Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Shooting in Tampa Fl. Cobb Theatre

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Shooting in Tampa Fl. Cobb Theatre (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Shooting in Tampa Fl. Cobb Theatre

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-15-2014 01:21 PM

A couple problems common with too many people led to this shooting. First, there's the anger management problem I mentioned earlier. Second, too many people are hell-bent on doing whatever they want to do and feel that anyone bothered by the activity can go screw himself. Fundamentally it's selfishness allowed to go way out of control.

Even though violent crime in the United States has been on a steady decline over the past couple decades, it does seem more and more socially acceptable for someone to act like a total asshole. In the case of this shooting it seems like two assholes got into it and wouldn't back down.

I like it that movie chains such as Alamo Drafthouse and Warren Theaters have mobile phone use bans, but it's also sad that so much of the public is selfish and immature enough to make such bans necessary.

quote: Mike Blakesley
The problem with the "shut your device off" rule is, these days people expect to hear back immediately when they text someone.

I didn't think such an app existed, but apparently there are numerous SMS-based auto responder apps available for Android and iOS based smart phones, many of them for free. Safest Text Auto Reply (available in the Google Play store) looks like it might be pretty good. Voice mail and apps like these negate any of those "I have to be able to be reached" excuses coming from phone addicts.

quote: Leo Enticknap
According to a report on NPR just now, the gunman (Reeves) claims that he saw the deceased put his hand in his pocket, which he thought, incorrectly, was reaching for a gun: at that point, he drew his own and fired.

I wonder how many witnesses would back up that claim. Everything I've read about this incident makes me think the phone user got pissed off enough to throw his popcorn at the old retired cop. The old retired cop got pissed off enough from having popcorn thrown at him that he had to retaliate with gunfire.

This new angle of "I thought he was reaching for a gun" sounds like an act of desperation. The shooter (or his attorney) is just trying to cover his ass.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-15-2014 02:25 PM

The stupidest part of the whole thing is the fact that the shooter IS A RETIRED COP. Cops, retired or otherwise, should be among the SAFEST people to have in your movie theater, not the most dangerous.

Cops are trained to have the utmost amount of restraint when it comes to firing their weapon. The guy should have known that he would pretty much be ending his own life by shooting that guy.

So this leads to two possible conclusions:

A. The retired cop had mental issues (or is on anger management or other meds and forgot to take his meds that day)

or

B. The retired cop is really old and has lost his reasoning skills.

One of those will probably be his defense.

There's also the possibility that the retired cop is just a hotheaded idiot who never should have been a cop in the first place. I assume his employment record will be scrutinized pretty thoroughly.

| IP: Logged

Rick Raskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1100
From: Manassas Virginia
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 01-15-2014 04:06 PM

Originally posted here.

Throwing popcorn at the guy would legally be considered assault but hardly justifying such a radical response. Major anger management issues here! I hope the guy gets life. An ex cop in the big house -- Wow, what a movie that would make. [evil]

| IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 01-15-2014 06:15 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
I like it that movie chains such as Alamo Drafthouse and Warren Theaters have mobile phone use bans, but it's also sad that so much of the public is selfish and immature enough to make such bans necessary.

Bans alone don't guarantee that someone won't decide to ignore or test the rule.

I'm curious how fans of these "zero tolerance" theatres feel about this shooting.

| IP: Logged

Mike Spaeth
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1129
From: Marietta, GA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 01-15-2014 09:52 PM

I suspect most of the "zero tolerance" theatres do so for liability reasons (possibly a reduction in their insurance).

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 01-15-2014 10:22 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
This new angle of "I thought he was reaching for a gun" sounds like an act of desperation. The shooter (or his attorney) is just trying to cover his ass.

+1, and furthermore is/are making the cynical calculation that the fact that the confrontation took place in semi-darkness and with no independent witnesses who were able to see what was going on to the level of detail needed to confirm or deny his claim = reasonable doubt.

| IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 01-15-2014 11:27 PM

quote: Mike Spaeth
I suspect most of the "zero tolerance" theatres do so for liability reasons (possibly a reduction in their insurance).

How does banning texting reduce insurance?

| IP: Logged

Joe Elliott
Master Film Handler

Posts: 497
From: Port Orange, Fl USA
Registered: Oct 2006

posted 01-15-2014 11:28 PM

As I heard more about this, I figured it would be a stand your ground case. From reports the 43 year old was looking like the aggressor, he stood up and turned around, he threw popcorn, his wife put her hand on his chest to hold him back . . etc. In looking tonight, I found a video from one of the Tampa stations.

The Popcorn Defense

| IP: Logged

Dennis Benjamin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1445
From: Denton, MD
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 01-16-2014 10:22 AM

As a movie biz person, the thing about all of this that jumped out at me: The guy went to go get a manager, or at least, someone to talk to the texting guy.

What happened there?

Was the theatre's budget so low on a Monday afternoon that the manager was stuck in the concession stand? That would be the case in most of the larger chains. I would hope that would not be the case in a smaller chain.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-16-2014 11:15 AM

Maybe the movie was in one of those far-flung auditoriums. The guy went into the hallway, found it empty, said "screw it" and went back in.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-16-2014 11:40 AM

The shooter has no excuse about not getting a manager.

He should have been persistent about finding a manager. That's really not difficult to do. If he didn't see any employees close to the auditorium he should have walked to the snack counter or ticket booth and speak to a staffer there. If the crew dilly-dallied around or the manager gave him some lame excuse or whatever the customer could have demanded a refund for his tickets.

Obviously the shooter didn't do this. My hunch is the guy walked outside the auditorium, looked around a bit, didn't see anyone that looked like a manager, fumed a little and then went back inside the auditorium to take matters into his own hands.

There's little doubt the ex-cop's lawyers will use Florida's "stand your ground" statutes for every bit of their worth and further make a mockery of the law.

"Stand Your Ground" and "Make My Day" laws are supposed to give a crime victim more legal cover in a life threatening self defense situation, such as an intruder barging into a person's home with the intent of severely injuring or killing the home owner. They do not give someone the license to kill for having popcorn thrown in his face or even getting his ass kicked. A person cannot legally use deadly force unless he believes his life or the lives of his loved ones are being threatened. Hence the "he was reaching in his pocket for something" defense.
[Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 01-16-2014 02:10 PM

It can be hard to find a manager depending on the theater. Managers love to hide out in their office. Find an employee, employee calls manager... no response. Seen it happen. Manager could have also been on his mandatory 15 or 30 minute break. At Regency we had mandatory breaks and the assistants were not exempt. So they left the building during these breaks. They can't be expected to keep working while off the clock, after all.

| IP: Logged

Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008

posted 01-16-2014 02:46 PM

The sad part about laws is that they get corrupted by those trying who want to better justify their behavior. The Bill of Rights, part of the Supreme Law of the Land, provided an amendment to the Constitution that allowed the citizens of the land the right to keep and bear arms, as the authors believed a well regulated militia was necessary to the security of a free state. Back in 1787, when the Second Amendment was passed, the United States, then a new country, did not have the standing army we now know. The Continental Army had been mostly disbanded by 1783, so the thought of the need for a militia (traditionally an army or other fighting force comprised on non-professional fighters) was justified at the time.

But there is no need for a militia today. We've had a standing Army for over two hundred years now, and the closest thing we do have to a militia today (the Army and other Armed Forces Reserves) do have professional militiary training. But instead of amending the Second Amendment to better fit a world that is far different from the one that existed in 1791, when the Bill of Rights was ratified, gun lovers formed an organization that does nothing but lobby for the right of any idiot to carry a gun.

I do believe in a person's right to bear arms. I do believe it is important to have arms in case you need to defend yourself, your family and your neighbors in deterring a tyrannical government. But I doubt the shooter in this case was going to find a tyrannical government needing to be deterred inside a Florida movie theatre. Just because you have the right to own a gun does not give you the right to carry it around anywhere and everywhere you want, and use it because you get in to an argument with someone.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-16-2014 02:55 PM

Would a regular, non-manager level employee be able to handle a situation where someone was disrupting the movie with a mobile phone or some other activity?

I can certainly understand smaller theaters being short-handed in terms of staff. Usually the larger ones at least have one or more assistant managers on duty while the GM is on his break.

Even with any staffing limitations that may have existed at that movie theater I still think the retired cop had no business going back in that auditorium to further confront the phone user. If it had taken too long for a staff member to respond to the situation the customer could have demanded a refund.

Basically I think any self defense claim on the part of that ex-cop is nonsense. He had plenty of opportunity to take the situation into a more peaceful direction.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.