Cops being cops

SirGreenThumb said:
True dat! I've already killed 9 today. them fuckers are like grimlins they keep multiplying.
Click to expand...
Problem is there is always some ass hole willing to sell his soul to be the next dick with a gun that gets to fuck with people for a living.

Sure there is lots of bullshit that goes along with being a cop. But if your the type of person that gets an erection out of controlling others, its the gig for you.
 
BigNBushy said:
Problem is there is always some ass hole willing to sell his soul to be the next dick with a gun that gets to fuck with people for a living.

Sure there is lots of bullshit that goes along with being a cop. But if your the type of person that gets an erection out of controlling others, its the gig for you.
Click to expand...

I've met some pretty cool cops, i've also met some power tripping fuckers. I'm almost certain that the power tripping cops are democrats. :lol:
 
BigNBushy said:
I got arrested one time, while there I saw another inmate throw a piece of paper at a co.

About 10 dudes jumped on him and kicked his ass. The guy had obvious mental issues.

My point, this guy threw popcorn at the ex-cop. If he were still a cop, he could have charged him with assaulting an officer. This is just how cops are. Overwheming force, respond to anything with an absurd amount of force.

They typically use more cops to arrest people than we used Navy Seals to go get Osama.

I wouldn't be surprised if this guy offers some kind of defense in court centered around fear for his life from the throwing of popcorn.
Click to expand...

no, he will say he was in fear for his life..isn't that the get out of jail free excuse these days?
 
schuylaar said:
no, he will say he was in fear for his life..isn't that the get out of jail free excuse these days?
Click to expand...

it only works if there is proof of such fear. Like initially if there was a gun involved(which there wasn't.)He left the theater to go get his gun) However, I wouldn't be surprised if he did get off simply because he was an ex cop. Hell they will probably offer him a pay raise to come out of retirement and then send him on a paid leave for the shooting. Corruption 101
 
SirGreenThumb said:
it only works if there is proof of such fear. Like initially if there was a gun involved(which there wasn't.)He left the theater to go get his gun) However, I wouldn't be surprised if he did get off simply because he was an ex cop. Hell they will probably offer him a pay raise to come out of retirement and then send him on a paid leave for the shooting. Corruption 101
Click to expand...
That's not quite how it works. It is a reasonable person standard. And the shooters advanced age, coupled with the victims young age and aggressive act of throwing popcorn.

He was an old man, with possible dementia, who was afraid because over his long career he has arrested many individuals. His experience has shown that acts of violence that cause grave harm are often preceeded by acts of lesser violence.

In the defendants understandable apprehension resulting from being in an argument with someone in much better condition, the aggressors act of throwing popcorn set off all sorts of defense training, after all his wife was with him.

I've not heard he left to get his gun. Did he admit to this? He did leave the theatre, he informed management.

Because he left and informed management, who did nothing, the theatre will be sued. They failed to protect, which they have a duty to do to a certain extent.

Oh to be in a torts class room today.
 
BigNBushy said:
That's not quite how it works. It is a reasonable person standard. And the shooters advanced age, coupled with the victims young age and aggressive act of throwing popcorn.

He was an old man, with possible dementia, who was afraid because over his long career he has arrested many individuals. His experience has shown that acts of violence that cause grave harm are often preceeded by acts of lesser violence.

In the defendants understandable apprehension resulting from being in an argument with someone in much better condition, the aggressors act of throwing popcorn set off all sorts of defense training, after all his wife was with him.

I've not heard he left to get his gun. Did he admit to this? He did leave the theatre, he informed management.

Because he left and informed management, who did nothing, the theatre will be sued. They failed to protect, which they have a duty to do to a certain extent.

Oh to be in a torts class room today.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't said, I assumed. Mainly because of him leaving the theater and not returning with anyone and no one came till after the altercation. But think about it like this; you can obviously see where the older ex cop was coming from in the sense of his career and wife being there. However, if the ex cop followed the law, he wouldn't have carried into the theater since he is an ex cop and not a current one, but that is to assume that he did in fact follow the law and the rules of the theater.

The proper thing to do would have been to change seats and move elsewhere that it didn't bother you or that you couldn't see the texter. I cannot stand people who start shit just cause they have a gun. If the ex cop wanted to be mr big shot, he could have used his training as an officer to take the dude down if there was a real confrontation. The fact of the matter is this; Do not start shit you cannot back up(without a firearm.)

But yea, I could be wrong about him going to get the gun, but he used to be a cop and he will never admit to going to get a gun to solve his problem with a texter.
 
SirGreenThumb said:
No, it wasn't said, I assumed. Mainly because of him leaving the theater and not returning with anyone and no one came till after the altercation. But think about it like this; you can obviously see where the older ex cop was coming from in the sense of his career and wife being there. However, if the ex cop followed the law, he wouldn't have carried into the theater since he is an ex cop and not a current one, but that is to assume that he did in fact follow the law and the rules of the theater.

The proper thing to do would have been to change seats and move elsewhere that it didn't bother you or that you couldn't see the texter. I cannot stand people who start shit just cause they have a gun. If the ex cop wanted to be mr big shot, he could have used his training as an officer to take the dude down if there was a real confrontation. The fact of the matter is this; Do not start shit you cannot back up(without a firearm.)

But yea, I could be wrong about him going to get the gun, but he used to be a cop and he will never admit to going to get a gun to solve his problem with a texter.
Click to expand...

Part of what you responded to was me just inserting what his defense team might say. I don't have as many facts as his lawyer will have.

The culpability for me (young, strong) is higher than for a frail older person when it comes to self defense.

Many women have been aquited in murder trials because they felt intimidated by the person they shot, where if they were a young healthy man they would have likely been convicted.

I hate to say it, but I think this guy walks at the end of it.

By the way, not all theaters ban people who are otherwise allowed to carry from doing so. Most do, this one may, I'm not sure, but I don't think it has an impact on the legality of the shooting. A theatre that does not allow one to carry is simply trying to enforce company policy, it does not carry with it the weight of law.

The fact that this shooting was done in a theatre will have no relevant impact on the outcome of the case, notwithstanding any particular law Florida may have with regard to having guns in a theatre.
 
BigNBushy said:
Part of what you responded to was me just inserting what his defense team might say. I don't have as many facts as his lawyer will have.

The culpability for me (young, strong) is higher than for a frail older person when it comes to self defense.

Many women have been aquited in murder trials because they felt intimidated by the person they shot, where if they were a young healthy man they would have likely been convicted.

I hate to say it, but I think this guy walks at the end of it.

By the way, not all theaters ban people who are otherwise allowed to carry from doing so. Most do, this one may, I'm not sure, but I don't think it has an impact on the legality of the shooting. A theatre that does not allow one to carry is simply trying to enforce company policy, it does not carry with it the weight of law.

The fact that this shooting was done in a theatre will have no relevant impact on the outcome of the case, notwithstanding any particular law Florida may have with regard to having guns in a theatre.
Click to expand...

He could have done many other things to solve the argument rather than shooting him..... You would think a retired cop would be able to handle confrontation
 
BigNBushy said:
Part of what you responded to was me just inserting what his defense team might say. I don't have as many facts as his lawyer will have.

The culpability for me (young, strong) is higher than for a frail older person when it comes to self defense.

Many women have been aquited in murder trials because they felt intimidated by the person they shot, where if they were a young healthy man they would have likely been convicted.

I hate to say it, but I think this guy walks at the end of it.

By the way, not all theaters ban people who are otherwise allowed to carry from doing so. Most do, this one may, I'm not sure, but I don't think it has an impact on the legality of the shooting. A theatre that does not allow one to carry is simply trying to enforce company policy, it does not carry with it the weight of law.

The fact that this shooting was done in a theatre will have no relevant impact on the outcome of the case, notwithstanding any particular law Florida may have with regard to having guns in a theatre.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying and I wouldn't be surprised if we walked also. If I was the judge he wouldn't have a chance in my courtroom. There are so many other ways to handle that situation. I don't go to the theater cause I don't like crowds, but when I have went there is always someone on their phone or talking, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna shoot them for it. Hell, I would get up and leave and demand a refund if it was that bad.
 
BigNBushy said:
I got arrested one time, while there I saw another inmate throw a piece of paper at a co.

About 10 dudes jumped on him and kicked his ass. The guy had obvious mental issues.

My point, this guy threw popcorn at the ex-cop. If he were still a cop, he could have charged him with assaulting an officer. This is just how cops are. Overwheming force, respond to anything with an absurd amount of force.

They typically use more cops to arrest people than we used Navy Seals to go get Osama.

I wouldn't be surprised if this guy offers some kind of defense in court centered around fear for his life from the throwing of popcorn.
Click to expand...

I will reserve judgment until I know whether the popcorn was GMO. If it was GM popcorn, then every popped kernel was crawling with death and the shooting was clearly justified.
 
BigNBushy said:
That's not quite how it works. It is a reasonable person standard. And the shooters advanced age, coupled with the victims young age and aggressive act of throwing popcorn.

He was an old man, with possible dementia, who was afraid because over his long career he has arrested many individuals. His experience has shown that acts of violence that cause grave harm are often preceeded by acts of lesser violence.

In the defendants understandable apprehension resulting from being in an argument with someone in much better condition, the aggressors act of throwing popcorn set off all sorts of defense training, after all his wife was with him.

I've not heard he left to get his gun. Did he admit to this? He did leave the theatre, he informed management.

Because he left and informed management, who did nothing, the theatre will be sued. They failed to protect, which they have a duty to do to a certain extent.

Oh to be in a torts class room today.
Click to expand...

You are correct about the standard, but I doubt any reasonable person will find it justifiable to shoot a person dead because they threw popcorn at the shooter.
 
No bond hold... I dunno' 'bout you all, but from what I know of the Sunshine State, they don't take kindly to random shootings -- outside of Miami, parts of Tampa, the greater Jacksonville and Lake City areas, and of course OBT in Orlando.
 
minnesmoker said:
No bond hold... I dunno' 'bout you all, but from what I know of the Sunshine State, they don't take kindly to random shootings -- outside of Miami, parts of Tampa, the greater Jacksonville and Lake City areas, and of course OBT in Orlando.
Click to expand...

Only thing I really know about Florida is that the strip in panama city is awesome during spring break.
 
Rob Roy said:
maybe he didn't like popcorn, it's not for everybody y'know!
Click to expand...

allergic to butter topping perhaps?
............................................

on another note

this idea that a cop's job is soooo dangerous is disproven by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. cops just want you to think that in order for you to feel sorry for them for being stupid enough to not amount to anything other than an oversized, underpaid bully..... you are more likely to die at work if you are a manager on a production line than if you're a cop. If you are in any sort of material's moving, whether its working on a pipeline, loading freight on trucks, driving trash trucks, driving semi's....etc... you risk your life more every day than those fucking pigs.... so him being an ex-cop is no excuse in my eyes....

www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top