino]

Speaking of concealed carrying, a gun owner stopped a mass shooting in Portland yesterday. Funny how the media ignored that in favor of this bullshit story.

If by 'gun owner' you mean 'armed security guard employed by the club' then yeah.

 

[Vic]

Speaking of concealed carrying, a gun owner stopped a mass shooting in Portland yesterday. Funny how the media ignored that in favor of this bullshit story.

This has been all over the news here.

 

[Exophase]

I doubt that you're the type of asshole who would text in a theater, refuse requests to stop, and then start an argument when someone complains about you and throw popcorn at the guy, so there's not much to worry about.

What makes you think the texter started the argument? You guys think that the old man went to get management, couldn't wait for someone else to finish complaining (which probably frustrated him further), came back visibly angry, then calmly sat in his seat again without saying anything? And the texter, only seeing that the guy leave and return angry but alone, was to assume that he tried to get management and started fighting with him over that? I don't think so. The texter knew the guy tried to get management because the guy told him. No question the guy went back to fighting with him over the texting.

We really don't know what either person's tone was like and what sort of language was being used. Maybe the old guy was being very rude in his confrontation which made the texter not want to do what he said, and it escalated in a shouting match that made both sides increasingly angry until it resulted in one of them throwing his popcorn and the other one getting shot.