Florida Man Is Shot to Death for Texting During Movie Previews

[Fanatical Meat]

Spacial I am wondering, if the popcorn thrower/assaulter were an 85 year old man would the shooting be justified? Does the same concern about being punched still work? What if the popcorn thrower was a 16 year old petite girl would that still be reasonable enough to shoot?

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Spacial I am wondering, if the popcorn thrower/assaulter were an 85 year old man would the shooting be justified? Does the same concern about being punched still work? What if the popcorn thrower was a 16 year old petite girl would that still be reasonable enough to shoot?

No it would not be justified.

That's why I keep saying.. The primary issue here is disparity of force and ability to carry out the perceived threat.


This is all well documented in florida (and most other pro self-defense states') case law.

This will be the primary issue at trial, if the 70+ year old retired man felt as though the young buck was capable of doing great bodily harm.

Knowing florida juries, that shouldn't be too difficult.

 

[spidey07]

True dat. So if you see somebody openly carrying an AK in your neighborhood, please feel free to open up on them. You just don't know if the nutter means to kill people or is just making a political statement. You don't have to be viciously assualted, you only have to believe you will be viciously assaulted.

Spatially, you have been avoiding this argument. Man up and make a counter to it.

Somebody openly carrying a firearm is NOT a threat.

Somebody yelling, advancing and actively attacking you IS a threat.

 

[lotus503]

No it would not be justified.

That's why I keep saying.. The primary issue here is disparity of force and ability to carry out the perceived threat.


This is all well documented in florida (and most other pro self-defense states') case law.

This will be the primary issue at trial, if the 70+ year old retired man felt as though the young buck was capable of doing great bodily harm.

Knowing florida juries, that shouldn't be too difficult.

Its not whether he was capable of doing great bodily harm, its whether a reasonable person would think he was in trying to do GBH.

Newsflash no reasonable person would think what occurred in the theater was a threat of GBH.

If I yell at you and you get scared because i'm a 7' hulk and I throw some popcorn at you, its not grounds to shoot and kill me. No reasonable person thinks that's the case.

 

[spidey07]

Its not whether he was capable of doing great bodily harm, its whether a reasonable person would think he was in trying to do GBH.

Newsflash no reasonable person would think what occurred in the theater was a threat of GBH.

If I yell at you and you get scared because i'm a 7' hulk and I throw some popcorn at you, its not grounds to shoot and kill me. No reasonable person thinks that's the case.

Actually it is based on your aggressive behavior and the fact that you have already assaulted me and refuse to stop and are still coming towards me with your wife attempting to prevent you from further attacking me.

He wasn't shot because of popcorn, he wasn't shot over texting, he was shot because he attacked a senior who was unable to retreat from the attack and was continuing his attack. That is abundantly clear in the video.

 

[bshole]

Somebody openly carrying a firearm is NOT a threat.

Somebody yelling, advancing and actively attacking you IS a threat.

The police have shot and killed people for only that. In fact they shot a kid in the back who was only toting a TOY gun. They were completely exonerated.

You see Spidey, like Spatially has stated, you don't have to wait to be attacked, you need only fear it. If somebody is walking down the street with an AK, why do you have to wait to shoot him? The police don't have to.

What if he decides to open up and start killing people? At that point it is too late!!

You have always argued that you don't have to wait to be injured before re-acting. What is with the 180?

 

[spidey07]

Because this is covered in CCDW classes and it is made extremely clear why somebody with a firearm is NOT a threat.

The threat is not imminent, nor is it credible. Also police have different laws governing their use of force than us.

Now if they were to aim the weapon at you then:

1) Threat is now imminent as the barrel is pointed at you.
2) Threat is now credible as you can assume a round is chambered and read to fire
3) Threat is capable as a firearm pointed at you is a very capable threat to great bodily harm or death.

Again, this is all covered in most state's sanctioned training for carrying a concealed deadly weapon. This exact same scenario is covered and exactly why you are not allowed to use deadly force.

 

[lotus503]

Actually it is based on your aggressive behavior and the fact that you have already assaulted me and refuse to stop and are still coming towards me with your wife attempting to prevent you from further attacking me.

He wasn't shot because of popcorn, he wasn't shot over texting, he was shot because he attacked a senior who was unable to retreat from the attack and was continuing his attack. That is abundantly clear in the video.

Bullshit, in the video he takes a swipe to grab the popcorn but doesn't get it, few seconds goes by and he grabs it and throws it at him, gun already out he shoots him. its obvious he was going for the popcorn because he tired and failed seconds before. He sits down and takes out his gun and the same time the second attempt at grabbing the popcorn occurs, he tosses it at him and is shot.

So yeah it was over the throwing of the popcorn.

 

[bshole]

Because this is covered in CCDW classes and it is made extremely clear why somebody with a firearm is NOT a threat.

The threat is not imminent, nor is it credible. Also police have different laws governing their use of force than us.

Now if they were to aim the weapon at you then:

1) Threat is now imminent as the barrel is pointed at you.
2) Threat is now credible as you can assume a round is chambered and read to fire
3) Threat is capable as a firearm pointed at you is a very capable threat to great bodily harm or death.

Are you high? All the guy has to do is lower his weapon and pull the damn trigger! Why the fuck would he be in my neighborhood with a damn AK if he wasn't there to shoot somebody?

Ok I see 2 young black kids walking down the alley in my white neighborhood. They are both carrying ak's. By your own words, I have to wait until they aim at me or shoot me before I can defend myself.... at which point it would be too late and I would die.

Damn dude, you are all over the map. You have no logical consistency at all. Perhaps you should open a thread and argue against yourself.

 

[spidey07]

Bullshit, in the video he takes a swipe to grab the popcorn but doesn't get it, few seconds goes by and he grabs it and throws it at him, gun already out he shoots him. its obvious he was going for the popcorn because he tired and failed seconds before. He sits down and takes out his gun and the same time the second attempt at grabbing the popcorn occurs, he tosses it at him and is shot.

So yeah it was over the throwing of the popcorn.

So you admit the attacker is swinging at the senior citizen who is sitting in his seat and can't retreat?

Any reasonable person would think the attacker means to do great harm with their multiple attempts to swing their fists at you while acting belligerently and yelling, while wife is attempting to restrain the assailant. The victim doesn't know if the attacker means to grab him out of his chair and throw him to the ground.

 

[spidey07]

Are you high? All the guy has to do is lower his weapon and pull the damn trigger! Why the fuck would he be in my neighborhood with a damn AK if he wasn't there to shoot somebody? Ok I see 2 young black kids walking down the alley in my white neighborhood. They are both carrying ak's. By your own words, I have to wait until they aim at me or shoot me before I can defend myself.... at which point it was it pointless and too late.

Damn dude, you are all over the map. You have no logical consistency at all. Perhaps you should open a thread and argue against yourself.

Perhaps you should take your state's concealed carry deadly weapon class.

This is all covered in detail. I am not all over the place, I am explaining the law perfectly.

And absolutely you would have to wait for them to aim their weapon at you before you would be justified in using deadly force. That or they say a verbal threat.

 

[lotus503]

So you admit the attacker is swinging at the senior citizen who is sitting in his seat and can't retreat?

Any reasonable person would think the attacker means to do great harm with their multiple attempts to swing their fists at you while acting belligerently and yelling, while wife is attempting to restrain the assailant. The victim doesn't know if the attacker means to grab him out of his chair and throw him to the ground.

No, I said specifically its obvious he was trying to grab the popcorn, not take a swing. No reasonable person would think someone trying to grab your popcorn is trying to do you GBH.

like I said this guy is going to die in prison and rightfully so. I've got a $100 on it want to take me up on it?

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Are you high? All the guy has to do is lower his weapon and pull the damn trigger! Why the fuck would he be in my neighborhood with a damn AK if he wasn't there to shoot somebody?

Ok I see 2 young black kids walking down the alley in my white neighborhood. They are both carrying ak's. By your own words, I have to wait until they aim at me or shoot me before I can defend myself.... at which point it would be too late and I would die.

Damn dude, you are all over the map. You have no logical consistency at all. Perhaps you should open a thread and argue against yourself.

Are you saying you would shoot two innocent black kids who were legally open carrying? Wow.

 

[bshole]

Perhaps you should take your state's concealed carry deadly weapon class.

This is all covered in detail. I am not all over the place, I am explaining the law perfectly.

And absolutely you would have to wait for them to aim their weapon at you before you would be justified in using deadly force. That or they say a verbal threat.

So..... basically I could just shoot them and say they aimed their guns at me later? I mean, who is going to contradict me? I am sure if they were black and you were on the jury, you would believe me.

I suppose I could shoot them even if they didn't have weapons... I could drop popcorn on their cooling corpses and claim they threw it in my face later.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

No, I said specifically its obvious he was trying to grab the popcorn, not take a swing. No reasonable person would think someone trying to grab your popcorn is trying to do you GBH.

like I said this guy is going to die in prison and rightfully so. I've got a $100 on it want to take me up on it?

Um, you cannot tell he was trying to grab the popcorn. Looks like he was taking a swing at the defenseless old man.

You don't know anything about popcorn except due to the benefit of hindsight. In the heat of the moment it certainly could've been a violent assault if Mr CCW old man hadn't stopped the raging young buck.

 

[spidey07]

No, I said specifically its obvious he was trying to grab the popcorn, not take a swing. No reasonable person would think someone trying to grab your popcorn is trying to do you GBH.

like I said this guy is going to die in prison and rightfully so. I've got a $100 on it want to take me up on it?

So the scenario is a yelling, aggressive male being restrained by his wife is attempting to grab you or items on or about your person and throwing things at you as you are unable to retreat in a dark movie theater? What if this aggressive, loud, threatening guy had grabbed his gun?

That means good shoot.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Yup, and great point that I'm sure will be brought up during trial.

This is why you don't go snatching things from people's hands. If they're carrying a gun they can legally shoot you dead.

 

[lotus503]

So the scenario is a yelling, aggressive male being restrained by his wife is attempting to grab you or items on or about your person and throwing things at you as you are unable to retreat in a dark movie theater? What if this aggressive, loud, threatening guy had grabbed his gun?

That means good shoot.

it was was an argument one that reeves participated in, He took a swipe at the popcorn and missed, reeves took out his gun, he took a grab at the popcorn and tossed it at him reeves shot him.

Its obvious and simple is was murder because he was angry not because of reasonable fear of GBH. His wife who is sitting next to him even says as much before she is told to STFU.

Key thing here is what a reasonable person would think, therefore I don't ever expect you to understand. Dudes wife gets it, everyone else gets it, just a few of the normal posters here don't get it.

 

[bshole]

Key thing here is what a reasonable person would think, therefore I don't ever expect you to understand. Dudes wife gets it, everyone else gets it, just a few of the normal posters here don't get it.

Oh they get it 100%. They are just trolling you. If it amuses you and them, everybody wins. If they simply agreed with you, that would be no fun for anybody.

 

[Lepton87]

Key thing here is what a reasonable person would think, therefore I don't ever expect you to understand. Dudes wife gets it, everyone else gets it, just a few of the normal posters here don't get it.

Well, that's the key point here. You can't be reasonable when you're in constant fear that someone is out to harm you. It's a mental issue, it really seems like a delusion.

 

[thraashman]

So you admit the attacker is swinging at the senior citizen who is sitting in his seat and can't retreat?

Any reasonable person would think the attacker means to do great harm with their multiple attempts to swing their fists at you while acting belligerently and yelling, while wife is attempting to restrain the assailant. The victim doesn't know if the attacker means to grab him out of his chair and throw him to the ground.

You are LITERALLY the last person that should ever determine what a reasonable person would do. You are the farthest thing from being such.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I think it will be pretty easy to show a florida jury that a poor defenseless elderly man was attacked in some manner, with no way to escape, nowhere to go, cornered cowering in his seat with a hulking young buck swiping and pawing at him.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

You are LITERALLY the last person that should ever determine what a reasonable person would do. You are the farthest thing from being such.

Spidey seems to know self defense laws better than anyone on this forum.


Keep that in mind, if you're the type that goes around bullying old people. Maybe they know self defense laws too. Or, maybe they don't care about the law.

 

[VtPC83]

Reeves is going to jail for the rest of his life. No way is this a good shoot. None what so ever. Even if he was elderly. I watched the video, there was absolutely no real threat to Reeves otherwise you would have seen Coulson in his face or at the very least in the video... Popcorn does not constitute a real threat.

Hope Reeves believes in what he did because he'll pay for it.

 

[CitizenKain]

Somebody openly carrying a firearm is NOT a threat.

No, that is someone wandering around with a deadly weapon intending to kill someone. How do I know they aren't a crazy person looking for blood? I say put a bullet into anyone open carrying, they are thugs looking for a fight.