Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

“Popcorn” Shooting: Don’t Frighten an Old Man
ammoland ^ | 13 March, 2017 | Dean Weingarten

Posted on 03/16/2017 6:11:27 AM PDT by marktwain

Video of Theater Shooting link

On January 13, 2014, a retired police officer, Curtis Reeves, and his wife were preparing to watch “Lone Survivor” in a theater in the unincorporated area of Wesley Chapel, part of the Tampa Bay Florida metro complex.

Directly in front of the retired officer and his wife were another couple, Chad Oulson and his wife.

Reeves and Chad got into a dispute after Reeves asked Chad to stop using his cell phone during previews.

The case has been characterized as a retired police officer shooting someone who threw popcorn at him.  I was surprised to see the reality when surveillance video of the confrontation was released.  The violent confrontation took about 1.3 seconds.

During that period, Chad Oulson snatched the popcorn container from Reeves lap, flung it at his face from about a foot away, rapidly extended his hand toward Reeves face again, and pulls it back, fractions of a second before Reeves shoots.  In the video, you can only see Oulson's outstretched arm and hand. The rest of him is outside the surveillance video frame.

Correction: There were two thrusts at Reeves, but the above paragraph has the sequence wrong. The first thrust is to grab the popcorn, the second is to fling the popcorn.  The above paragraph states that the grabbing and flinging were in one motion, and then a second motion without the popcorn. That is incorrect. Tip of the hat to Kevin in the comments.

The outstretched Arm of Chad Oulson is under the red arrow.  The container of popcorn is just to left, in flight. Head of retired officer Reeves is just to left of cup in flight, barely visible.

(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: banglist; popcorn; selfdefense; theater
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
Both parties had numerous chances to disengage. Neither did.
1 posted on 03/16/2017 6:11:27 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Some thing to consider

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/12/a-punch-to-head-is-potential-deadly.html

If you watch television and the movies, you might get the impression that a punch to the head is no big deal. That is not true. A punch to the head is a very serious attack. It can disable. It can maim. It can kill. The head is a vulnerable target, which is why an attacker aims for it. I first became aware of the deadly potential of one punch to the head in the 1970’s, from a long forgotten news story. Later, the son of a close friend killed a man with one punch. He was eventually found not guilty of manslaughter, but only after a long and expensive legal fight


2 posted on 03/16/2017 6:15:41 AM PDT by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

So it’s been three years and they’re not quite to the point where they have decided if there should be a trial. Somebody’s trying to run out the clock.


3 posted on 03/16/2017 6:27:23 AM PDT by jiggyboy (Ten percent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
"Both parties had numerous chances to disengage."

Reeves had no need to disengage since it was Chad who conducted on his own the violent confrontation. When Chad escalated the violence to a level that appeared to threaten the lives and safety of himself and his wife next to him, Reeves legitimately used deadly force to stop the violent threat.

Sadly, society, law enforcement, and the leftist-saturated judiciary are so politically correct and testicularly challenged today that Reeves will likely get kangaroo court justice.

4 posted on 03/16/2017 6:30:45 AM PDT by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Reason number 42 why I don’t go to movie theaters any more.


5 posted on 03/16/2017 6:32:16 AM PDT by Flick Lives (I want to live long enough to see all Deep State operatives executed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl Vehse
....Reeves legitimately used deadly force to stop the violent threat.

What violent threat? Popcorn?

I predict the turgidity level, about shooting another human, in this thread is going to be strong.

6 posted on 03/16/2017 6:34:27 AM PDT by raybbr (That progressive bumper sticker on your car might just as well say, "Yes, I'm THAT stupid!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Both parties had numerous chances to disengage. Neither did.

Don't be an a-hole. You'll eventually meet a bigger one.

7 posted on 03/16/2017 6:35:29 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Reeves and Chad got into a dispute after Reeves asked Chad to stop using his cell phone during previews.

Reeves didn't 'ask'. He ordered. Reeves was the one who initiated the confrontation.

Not 5 minutes before he 'ordered' Chad to stop using his phone, Reeves, himself, had texted his son to let the son know where he and his wife were sitting in the theater.

Clearly a case of 'do as I say, not as I do'.

8 posted on 03/16/2017 6:36:24 AM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard., -- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

One man is sitting get down, while the other is standing a day actively engaging.

It’s also a darkened theater.

I’m Going with self defense.


9 posted on 03/16/2017 6:40:53 AM PDT by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wH-pk2vZG2M)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carl Vehse
Reeves had no need to disengage since it was Chad who conducted on his own the violent confrontation. When Chad escalated the violence to a level that appeared to threaten the lives and safety of himself and his wife next to him, Reeves legitimately used deadly force to stop the violent threat.

Had you followed the case from the beginning, you'd know that it was Reeves who initiated the confrontation.

If Reeves use of deadly force had been legitimate, he would not be sitting in jail right now awaiting trial.

Sadly, society, law enforcement, and the leftist-saturated judiciary are so politically correct and testicularly challenged today that Reeves will likely get kangaroo court justice.

Reeves tried to claim he was protecting himself under Florida's Stand Your Ground laws. The judge denied the motion because Reeves' own contemporaneous statements, along with those of his wife and witnesses (one of whom was a fellow LEO) clearly showed that he was not a guilt-less as you would like to believe.

For his part in escalating the confrontation, Reeves deserves to spend the rest of his life behind bars, and in all likelihood, probably will.

10 posted on 03/16/2017 6:43:45 AM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard., -- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker

Reeves was a cop... Prison? I doubt it.


11 posted on 03/16/2017 6:46:56 AM PDT by Lord Castlereagh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
It’s also a darkened theater.

It wasn't darkened. The lights were dimmed, as they usually are during the previews, but not completely out.

I’m Going with self defense.

Of course you are since you know absolutely nothing about the events that led up to the shooting.

12 posted on 03/16/2017 6:47:47 AM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard., -- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lord Castlereagh
Reeves was a cop... Prison? I doubt it.

Retired police captain. And, he's going to stand trial as his Stand Your Ground defense was rejected by the judge based upon his own, his wife's, and witness statements at the time, one of whom was an active LEO.

13 posted on 03/16/2017 6:49:58 AM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard., -- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Wow, this story is about as spinning as you can get.. the guy grabbed his poporn and threw it at him, and the other guy was pulling his gun out before the popcorn had even left his hand....

This old man is going to jail, trying to spin this as stand your ground is ridiculous.


14 posted on 03/16/2017 6:51:43 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

The trial is on..............
Judge rules ex-cop must stand trial in fatal theater shooting

http://nypost.com/2017/03/10/judge-rules-ex-cop-must-stand-trial-in-fatal-theater-shooting/


15 posted on 03/16/2017 6:56:49 AM PDT by Red Badger (Ending a sentence with a preposition is nothing to be afraid of........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
One man is sitting get down, while the other is standing a day actively engaging.

Day is?....................B^0

16 posted on 03/16/2017 6:57:54 AM PDT by Red Badger (Ending a sentence with a preposition is nothing to be afraid of........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker

This guy trying to use stand your ground is ludicrous on its face, the other guy grabbed his popcorn and flung it at him... this guy was pulling his gun out clearly with intent to shoot before the popcorn ever left the other persons hand....

This guys going to jail.


17 posted on 03/16/2017 7:08:47 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
Don't be an a-hole. You'll eventually meet a bigger one.

Words of wisdom, FRiend!
18 posted on 03/16/2017 7:14:40 AM PDT by RandallFlagg (Vote for your guns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
"...it was Reeves who initiated the confrontation."

No. Reeves did not initiate the violent confrontation. He asked the man to stop using his cell phone. He then reported the man's disruption to the theater management and returned to his seat. All of these actions were legal and proper. Any ranting by Chad would have confirmed he was a total ass, but would not have been considered a threat against Reeves (unless Chad verbally threatened he would get up and attack Reeves).

Chad initiated the violent confrontation when he got up from his seat and grabbed the popcorn and threw it in Reeves face. It could also reasonably be considered a diversion to a more violent and life-threatening attack from Chad's "outstretched arm and hand."

Stupid people, because of their own fault, do stupid and violent things against others and get themselves killed.

Reeves does not deserve to spend a single day behind bars and it is a sickening injustice that it is even being considered, and another sign that we live in a sick and perverted society.

19 posted on 03/16/2017 7:30:01 AM PDT by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
Clearly a case of 'do as I say, not as I do'.

(Retired) Cop Style.

20 posted on 03/16/2017 7:38:09 AM PDT by Mr.Unique (The government, by its very nature, cannot give except what it first takes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson