FL Retired cop, shoots texting wanker

[Rick Lee]

I feel badly for the shooter, the old guy.



How scared do you have to be of the world that you have to carry a gun to go outside and pee? That must be a terrible place to be, not to be secure as to who you are and what you are. To expect the world to come crashing down on you at any moment where you would need to shoot someone.



That is a sad place to live. That is to be a prisoner of fear.

What makes you think people who carry guns live in fear? How does that work? Am I paranoid for having an alarm system? Am I a closet pyro for having fire extinguishers all over my house?

[foxpaws]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

Foxpaws,

As a side note, I will re-iterate that both men were responsible for this.

There is no "us" vs "them." This is NOT one of your political arguments in PARF. We can all agree that it was senseless and that the cop IS rightly arrested for his crime.

Where the disagreements begin is in the shades of gray and who is thought to be the aggressor.

And if you even think this "US vs THEM" issue is related to carrying guns, I am NOT a gun owner nor will I be for the foreseeable future.

And I am a gun owner and plan to be for the foreseeable future.

Both men were not responsible for this - only one man caused another man's death. Again throwing popcorn, swearing and screaming at each other is never cause to escalate to using your weapon. Someone being rude is never a reason to un-holster and shoot. You deescalate every single time. Deescalate by waiting for the management to have time to listen to your complaint, deescalate by removing yourself from the situation, deescalate by understanding there are rude people and bad behavior everywhere, but you don't take out your weapon and shoot them for it.

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

I would have liked to have known Pops...and fewer words of wisdom, cautionary council, have been written.

What I do find interesting about this debate is that those who often find the police surly and without merit are rallying to this guys defense.

This is not about the policy of concealed carry. It is about an a-hole with a gun, no different that a drive-by shooting or a robbery gone south.

Given what any of us know right now, I can't find the slightest keen in rallying to this d-bags defense.

You would have liked him. Charming man but he had his flaws as we all do.

20 year guy, Korea and Vietnam.

My brother and I grew up with "boy, when I was your age I was jumping out of airplanes getting shot at, what'd you do today". I miss hearing that.

There's a story about him from Vietnam, they were sitting around playing Pinochle, $40 in the pot, Pop gets the best hand you can get, something like a straight Royal Flush in poker. They start getting shelled, everyone starts to get up to find a foxhole, Pop being the SO ordered everyone to sit back down and finish the hand. It wasn't about the $40, it was about the hand.

His little brother Bill was a CWO and flew medevac helo's in Vietnam.

Bill came home and a year later died in a training exercise in Ft Wolters TX. My cousin Amy had just been born.

I'm not defending the shooter.

I think the whole thing is tragic from both ends.

I got sucked into this because I disagree (in general) with the premise that people who behave inappropriately and affect the quality of my life or experience should be given a pass.

Just like my friends and I did not deserve a pass at lunch.

But in the back of my head I also remember something my father used to say, "don't let your mouth write checks that your body can't cash"

[Buckterrier]

An ex cop was involved, nuff said. Whomever thinks an ex cop with a gun feared for his life apparently has never been around cops, that is total malarky.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Moses

This exact scenario played out so many times in my childhood. My father would offer the offenders a single opportunity to apologize to his family for their rudeness. The smart ones took that opportunity.

A few years ago a friend of mine and I were having breakfast at IHOP. He is a Pennsylvania, Allentown type of guy, son of a coal miner that helped his father buy a gas station and get out of the mines, tough and smart: He doesn't drop F Bombs, he drops Cluster Bomb F Bombs.

Odd thing about Steve is that he went to the Naval Academy, and is an extremely successful investor. We met 24 years ago when is was working DC stuff. Anyway.

We are in the smoking section since he lights up reflexively: Cigarettes are props, punctuations to his conversation.

About ten minutes into breakfast, two or three stories in, an older guy five tables away, the only other table occupied in the smoking section, comes over and levels his gaze: "Your language is unacceptable to me and my wife".

Steve takes a second, then launches into an apology a Head Nun would appreciate. We buy the guy and his wife breakfast, do whatever we can to make sure they realize we were wrong, stupid.

THAT is what is missing today. I don't think Steve and I, dicking around from the moment we met in the parking lot, even knew they were there, five tables away. But once he stood in front of us, it was our problem, not his.

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by hardflex

When does the sacred viewing time start, at the start of the previews or the start of the actual movie? it seems like during the previews people are still moving around, taking their seats, and talking. Then when the actual 'main attraction' starts everyone goes quiet and attentive.

I think this varies with the movie. The last time I was in theater was for Senna, and not a person left or spoke for the whole credits, even when the screen went blank, no one moved, it wasn't until the staff brought the lights up that people moved.

The reason for the above, was it was a documentary that ended with quite a bit of death. I don't know for sure, but I think the movie intended to be played also delt with real world violent death. I would expect a little more respect from movie goers at that movie if I were an old man.

Typically, the theater is playing slides or video clips asking you to shut your phone off before the previews. Phone on during adds is probably ok, but at preview time, shut it up.

I have to agree - some people go around with an attitude that is going to get them shot someday.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/402/402.txt

Originally Posted by Penrod

"Lick dirt!" he commanded, forcing them still forward, until their faces
were close to the stable floor.

At this moment he received a real surprise. With a loud whack something
struck the back of his head, and, turning, he beheld Verman in the act
of lifting a piece of lath to strike again.

"Em moys ome!" said Verman, the Giant Killer.

"He tongue-tie'," Herman explained. "He say, let 'em boys alone."

Rupe addressed his host briefly:

"Chase them nigs out o' here!"

"Don' call me nig," said Herman. "I mine my own biznuss. You let 'em
boys alone."

Rupe strode across the still prostrate Sam, stepped upon Penrod, and,
equipping his countenance with the terrifying scowl and protruded jaw,
lowered his head to the level of Herman's.

"Nig, you'll be lucky if you leave here alive!" And he leaned forward
till his nose was within less than an inch of Herman's nose.

It could be felt that something awful was about to happen, and Penrod,
as he rose from the floor, suffered an unexpected twinge of apprehension
and remorse: he hoped that Rupe wouldn't REALLY hurt Herman. A sudden
dislike of Rupe and Rupe's ways rose within him, as he looked at the big
boy overwhelming the little darky with that ferocious scowl. Penrod,
all at once, felt sorry about something indefinable; and, with equal
vagueness, he felt foolish. "Come on, Rupe," he suggested, feebly, "let
Herman go, and let's us make our billies out of the rake handle."

The rake handle, however, was not available, if Rupe had inclined to
favour the suggestion. Verman had discarded his lath for the rake, which
he was at this moment lifting in the air.

"You ole black nigger," the fat-faced boy said venomously to Herman,
"I'm agoin' to----"

But he had allowed his nose to remain too long near Herman's.

Penrod's familiar nose had been as close with only a ticklish spinal
effect upon the not very remote descendant of Congo man-eaters. The
result produced by the glare of Rupe's unfamiliar eyes, and by
the dreadfully suggestive proximity of Rupe's unfamiliar nose, was
altogether different. Herman's and Verman's Bangala great-grandfathers
never considered people of their own jungle neighbourhood proper
material for a meal, but they looked upon strangers especially truculent
strangers--as distinctly edible.

Penrod and Sam heard Rupe suddenly squawk and bellow; saw him writhe and
twist and fling out his arms like flails, though without removing his
face from its juxtaposition; indeed, for a moment, the two heads seemed
even closer.

Then they separated--and battle was on!



CHAPTER XXIII COLOURED TROOPS IN ACTION

How neat and pure is the task of the chronicler who has the tale to tell
of a "good rousing fight" between boys or men who fight in the "good old
English way," according to a model set for fights in books long before
Tom Brown went to Rugby. There are seconds and rounds and rules of
fair-play, and always there is great good feeling in the end--though
sometimes, to vary the model, "the Butcher" defeats the hero--and the
chronicler who stencils this fine old pattern on his page is certain of
applause as the stirrer of "red blood." There is no surer recipe.

But when Herman and Verman set to 't the record must be no more than a
few fragments left by the expurgator. It has been perhaps sufficiently
suggested that the altercation in Mr. Schofield's stable opened with
mayhem in respect to the aggressor's nose. Expressing vocally his
indignation and the extremity of his pained surprise, Mr. Collins
stepped backward, holding his left hand over his nose, and striking at
Herman with his right. Then Verman hit him with the rake.

Verman struck from behind. He struck as hard as he could. And he struck
with the tines down--For, in his simple, direct African way he wished to
kill his enemy, and he wished to kill him as soon as possible. That was
his single, earnest purpose.

On this account, Rupe Collins was peculiarly unfortunate. He was plucky
and he enjoyed conflict, but neither his ambitions nor his anticipations
had ever included murder. He had not learned that an habitually
aggressive person runs the danger of colliding with beings in one of
those lower stages of evolution wherein theories about "hitting below
the belt" have not yet made their appearance.

The rake glanced from the back of Rupe's head to his shoulder, but it
felled him. Both darkies jumped full upon him instantly, and the three
rolled and twisted upon the stable-floor, unloosing upon the air sincere
maledictions closely connected with complaints of cruel and unusual
treatment; while certain expressions of feeling presently emanating from
Herman and Verman indicated that Rupe Collins, in this extremity, was
proving himself not too slavishly addicted to fighting by rule. Dan and
Duke, mistaking all for mirth, barked gayly.

From the panting, pounding, yelling heap issued words and phrases
hitherto quite unknown to Penrod and Sam; also, a hoarse repetition
in the voice of Rupe concerning his ear left it not to be doubted
that additional mayhem was taking place. Appalled, the two spectators
retreated to the doorway nearest the yard, where they stood dumbly
watching the cataclysm.

The struggle increased in primitive simplicity: time and again the
howling Rupe got to his knees only to go down again as the earnest
brothers, in their own way, assisted him to a more reclining position.
Primal forces operated here, and the two blanched, slightly higher
products of evolution, Sam and Penrod, no more thought of interfering
than they would have thought of interfering with an earthquake.

At last, out of the ruck rose Verman, disfigured and maniacal. With a
wild eye he looked about him for his trusty rake; but Penrod, in horror,
had long since thrown the rake out into the yard. Naturally, it had not
seemed necessary to remove the lawn-mower.

The frantic eye of Verman fell upon the lawn-mower, and instantly
he leaped to its handle. Shrilling a wordless war-cry, he charged,
propelling the whirling, deafening knives straight upon the prone
legs of Rupe Collins. The lawn-mower was sincerely intended to pass
longitudinally over the body of Mr. Collins from heel to head; and it
was the time for a death-song. Black Valkyrie hovered in the shrieking
air.

"Cut his gizzud out!" shrieked Herman, urging on the whirling knives.

We have little idea what actually happened in the theater, but I doubt I'd ever have to of worried about being that old man's target, as rudeness doesn't really get you anywhere.

[foxpaws]

Again, I find all this 'chest out posturing' rather interesting. "Good for your Dad, he didn't take it", and similar pats on the back.

My father was a huge man (in many ways). Also a Korea and Vietnam vet. Always stayed in shape. I would watch men pick fights with my Dad, he always walked away. I watched my Dad politely ask for someone to .... (fill in the blank) i.e. stop their rude/annoying behavior, and if the people didn't my Dad would either go to the people in charge, or just remove himself/us from the situation. My father in no way was a coward or a lesser man for any of his peaceable actions, far from it. I never once felt like anyone was taking advantage of my Dad or that he wasn't 'brave enough'. I believe it takes a much bigger man to just walk away, then to get drawn into a no-win situation.

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

I got sucked into this because I disagree (in general) with the premise that people who behave inappropriately and affect the quality of my life or experience should be given a pass.

I don't think anyone is stating that people who behave inappropriately should be given a pass - however, there are a couple of questions - did the texter behave inappropriately because he was texting before the movie started - probably not, just the act of texting before the movie isn't considered inappropriate behavior by most people. Add to that lethal force is not the appropriate response to popcorn throwing and swearing and screaming.

[fintstone]

Florida law considers attacking a senior citizen to be a forcible felony. Since Florida law also allows deadly self-defense to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony...isn't all the fellow needs to do is show he was attacked or about to be?

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

...About ten minutes into breakfast, two or three stories in, an older guy five tables away, the only other table occupied in the smoking section, comes over and levels his gaze: "Your language is unacceptable to me and my wife".

Steve takes a second, then launches into an apology a Head Nun would appreciate. We buy the guy and his wife breakfast, do whatever we can to make sure they realize we were wrong, stupid.

THAT is what is missing today. I don't think Steve and I, dicking around from the moment we met in the parking lot, even knew they were there, five tables away. But once he stood in front of us, it was our problem, not his.

Exactly!

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by foxpaws

...I believe it takes a much bigger man to just walk away, then to get drawn into a no-win situation.

That cuts both ways and there in lies the root of this whole tragic story.

It appears both men wanted to "win".

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by fintstone

Florida law considers attacking a senior citizen to be a forcible felony. Since Florida law also allows deadly self-defense to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony...isn't all the fellow needs to do is show he was attacked or about to be?

Does that include attack by popcorn? Does it matter if it's buttered or not?

Thank goodness your day job isn't criminal law.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

A few years ago a friend of mine and I were having breakfast at IHOP. He is a Pennsylvania, Allentown type of guy, son of a coal miner that helped his father buy a gas station and get out of the mines, tough and smart: He doesn't drop F Bombs, he drops Cluster Bomb F Bombs.

Odd thing about Steve is that he went to the Naval Academy, and is an extremely successful investor. We met 24 years ago when is was working DC stuff. Anyway.

We are in the smoking section since he lights up reflexively: Cigarettes are props, punctuations to his conversation.

About ten minutes into breakfast, two or three stories in, an older guy five tables away, the only other table occupied in the smoking section, comes over and levels his gaze: "Your language is unacceptable to me and my wife".

Steve takes a second, then launches into an apology a Head Nun would appreciate. We buy the guy and his wife breakfast, do whatever we can to make sure they realize we were wrong, stupid.

THAT is what is missing today. I don't think Steve and I, dicking around from the moment we met in the parking lot, even knew they were there, five tables away. But once he stood in front of us, it was our problem, not his.

Everyone handling the situation like the adults they are. Too bad the parties in this shooting were both immature.

[foxpaws]

I don't think people are more or less rude then they were decades ago - I think this is a case of looking at the past through rose colored glasses. There were jerks and stupid people back then, just as there are now. There are also really nice, considerate and all around great people all over the place right now. Every generation looks back with fondness, and often with 'it was better than' blinders on.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

Does that include attack by popcorn? Does it matter if it's buttered or not?

Thank goodness your day job isn't criminal law.

Any your's is?

[Jim Richards]

Eng. Mgr. I don't try to interpret the law like you did in post #350. I think the golden rule is more my speed, and I don't always get that right.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by foxpaws

I don't think people are more or less rude then they were decades ago - I think this is a case of looking at the past through rose colored glasses. There were jerks and stupid people back then, just as there are now. There are also really nice, considerate and all around great people all over the place right now. Every generation looks back with fondness, and often with 'it was better than' blinders on.

Foxy. you underestimate society's behavioral adaptation to new technologies such as cell phones and texting.

[Seahawk]

You are wrong...the ratio, polite to rude, is inverse of what it was 20 years ago, let alone when I was growing up.

And no, I won't do homework for you, find a link, go to class, buy into your "anecdotal" clap trap.

It is as plain as can be.

Originally Posted by foxpaws

I don't think people are more or less rude then they were decades ago - I think this is a case of looking at the past through rose colored glasses. There were jerks and stupid people back then, just as there are now. There are also really nice, considerate and all around great people all over the place right now. Every generation looks back with fondness, and often with 'it was better than' blinders on.

[foxpaws]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

Foxy. you underestimate society's behavioral adaptation to new technologies such as cell phones and texting.

There are always new technologies - horses to cars, mail to telegrams, courier to phone, heck, regular cell phone to 'smart phone' to google glass. If anything I would imagine we are adapting faster to new technologies because they are happening so quickly, and are becoming available to the 'average' person at a far more condensed time frame.

[70SATMan]

Originally Posted by fintstone

Florida law considers attacking a senior citizen to be a forcible felony. Since Florida law also allows deadly self-defense to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony...isn't all the fellow needs to do is show he was attacked or about to be?

Throwing popcorn now a felony?? How PC we've become. This is a result of coddling generations.

Back in my day we wouldn't call the cops for something like this. We'd respond with equal force...

Milk duds.

I'd love to see everyone's reactions over a straight story of the Police arresting someone and booking them on felony charges for throwing food.

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by foxpaws

I don't think people are more or less rude then they were decades ago - I think this is a case of looking at the past through rose colored glasses. There were jerks and stupid people back then, just as there are now. There are also really nice, considerate and all around great people all over the place right now. Every generation looks back with fondness, and often with 'it was better than' blinders on.

If you swapped rude for violent I'd agree.

Rude will vary by local. Rather than just looking back in time - people may be looking back in time and place.

In regurards to a response to your post, I do not think cell phone use contributes as much to rudeness today as cars and hour + drives every day to get to work and home. People that run through the worst traffic routes in my city display the rudest behavior all over. I pick them out and call the exit they are taking to passengers, and sure enough, there they go taking the exit for 485 towards Pineville, a hell hole currently made worse by construction and a pointlessly unsafe 55MPH speed limit. Some people still go through weaving at their regualar 75-80, some are doing the dangerous 55MPH. A real cluster, and I can pick out when I'm on I-77 the drivers that are going to take the exit for it mainly from extremely rude and short sighted behavior that the route apparently breeds.

Car's don't let you talk to the others around you, so you spend an 1+ a day dealing with people with no communication, and you start to get more self centered as you cannot share view points.

With cellphone use, the people around you can still communicate with you if they really want to.