If the old man thought he was being attacked and needed to defend himself...why would he not use a weapon...especially after being struck by the younger man? Must he wait until he is on the ground and the younger, larger man is pounding his head on the concrete? Seems a bit late to try to dig the gun out then.

The hypocrisy of the old man is endless. He brings a gun to a movie theater - forbidden - and ends up murdering someone with that gun because the guy was texting? The old man was getting his way one way or another. Control freak at its finest. Even if knocked in the face by the texter, there is no way he could justify shooting him. Murder 2 - no question. The texter was inconsiderate, yes. But certainly not worth being murdered. I can imagine his poor wife putting her hand in front of him to protect him and getting a hole shot through it. Pretty terrible stuff.

You mean not getting caught....

That is not justification for breaking rules.. You are assigning priorities to their policies based on your own bias.

You're the one who changed the discussion by asking me how I'd respond to a POLICY.

I responded by saying my response would be based on the CCP laws of the state.

Get it? I can still be asked to leave, but if I'm not breaking a law, I won't be prosecuted.

And as Rick said, if the gun is concealed, it won't offend anyone.

Apparently, it's not forbidden, according to Florida law.

It has been reported that her hand was in front of her husband because she was trying to restrain him (contrary to earlier silly speculation that she was attempting to catch a bullet).

Seesm that if the younger, larger man needed to be restrained...he was being pretty agressive. The older guy was not required to flee and had every right to defend himself. The younger man should have stayed in his seat, shut up (since he was clearly in the wrong), and turned off his phone. The older guy would have done the same (as he was doing before the incident)..

So why don't you respond in like regarding the laws of the state for texting in a movie theater?

The old guy went to get management, but he didn't wait to talk to them.

And it doesn't matter again if the texting guy was terribly rude, a hot head, and even texting during the movie, it doesn't invite a death sentence by anyone. Being rude, yelling, throwing popcorn, texting, although not great behavior isn't cause for killing anyone.

I don't think there is a law regarding texting in a movie theatre.

Your point?

And no one, including the older guy...have claimed it was...so why do you keep making that argument?

Oh this argument again? There was zero justification for this shooting. Witnesses have confirmed that there was no physical confrontation. As Fox stated, the guy with the gun has the responsibility to diffuse the situation. To find another seat. Not let it escalate. When you have the power to end a confrontation with the pull of a trigger in seconds, you have to be a bigger person. No one would expect to be shot over such a trivial incident.

Not at all. Breaking any rule is grounds for a trespassing cite IF you make fuss once asked to leave. That's all that can happen. Since there's no chance of anyone seeing a gun on my belt, there's no chance of anyone being made uncomfortable by it. The same can't said for cell phone use, loud talking, gum chewing or anything else, which, by definition, entails making noise in a place where it would normally bother people. As it is, I ignore gun busters signs because they don't have the force of law and, if someone made me and then asked me to leave, I would cheerfully take mu business elsewhere.

It was a dark theater...so most witnesses probably saw nothing There is at least one witness that claims it was physical. Others claim that the younger man was being restrained by his wife, etc. The guy with a gun has zero responsibility to flee and can "stand his ground" if attacked.

I'd be surprised if there was a law.

I'm glad you aknowledge that neither the texter nor the old man broke the law. They only broke theater policies of texting and carrying.

Would you rate one over the other in terms of severity of offense, the possibility of misuse, etc?

Texting in a movie theater is rarely fatal.

I ignore texting signs in theaters because they don't have the force of the law.

Jim, aint it a shame that you were forced to use the word "rarely" in your statement???:(

An therein lies the rub. The old man was not at risk of death based off of what transpired. He wasn't physically assaulted, stabbed, shot at, threatened, etc. He overreacted. Here's a thought: he could've simply walked away. Honestly, the words "I'm texting with my 3-year-old daughter" should've been enough to diffuse the situation. That and the fact that the victim was clearly being difficult. A police captain should know better.

LOL, don't take everything so literally.

I'm not shooting anyone over texting in a movie theater. I'm not going to give the behavior a pass either. I'm not going to escalate it and will look for ways to resolve it in a non violent way because you just don't know who you are dealing with or what they are capable of. Something the texter should have been thinking about. He let his ego and "machismo" control his actions and unfortunately it cost him because he did not expect to run into someone with the same personality traits.

I was not there and don't know the specifics so whether there was justification or not is not something I feel qualified to weigh in on. I don't believe a simple disagreement of this nature should ever end in one losing their life.

Both parties made poor choices at varying points.

Let's not be trying this case on a message board. YukYukYukYukYuk