Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tampa Bay Online)   Remember the guy who shot another man in a Florida movie theater for texting during the previews? New records show the shooter was texting, too   (tbo.com) divider line 35
    More: Followup, lone survivor, mandatory minimums, Chad Oulson, Matthew Myers  
•       •       •

5100 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2014 at 5:25 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-03-13 05:32:07 PM  
9 votes:
So a (retired)cop shot someone for breaking a rule that he believes himself to be exempt from?

Sounds about right.
2014-03-13 05:37:12 PM  
8 votes:
A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.
2014-03-13 05:21:33 PM  
4 votes:

meow said the dog: Listen I am tired of seeing the story of this in the news. The popcorn throwing was the escalator of this and for the reason of this listen you just do not know where the chaos might obtain as this could have left to someone doing the shooting. He was lucky to not have been shot and was probably the person who was thankful for having the gun of he to protect the self of him from the possible aggression by the other person who might also be the person with the gun but happened to not be this person. You see when you must do the ground standing then what is the thing that happens is you must always make the assumption of you that the person who is not you but is the other person might have the armament and then react according to this and I believe that is what was done in the case of this and the right person did the right thing and the wrong person did the wrong thing and unfortunately of this the result was the death of one of these persons but not of the other and we will never know if the right person would have done the different thing if not the wrong person but instead the right person. For this reason we should not apply the Court of Farker Opinion on this case until we wish for seeing this from both sides of the wrong one and the right one.

I do wish for the opinion of you on this because I am thinking it is quite the thing that we can come to the solution of together and perhaps do the writing of the amicus brief for the party who is the right person. I will do the writing of this if you do the signing for me.

Let us do this!


0-media-cdn.foolz.us
2014-03-13 05:41:47 PM  
3 votes:
Reactions that are equal, or nearly equal to that of having a cell phone thrown at you:

Throwing a cell phone back
Throwing popcorn
Throwing a shoe
Yelling at them and threatening to call the police

Reactions that are not anywhere near equal to that of having a cell phone thrown at you:

Shooting the person
Stabbing the person
Tazing the person
Macing the person
Doing anything lethal to the person
Force them to watch Pootie Tang
2014-03-13 03:52:03 PM  
3 votes:
He also shot someone over a texting dispute!
2014-03-14 01:28:20 AM  
2 votes:
How come everyone that wants to defend the ex-cop and harp on the popcorn being thrown forgets that the ex-cop escalated the issue by verbally confronting the other person, violating the law by bringing a weapon into a building with a large and clear sign stating  NO WEAPONS, and  KICKING the seat the other person was in.


Remember private locations can restrict gun usage on their property.


If you want to apply stand your ground then apply it to the initial victim, the person that ended up being killed by the aggressor.  It clearly was stated in the police report Reeves kicked Oulson's chair, demanded the phone be put away, was informed that the text was in regard to a preschooler, left in a huft to get a manager, failed at convincing anyone that this was a serious crime, came back alone as clearly texting during a preview is not the same offense as texting during the movie.

Just be glad that Reeve's gun was jammed as who knows how many more shots would of been used to defend his life against popcorn.
2014-03-13 10:24:10 PM  
2 votes:
Anyone who brings a gun into a movie theater is a coward and a danger to society.

What the hell is wrong with gun nuts? Biggest pussies on the planet.
2014-03-13 07:59:57 PM  
2 votes:

ongbok: StoPPeRmobile: ongbok: StoPPeRmobile: Callous: Sounds about right.

Ex-cops are allowed to throw cellphones at the elderly in Florida?

FTA, "Reeves' attorneys claim that was the glow from a cellphone Oulson threw at Reeves before the shot was fired.  "

This is something for the retards in this thread, yes you are retards.
Having popcorn thrown at you does not justify shooting somebody.
Having a cellphone thrown at you does not justify shooting somebody.
Having somebody snatch popcorn out of your hand does not justify shooting somebody.
Having somebody disrespect you does not justify shooting somebody.
If you even try to argue any of that you are a retard plane and simple, and none of your opinions are valid.

Then get the law changed unless you are too retarded. Clearly it should be easy to get the elderly to give up the ability  to prevent a felonious act.

Once again, can I throw a cell phone at you at close range. I promise I will not aim for your eyes. You don't need them anyway, right. Can I throw one at your grandparents while in a rage?

The guy didn't throw a cell phone at anyone. He threw the guy's popcorn in his face. Watch the surveillance film, he snatched the guy's popcorn and threw it in his face.


And even if he did throw a cellphone, shooting somebody in response isn't a proper response, unless you are a retarded coward.
2014-03-13 06:36:41 PM  
2 votes:
jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.

www.clevescene.com www.clevescene.com www.clevescene.com www.clevescene.com www.clevescene.com

That should be the question that determines whether someone gets a handgun permit not.
2014-03-13 06:22:02 PM  
2 votes:

jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.


Bill Hicks had a good way of determining who should have a gun: "Do you want to own a gun, yes or no? If you said yes, you don't deserve to own a gun."
2014-03-13 06:12:37 PM  
2 votes:

Vexed Thespian: scottydoesntknow: meow said the dog: Listen I am tired of seeing the story of this in the news. The popcorn throwing was the escalator of this and for the reason of this listen you just do not know where the chaos might obtain as this could have left to someone doing the shooting. He was lucky to not have been shot and was probably the person who was thankful for having the gun of he to protect the self of him from the possible aggression by the other person who might also be the person with the gun but happened to not be this person. You see when you must do the ground standing then what is the thing that happens is you must always make the assumption of you that the person who is not you but is the other person might have the armament and then react according to this and I believe that is what was done in the case of this and the right person did the right thing and the wrong person did the wrong thing and unfortunately of this the result was the death of one of these persons but not of the other and we will never know if the right person would have done the different thing if not the wrong person but instead the right person. For this reason we should not apply the Court of Farker Opinion on this case until we wish for seeing this from both sides of the wrong one and the right one.

I do wish for the opinion of you on this because I am thinking it is quite the thing that we can come to the solution of together and perhaps do the writing of the amicus brief for the party who is the right person. I will do the writing of this if you do the signing for me.

Let us do this!

[0-media-cdn.foolz.us image 526x300]

someone who is trying way to hard to be pocket ninja, I noticed it in another thread earlier this week.


meow has been here for years.
2014-03-13 05:49:47 PM  
2 votes:

Callous: Callous: buttcat: Callous: jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.

Good thing this guy was a cop then.

I thought he was a retired cop...which now makes him a civilian.

Actually cops are civilians, retired or not.  I guess you believe we should disarm the police.

Sorry, I guess jaykay believes we should disarm the police.


To be fair, there are plenty of them who have no business being armed (much less being given positions of authority)
2014-03-13 05:45:28 PM  
2 votes:

jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.


Police officers are civilians as are retired police officers.
2014-03-13 05:35:46 PM  
2 votes:
So you're saying the shooter's a dick.
2014-03-13 10:36:41 PM  
1 votes:

cretinbob: redmid17: cretinbob: The Southern Dandy: Why is that limited to civilians? Shouldn't that say "A person..." ?

Because LEO need their weapons

LEOs are civilians.

no


Yes
2014-03-13 08:13:28 PM  
1 votes:

Mikey1969: factoryconnection: He also shot someone over a texting dispute!

Actually, he shot someone who threw something at him I a dark theater. It's weird how people keep forgetting that detail.


Yeah, popcorn. Popcorn dude. It's funny how some people keep trying to forget that detail and act like he was throwing knives and ninja stars at him.
2014-03-13 07:17:33 PM  
1 votes:

meow said the dog: Listen I am tired of seeing the story of this in the news. The popcorn throwing was the escalator of this and for the reason of this listen you just do not know where the chaos might obtain as this could have left to someone doing the shooting. He was lucky to not have been shot and was probably the person who was thankful for having the gun of he to protect the self of him from the possible aggression by the other person who might also be the person with the gun but happened to not be this person. You see when you must do the ground standing then what is the thing that happens is you must always make the assumption of you that the person who is not you but is the other person might have the armament and then react according to this and I believe that is what was done in the case of this and the right person did the right thing and the wrong person did the wrong thing and unfortunately of this the result was the death of one of these persons but not of the other and we will never know if the right person would have done the different thing if not the wrong person but instead the right person. For this reason we should not apply the Court of Farker Opinion on this case until we wish for seeing this from both sides of the wrong one and the right one.

I do wish for the opinion of you on this because I am thinking it is quite the thing that we can come to the solution of together and perhaps do the writing of the amicus brief for the party who is the right person. I will do the writing of this if you do the signing for me.

Let us do this!


I've missed you, meow. You go away for so long, I think you've died. and then you return, like an exploding star, never missing a beat. Why do you leave so often, for so long?
2014-03-13 07:10:17 PM  
1 votes:

cretinbob: The Southern Dandy: Why is that limited to civilians? Shouldn't that say "A person..." ?

Because LEO need their weapons


LEOs are civilians.
2014-03-13 06:30:59 PM  
1 votes:

Wadded Beef: So you're saying the shooter's a dick.


Angry Middle Age White Guy Syndrome.
2014-03-13 06:19:23 PM  
1 votes:

brainiac-dumdum: StoPPeRmobile: Callous: Sounds about right.

Ex-cops are allowed to throw cellphones at the elderly in Florida?

FTA, "Reeves' attorneys claim that was the glow from a cellphone Oulson threw at Reeves before the shot was fired.  "

No, a tossed cell phone is not a reason to shoot someone. What kind of pussy would even consider such a response?


The whole cellphone toss excuse is BS. The guy didn't throw a cellphone. If you watch the video he snatched the guy's popcorn and tossed it in his face, then the guy shot him immediately after.
2014-03-13 06:15:50 PM  
1 votes:

StoPPeRmobile: Callous: Sounds about right.

Ex-cops are allowed to throw cellphones at the elderly in Florida?

FTA, "Reeves' attorneys claim that was the glow from a cellphone Oulson threw at Reeves before the shot was fired.  "


No, a tossed cell phone is not a reason to shoot someone. What kind of pussy would even consider such a response?
2014-03-13 06:15:46 PM  
1 votes:

elguerodiablo: Vexed Thespian: scottydoesntknow: meow said the dog: Listen I am tired of seeing the story of this in the news. The popcorn throwing was the escalator of this and for the reason of this listen you just do not know where the chaos might obtain as this could have left to someone doing the shooting. He was lucky to not have been shot and was probably the person who was thankful for having the gun of he to protect the self of him from the possible aggression by the other person who might also be the person with the gun but happened to not be this person. You see when you must do the ground standing then what is the thing that happens is you must always make the assumption of you that the person who is not you but is the other person might have the armament and then react according to this and I believe that is what was done in the case of this and the right person did the right thing and the wrong person did the wrong thing and unfortunately of this the result was the death of one of these persons but not of the other and we will never know if the right person would have done the different thing if not the wrong person but instead the right person. For this reason we should not apply the Court of Farker Opinion on this case until we wish for seeing this from both sides of the wrong one and the right one.

I do wish for the opinion of you on this because I am thinking it is quite the thing that we can come to the solution of together and perhaps do the writing of the amicus brief for the party who is the right person. I will do the writing of this if you do the signing for me.

Let us do this!

[0-media-cdn.foolz.us image 526x300]

someone who is trying way to hard to be pocket ninja, I noticed it in another thread earlier this week.

meow has been here for years.


And definitely has a different schtick than PN.
2014-03-13 06:14:13 PM  
1 votes:
What a surprise, an asshole who thought that a valid response to tossed popcorn was instant execution is also an entitled hypocrite. I'm shocked.
2014-03-13 06:13:04 PM  
1 votes:

StoPPeRmobile: Callous: Sounds about right.

Ex-cops are allowed to throw cellphones at the elderly in Florida?

FTA, "Reeves' attorneys claim that was the glow from a cellphone Oulson threw at Reeves before the shot was fired.  "


This is something for the retards in this thread, yes you are retards.
Having popcorn thrown at you does not justify shooting somebody.
Having a cellphone thrown at you does not justify shooting somebody.
Having somebody snatch popcorn out of your hand does not justify shooting somebody.
Having somebody disrespect you does not justify shooting somebody.
If you even try to argue any of that you are a retard plane and simple, and none of your opinions are valid.
2014-03-13 06:12:58 PM  
1 votes:
The problem I have with this is that old dude started the incident and then said he felt threatened. Don't start sh*t if you are afraid of the consequences. And really, how much of a disturbance can a person texting make? Yeah the light from the phone is bright but not enough to cause you to be unable to see the movie. texting is mostly silent if the ringer is turned down or off.

This guy has a "get off my lawn" mentality and thinks his retired cop badge gets him out of things. I don't care he's old, send him to jail for the rest of his life
2014-03-13 06:09:15 PM  
1 votes:

plcow: factoryconnection: He also shot someone over a texting dispute!

This.

Does calling him a hypocrite really matter at this point?  He killed someone.


Doesn't matter. He was a Fark hero when it happened and he will continue to be a Fark hero.  The appropriate penalty for being mildly annoying for a minute or two is death apparently.
2014-03-13 05:59:01 PM  
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: meow said the dog: Listen I am tired of seeing the story of this in the news. The popcorn throwing was the escalator of this and for the reason of this listen you just do not know where the chaos might obtain as this could have left to someone doing the shooting. He was lucky to not have been shot and was probably the person who was thankful for having the gun of he to protect the self of him from the possible aggression by the other person who might also be the person with the gun but happened to not be this person. You see when you must do the ground standing then what is the thing that happens is you must always make the assumption of you that the person who is not you but is the other person might have the armament and then react according to this and I believe that is what was done in the case of this and the right person did the right thing and the wrong person did the wrong thing and unfortunately of this the result was the death of one of these persons but not of the other and we will never know if the right person would have done the different thing if not the wrong person but instead the right person. For this reason we should not apply the Court of Farker Opinion on this case until we wish for seeing this from both sides of the wrong one and the right one.

I do wish for the opinion of you on this because I am thinking it is quite the thing that we can come to the solution of together and perhaps do the writing of the amicus brief for the party who is the right person. I will do the writing of this if you do the signing for me.

Let us do this!

[0-media-cdn.foolz.us image 526x300]


It's not so much "word salad" as "word mixed greens."
2014-03-13 05:47:17 PM  
1 votes:

buttcat: Callous: jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.

Good thing this guy was a cop then.

I thought he was a retired cop...which now makes him a civilian.


Actually cops are civilians, retired or not.  I guess you believe we should disarm the police.
2014-03-13 05:44:06 PM  
1 votes:

Callous: jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.

Good thing this guy was a cop then.


I thought he was a retired cop...which now makes him a civilian.
2014-03-13 05:42:35 PM  
1 votes:
Was the victim wearing a hoodie?  Could he be considered a "thug"?  If not, then Imma guess OId Man Reeves is going to prison instead of signing autographs for standing his ground against The Other.  Because Florida.
2014-03-13 05:39:51 PM  
1 votes:

justanotherfarkinfarker: If someone says touch me again and I'll kill you, it may be a good idea to not touch them. Not that them killing  you is justified. IT did come with a warning too.

/too bad he didn't have a .25 would have gotten stopped by the wife's finger.


The warning makes it premeditation.
2014-03-13 05:39:42 PM  
1 votes:

Kit Fister: Damn, I was hoping he'd left.


No I have the belief he is still in prison which is what the story of this is about have you not done the reading or perhaps the first language of you is not the English.
2014-03-13 05:39:23 PM  
1 votes:

jaytkay: A civilian who feels the "need" to carry a gun around suburban America is too deluded and paranoid to be trusted with a gun.


Good thing this guy was a cop then.
2014-03-13 05:35:02 PM  
1 votes:
Sure, but if the dead guy is black then everything's okay right?
2014-03-13 05:31:13 PM  
1 votes:

factoryconnection: He also shot someone over a texting dispute!


This.

Does calling him a hypocrite really matter at this point?  He killed someone.
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report