Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-15-2014, 07:47 PM
 
Location: Stasis
15,823 posts, read 12,429,091 times
Reputation: 8599

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
Yes, if you know that's what it is flying into your face and eyes. Can you prove the old fella knew it was harmless popcorn being flung at him by a belligerent stranger?
He's facing and arguing with a man who's holding a bag of popcorn. He's an imbicile if he doesn't see him toss the popcorn and even more of an unhinged idiot if he then takes the time to un-holster his gun point and shoot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-15-2014, 07:48 PM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,425,909 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
Yes, if you know that's what it is flying into your face and eyes. Can you prove the old fella knew it was harmless popcorn being flung at him by a belligerent stranger?
The issue will be can he prove he didn't when seemingly all of the witnesses sitting nearby stated they observed the errant texter eating the popcorn before he'd even stood up to turn to face Reeves with the popcorn still in his hand. They could tell what it was but this highly trained, observant, retired cop, couldn't?

Kinda hard to text with thumbs when at least one is engaged holding the bag of popcorn and the other engaged groping the kernals into your yap, wouldn't you agree?

No longer texting, my, my, Mr Reeves continued the confrontation instead of simply saying "oh you've stopped texting, well let's kiss and make up and sit down to watch the movie now". That is the behaviour you're demanding of Mr Oulson when he was firstly confronted by Mr Reeves getting in his face to pass your litmus test of appropriate compliance, was it not?

Unless retired cop Reeves is blind which would kinda defeat his need to attend a movie, he knew it was popcorn from the get go. His training would have required him to take note of anything in Oulson's hands; he was a deadly threat after all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 07:50 PM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 26,932,869 times
Reputation: 15644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
OKAY.

So now the man who was murdered was himself a mass murderer?

The people here who support the shooter are the ones not waiting for facts and going completely off the rails!
I don't believe that was said by anyone but you. Please reread the post for further comprehension.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 07:56 PM
 
28,619 posts, read 18,668,277 times
Reputation: 30899
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Don't think so....and the key word there is should. You're discounting their unique experience and the fact that they're human beings as imperfect as you or I.
The point is that the retired police officer does have unique experience. The prosecution can argue that his years of experience makes him an expert in accurately judging confrontations. Experts will always--and should always--be judged more harshly for errors than dilettantes, and an experienced police officer is expected to be an expert with confrontations.

The defense is going to have to deflect all "expert" and "experience" connotations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 07:57 PM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 26,932,869 times
Reputation: 15644
Quote:
Originally Posted by fitzy24 View Post
It appears others have come forward stating they've had run-ins at the movies with this killer. With his attitude about cell phones and such, why does he bother to go to a public movie theatre? And why didn't his wife send him to anger management classes?
As I've been saying since the start of this, more info will come out and people should reserve judgement until it all is released.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,159,544 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
The point is that the retired police officer does have unique experience. The prosecution can argue that his years of experience makes him an expert in accurately judging confrontations. Experts will always--and should always--be judged more harshly for errors than dilettantes, and an experienced police officer is expected to be an expert with confrontations.

The defense is going to have to deflect all "expert" and "experience" connotations.
According to one of his supervisors while he was a police officer "Captain Reeves not only has the ability to act decisively when necessary but has the foresight to initiate the proper course of action to avoid conflict,"

I'm pretty sure shooting a person is not an appropriate way to avoid conflict.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
3,408 posts, read 4,449,213 times
Reputation: 3271
It's fairly obvious that the man who was shot only has himself to blame for not being armed and shooting the old guy before being shot.

I'm not sure if the people defending the old man are serious or just trolling, but either way this thread is pure comedy gold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 08:06 PM
 
4,721 posts, read 5,300,820 times
Reputation: 9107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
Don't lie. Not about what I've said. Never have I defended him, per se. I do defend the action of taking action when someone throws an unknown substance in your face. And I've said he'll walk. That's not defending. It's stating the obvious that anti-gun people are incapable of grasping.
I am not anti-gun, and I never have been. I am anti violence. Popcorn and bullets don't equal each other. You, Mr. Reeves, nor anyone else has the right to shoot because of an argument. If Mr. Reeves had just minded his own business, none of this would have happened and a man would be alive. Mr. Reeves deserves to spend a long time in jail, and at his age he will probably die in jail. He should.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 08:06 PM
 
22,626 posts, read 24,477,017 times
Reputation: 20279
I'm going to go out on a limb...and say that I suspect there may be more to the story what is being reported.

I would not be too surprised if it comes out that the Geezer shot in self defense????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2014, 08:20 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
3,408 posts, read 4,449,213 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by tickyul View Post
I'm going to go out on a limb...and say that I suspect there may be more to the story what is being reported.

I would not be too surprised if it comes out that the Geezer shot in self defense????
All he had to say was he thought he saw the guy reaching into his pocket and pull out something that looked like a weapon. Dead men tell no tales and it could probably be established that the dead guy's arm/pocket were outside of the wife's field of vision. I'm surprised that an ex-cop failed to come up with a story to absolve himself, lol.

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top