TexasCHLforum.com

It matters not how frail, old, crippled or retarded you might be. We cannot instigate a confrontation and then use our guns to end it when we realize we have bit off more than we could chew.

Indeed.

EDIT: reply no longer needed.

Oldgringo wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:And heck yeah this subject makes me mad. I have loved ones living out there that could be the victim of this kind of crazed cowardly lunatic. We can never condone this type of situation or we WILL lose our right to own weapons.


As for the chances a jury will somehow say it is OK to kill a human for texting in a theater, I think are very slim. My bet is on a plea bargain. They have this nut dead to rights. I would be seriously concerned by the precedent set if this lunatic walks without serving some serious time.

Is your angst driven by the shooters actions or his age?

I think its driven by someone shooting a dad over a text to his daughter's babysitter during the previews.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:And heck yeah this subject makes me mad. I have loved ones living out there that could be the victim of this kind of crazed cowardly lunatic. We can never condone this type of situation or we WILL lose our right to own weapons.


As for the chances a jury will somehow say it is OK to kill a human for texting in a theater, I think are very slim. My bet is on a plea bargain. They have this nut dead to rights. I would be seriously concerned by the precedent set if this lunatic walks without serving some serious time.

Is your angst driven by the shooters actions or his age?

I think its driven by someone shooting a dad over a text to his daughter's babysitter during the previews.

Yep... and then there is that.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

It matters not how frail, old, crippled or retarded you might be. We cannot instigate a confrontation and then use our guns to end it when we realize we have bit off more than we could chew.

Indeed.

Obviously not all the facts are in, so I'm just playing devils advocate here...

The way I learned it (in NC) was there are levels of escalation...
-Verbal
--- Soft Hands
----- Hard Hands
------- Chemical
--------- Impact Weapons
----------- Deadly Force

Do we now live in a society where I am not allowed to argue with someone because that translates to "I started it"?
Is it possible that the ex LEO, while engaging in a verbal argument with the texting guy, never intended for it to be anything other than a verbal admonition for texting during the movie? Is it not possible to argue that the texting guy got angry and escalated the incident from words to physical force? And, having not seen or heard the texting guy (was he mouse sized or linebacker sized?), can anyone say that it was completely unreasonable for the ex officer to have felt in danger of imminent harm by this escalation from words to "hard hands"?

Clearly the ex officer was running his mouth. But that doesn't give the texting guy the right to hit him.
It certainly looks bad for the officer, but, more info needed.

The only thing clear is that in this case 2 wrongs made one guy dead.

Read the story again. I think you missed some very important details. Unless you are speaking hypothetically about a different scenario. BTW... all the facts are in. This is not a mystery crime. The crazed killers own wife said she had no idea why her husband shot the innocent victim.

For the record, you cannot instigate a confrontation and then end it with deadly force because you realize you bit off more than you could chew. This was or should have been covered in your CHL class.

Crazed killer guy absolutely instigated the confrontation. There is no argument on this part of it all. The crazed killer was never hit. Again, his own wife said she never saw that happen. He made that crap up after he shot the dude and realized he just screwed up. Not to mention that if a 43 year old man punched a 70 plus year old crazed killer in the face, he would have one heck of a bruise. No marks of any kind were on crazed killer guys face.

Oldgringo wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:And heck yeah this subject makes me mad. I have loved ones living out there that could be the victim of this kind of crazed cowardly lunatic. We can never condone this type of situation or we WILL lose our right to own weapons.


As for the chances a jury will somehow say it is OK to kill a human for texting in a theater, I think are very slim. My bet is on a plea bargain. They have this nut dead to rights. I would be seriously concerned by the precedent set if this lunatic walks without serving some serious time.

Is your angst driven by the shooters actions or his age?

His actions. That was one dumb question my friend. It makes me question your motivations. Is your angst for the crazy nut because of his age?

Personally, if I were related to the victim, I would do everything I could to get that crazed killer out of jail.

Just kiddin'....

I think you and Abraham are working together to get me riled up so you guys can shoot me and claim self defense. You can rest assured, I am not going to throw my 20 dollar popcorn at you.

It appears a double standard was in play.

http://m.cnet.com/news/accused-movie-th ... s/57620330" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mojo84 wrote:It appears a double standard was in play.

http://m.cnet.com/news/accused-movie-th ... s/57620330" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Case keeps getting stranger.

His world is shattered!!!??? By his own stupid hand. The other families world is shattered too! A little girl will never hear her fathers voice again or be held in his strong embrace. A wife will have to pick up the pieces and move on as best she can without the love of her life. Now he may be exonerated, but if he had shut his mouth and moved seats or just lived with life's little annoyances everyone would have gone home that night.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:I think its driven by someone shooting a dad over a text to his daughter's babysitter during the previews.

The movie didn't start yet and already the old cop had movie rage over somebody using a phone?

mamabearCali wrote:His world is shattered!!!??? By his own stupid hand. The other families world is shattered too! A little girl will never hear her fathers voice again or be held in his strong embrace. A wife will have to pick up the pieces and move on as best she can without the love of her life. Now he may be exonerated, but if he had shut his mouth and moved seats or just lived with life's little annoyances everyone would have gone home that night.

Right on!!!

mamabearCali wrote:His world is shattered!!!??? By his own stupid hand. The other families world is shattered too! A little girl will never hear her fathers voice again or be held in his strong embrace. A wife will have to pick up the pieces and move on as best she can without the love of her life. Now he may be exonerated, but if he had shut his mouth and moved seats or just lived with life's little annoyances everyone would have gone home that night.

I think the wife of the dead man was the one saying her world is shattered.

Forty-three-year-old Oulson's wife, Nicole, who was injured in the shooting, reportedly said in January: "And just to think that in the blink of an eye, my whole world just got shattered into a million pieces. And now I'm left trying to pick them up."

I was reading some of the posts from the online article above. I did nor know he LEFT the theater to retrieve his gun!!

To me this is NOT stand your ground. He left his wife presumably in the theater while retrieving his weapon. If he did it after the confrontation, that seems to be premeditated. Stand your ground does not mean I leave and come back to the fight with a gun. I need to find more articles on this guy. I had no idea he had done this. If this was indeed how it transpired, then he should go to jail for murder, no deliberation necessary.

Thanks I missed that. Life is so fragile.