Florida Man Is Shot to Death for Texting During Movie Previews

[sze5003]

If he is found not guilty I think it will be ridiculous. Now I understand why a lot of my friends moved overseas over the past couple years. This country is going to shit lol.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

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

It may not be off the table by law however it sure looks like a losing argument:


Reeves made his first court appearance Tuesday on a charge of second-degree murder.
His attorney, Richard Escobar, tried to persuade Circuit Court Judge Lynn Tepper that his client was actually the victim in the incident and that Oulson was the "aggressor."

Police said despite Reeves' claim that he was in fear for his safety, this was not a case for Florida's "stand your ground" defense.
"Working with the state attorney's office it was determined that stand-your-ground does not fly here in this case," Nocco said.
Authorities said a preliminary investigation determined that there was no physical contact during the incident. It was popcorn, thrown by Oulson, that struck Reeves.
Tepper said there was no evidence to support the claim that the shooter was a victim. She denied him bond

 

[Vic]

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

Which must explain why it's getting such a rise out of you.

People are rude in public all the time. That doesn't mean you get to shoot them for it (much as we all might like to).

 

[Exophase]

If he is found not guilty I think it will be ridiculous. Now I understand why a lot of my friends moved overseas over the past couple years. This country is going to shit lol.

Don't worry, this probably won't happen.

 

[TerryMathews]

It may not be off the table by law however it sure looks like a losing argument:


Reeves made his first court appearance Tuesday on a charge of second-degree murder.
His attorney, Richard Escobar, tried to persuade Circuit Court Judge Lynn Tepper that his client was actually the victim in the incident and that Oulson was the "aggressor."

Police said despite Reeves' claim that he was in fear for his safety, this was not a case for Florida's "stand your ground" defense.
"Working with the state attorney's office it was determined that stand-your-ground does not fly here in this case," Nocco said.
Authorities said a preliminary investigation determined that there was no physical contact during the incident. It was popcorn, thrown by Oulson, that struck Reeves.
Tepper said there was no evidence to support the claim that the shooter was a victim. She denied him bond

No argument here. It will be a losing argument barring evidence we haven't seen yet. I'm only taking issue with the statement "its off the table"

 

[HumblePie]

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

I don't see that info from that article. The article just says a patron at the bar fired upon the assailant.

 

[Venix]

This has been all over the news here.

National news or are you in Portland? I was referring to an admittedly small sample of national news websites like CNN, which has a half dozen articles about this texting thing on the front page. I don't have cable so I can't comment on what's on TV.

 

[sze5003]

Did the shooter have the gun with him the whole time or is it possible when he went to speak to the manager he went and got his gun?

 

[HumblePie]

Did the shooter have the gun with him the whole time or is it possible when he went to speak to the manager he went and got his gun?

Not yet released detail. If the later, then it is very damning evidence against Reeves.

 

[Venix]

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.

The witness said that the texter confronted the old guy when he returned to the theater. He turned around and said something like, "Did you go complain about me?"

I don't think it matters much. A shouting match requires two willing participants, and they're both idiots for engaging in one over such a stupid issue. Now one is dead and the other will likely die in prison.

 

[railer]

The most likely scenario here is that the pea-brained gun nut, knowing full well that he had a gun in his pocket, started shit with a guy texting his babysitter during the movie previews. If he didn't have a gun he would have just sat there and shut up, or moved two seats over, or done any one of an infininte number of things to remove himself from the situation. But, because he had a gun, he felt like a tough guy and decided to provoke and escalate an essentially meaningless situation. Now he rots in jail until he dies, his wife is alone for the rest of her life, and he never spends time with his family again. ROFL @ gun nutter.

 

[Daverino]

I don't see that info from that article. The article just says a patron at the bar fired upon the assailant.

Read the follow-up.

It is unclear whether he was licensed to be armed or whether the club owner even knew he was armed. But he wasn't a patron. He was there to provide security. Which he did.

 

[Vic]

I don't see that info from that article. The article just says a patron at the bar fired upon the assailant.

He was a bouncer hired by the club.

 

[bshole]

The most likely scenario here is that the pea-brained gun nut, knowing full well that he had a gun in his pocket, started shit with a guy texting his babysitter during the movie previews. If he didn't have a gun he would have just sat there and shut up, or moved two seats over, or done any one of an infininte number of things to remove himself from the situation. But, because he had a gun, he felt like a tough guy and decided to provoke and escalate an essentially meaningless situation. Now he rots in jail until he dies, his wife is alone for the rest of her life, and he never spends time with his family again. ROFL @ gun nutter.

^^^^^^^

Best post yet!

 

[SpatiallyAware]

The witness said that the texter confronted the old guy when he returned to the theater. He turned around and said something like, "Did you go complain about me?"



I don't think it matters much. A shouting match requires two willing participants, and they're both idiots for engaging in one over such a stupid issue. Now one is dead and the other will likely die in prison.

Wow...


That means a lot, from a jury perspective. The old man tried to de escalate, tried to get help, yet was still attacked by young buck.

 

[Daverino]

Wow...


That means a lot, from a jury perspective. The old man tried to de escalate, tried to get help, yet was still attacked by young buck.

How old are you that you consider a 43 year old married father a 'young buck'?

 

[Vic]

As far as I know, that's referring to laws like Texas' 30.06 signs, where ignoring the sign is a crime. "No guns allowed" signs in Florida have no force of law, so the only penalty for ignoring them is that the owner could ban you from his property if he finds out.

I thought that LEOSA superseded signs that have no force of law, much like how service animal laws supersede "no dogs allowed" signs, but I could be mistaken. I think we have some cops here who've used LEOSA, so maybe they can chime in.

I was not trying to imply that Reeves was carrying illegally. Just that private property owners do have rights wrt this issue, even with LEOs.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Not in most states. Those signs don't mean jack.

 

[Vic]

National news or are you in Portland? I was referring to an admittedly small sample of national news websites like CNN, which has a half dozen articles about this texting thing on the front page. I don't have cable so I can't comment on what's on TV.

I'm in Portland. I guess a white supremacist shooting up a strip club on the east side isn't national news? Or that the bouncer who wasn't licensed for concealed carry shot back?
I dunno, I try to avoid CNN, Fox, and MSNBC if I can help it.

 

[sze5003]

I don't see how anyone was attacked. Really? Really popcorn thrown? Maybe verbal attacks, but any sort of physical attack well at least in my opinion requires excessive force and contact.

The manager probably didn't do anything because the movie had not started. Or maybe he was busy listening to someone else complain.

 

[piasabird]

I think I would understand killing the phone, but not the person. I would even support a lifetime ban from the movie theater by management. Most theaters have a message to turn off you cell phone well in advance of it starting. So no excuse for the text addict.

Shooting a firearm in a crowded theater is endangering a lot of innocent people.

 

[cubby1223]

The most likely scenario here is that the pea-brained gun nut, knowing full well that he had a gun in his pocket, started shit with a guy texting his babysitter during the movie previews. If he didn't have a gun he would have just sat there and shut up, or moved two seats over, or done any one of an infininte number of things to remove himself from the situation. But, because he had a gun, he felt like a tough guy and decided to provoke and escalate an essentially meaningless situation. Now he rots in jail until he dies, his wife is alone for the rest of her life, and he never spends time with his family again. ROFL @ gun nutter.

The world needs more people willing to stand up and confront rude, annoying, disrespectful people, not less.

The texter could have done a dozen things to remove himself from the situation but instead decided to be an even larger asshole than he was, escalating the situation on his end. He could have been a normal person and said to the guy "I'm sorry, I will put my cell phone away and be respectful towards everyone around me." But he didn't. He decided the best course of action was a demonstration of his manhood. And now he's dead.

A gun was too far. But I absolutely want more people willing to put jackasses back in their place.

 

[Zorba]

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.

You do more to further the gun control argument than basically anything else. People yell and argue all the time, you can't shoot someone just because they pissed you off. By your logic a huge percentage of murders would be justified, because, generally people only kill someone for a reason.

BTW: A wife putting a hand on her husband's chest when he is making a huge scene in public is EXTREMELY common. It doesn't mean she was holding him back, probably just trying to get him to shut up and move on with life.

 

[bshole]

The world needs more people willing to stand up and confront rude, annoying, disrespectful people, not less.

Yea, thats what just what we need. We are not quite the murder capitol of the world but that philosophy might just give us the last oomph to reach gold!!! ROFLMFAO!!!!!!

 

[Daverino]

The world needs more people willing to stand up and confront rude, annoying, disrespectful people, not less.

So you think standing up to confront rude people == shooting a young girl's father to death in front of his wife at a movie theater.

I'll add you to my 'not rational enough to look at a gun, much less own or carry one' list.