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

This is topic Shooting in Tampa Fl. Cobb Theatre in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=002747

Posted by Don Furr (Member # 1469) on 01-13-2014, 05:18 PM:

A filmgoer irked that other audience members were texting at a Mark Wahlberg war movie opened fire in a Florida theater Monday, killing a man and wounding a woman, authorities said.

The Grove 16 Theatre in Wesley Chapel, north of Tampa, was evacuated after the shooting about 1:20 p.m. ET.

A male suspect was in custody thanks to the quick thinking of a good Samaritan who detained the man until authorities arrived, said Doug Tobin, a spokesman for the Pasco County Sheriff's Office.

The victims were airlifted to a Tampa hospital, where the man was pronounced dead and the woman was being treated for non-life-threatening injuries, Tobin said.
"Everybody is paranoid, they're scared, because a movie theater should be somewhere safe where people are out there to enjoy themselves," Pasco County Sheriff Chris Nocco told reporters.

"But unfortunately, what America has seen over the last couple of years is that movie theaters have become dangerous places," he said in an apparent reference to the mass killings at a theater in Aurora, Colo., in July 2012.

None of the participants was identified, and Nocco wouldn't disclose how the good Samaritan managed to subdue an armed man, saying the investigation was still underway.

But Nocco did confirm that "what we believe is this was over somebody texting."

Nocco said the dispute was confined to two couples who happened to be sitting near each other as the preview trailers were rolling just before the showing of "Lone Survivor," the Mark Wahlberg movie about a failed 2007 Navy Seal raid in Afghanistan.

"So during this time, the victim was on his cellphone. He was texting — we believe he was making some type of noise," Nocco said.

"This noise led to an altercation between the suspect and the victim," Nocco said. "During the altercation, the suspect decided to pull out a .380 [caliber gun], and he shoots the victim. There's another shot that was fired at the time."

Shaking his head, Nocco said: "It's absolutely crazy that it would arise to this level of altercation over somebody just texting in a movie theater."

The theater remained closed late Monday afternoon, said its operator, Cobb Theatres.

"We are truly heartbroken by this incident," it said.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/13/22292711-man-shot-and-killed-for-texting-at-florida-movie-sheriff?lite

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-13-2014, 05:26 PM:

The sensationalist idiot who wrote this article should be fired. Using words like "opened fire" sounds like the guy stood at the bottom and started spraying the crowd, which he clearly did not.

Then comes this dick-head:

quote: Don Furr
"But unfortunately, what America has seen over the last couple of years is that movie theaters have become dangerous places," he said in an apparent reference to the mass killings at a theater in Aurora, Colo., in July 2012.

Nonsense! How many hundreds of millions of people have gone to the movies since Aurora, attended hundreds of thousands of shows with NO incident whatsoever. A theater is probably a thousand times safer than you are in your car, and no more dangerous than a shopping mall or a sports stadium.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 01-13-2014, 06:29 PM:

I have so many things to say about this, but I'll refrain to avoid political discussions.

The only thing I'll say is that once again the crazy comes out in Florida.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 01-13-2014, 08:43 PM:

Not that close to Deltona! (where the real crazies live.) louis

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-14-2014, 01:21 PM:

It is sensational to suggest movie theaters are dangerous places; they're not.

However, it's still very disgusting that a man was shot to death over such a cheap, petty thing. Some Americans have very serious anger management issues. It's even more disgusting the 71 year old shooter is a retired cop who should have known better. Cops are trained both in the lawful use of deadly force and how to peacefully neutralize emotional situations with civilians. That angry fart failed in both of those regards.

The outcome is just so stupid. If ex-cop was worried about a mobile phone display ruining his movie he might have tried thinking ahead a few moves and realize shooting a gun would not only stop the movie for him but for everyone else!

I'm wondering why the retired cop was getting so aggravated in the first place. Reports say the movie was in previews; the feature hadn't started yet. Who should care about mobile phone use while the TV commercials and movie trailers are playing?

Reports also say the retired cop left the theater to find a manager, but gave up on that, returned to his seat and pursued the argument with the phone user. I think that's going to be an important issue if a "stand your ground" self-defense claim is made. A smart person would have been persistent about finding a theater manager (which really isn't hard to do). If management refused to do anything about the situation the customer could demand a refund. The retired cop did exactly what he should not have done: go back into the theater and get into it with a total stranger.

One big positive thing to report, which very few in the news media like to repeat, murders in the United States are reaching new record low levels. Nationwide yearly totals of homicides are less than half what they were 20 years ago. In 2013 New York City had only 333 murders. Contrast that with 1990 when New York City had over 2000 murders in the 5 boroughs. Most other large US cities have seen steady declines. Memphis is one of the few large cities that has seen an increase.

The media doesn't like reporting that kind of progress. Instead they like to point out how the United States still has one of the highest murder rates in developed nations. Of course they don't bring up the more horrific murder rates taking place in many "undeveloped" countries.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-14-2014, 02:35 PM:

But it's USA magnited States of America where yer-you are free to text in a the-a-ter!

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-14-2014, 04:31 PM:

Was the deceased white? If so don't worry because it'll all blow over pretty soon if he was. It's more acceptable to kill white people.

quote:
But it's USA magnited States of America where yer-you are free to text in a the-a-ter!

That's governed by individual the-a-ter (or worse, thee-a-tree) policies. For example, you have a right to wear polka-dot shirts but an establishment can ban anyone from wearing polka-dot shirts for no reason whatsoever and be well within it's rights to do so. So a theater can ban texting and if you don't obey those rules then you can get out. Same goes for allowing guns on the premises but if you're doing it right nobody should ever know you have a gun.

The theater where the shooting took place now has a complete ban on electronics. Not sure how they plan to enforce that but there you go. At least it'll make it so that when people pull 'em out in an auditorium they can be ejected.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 01-14-2014, 05:21 PM:

Common sense dictates that one steps out of a theatre if one needs to use their electronic device once the regular cinematic program begins, regardless of whether it be in the trailers or feature.

Common sense dictates that one does not bring a gun in to a movie theatre under any circumstances (with the sole exception of one being a security guard employed by the theatre to provide security for said theatre).

Common sense seems to be lacking in this case on both sides.

Shut your damn device off once you're in the theatre, period.

Don't bring your gun to the movies, period.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-14-2014, 05:36 PM:

The problem with the "shut your device off" rule is, these days people expect to hear back immediately when they text someone. I wish there was an "app" that you could launch when you go to a movie (or anytime you want to be uninterrupted for a while). This app would automatically text back to whoever texts you, "Sorry, I'm at the movies right now; will hit you back after 9:00pm." (Of course the text and time would be customizable.) Then at the appointed time, your phone would come to life and let you know you have messages to return.

But people's addiction to their phones, combined with the notion that you MUST reply back whenever you get a text, will make this a never-ending problem, I fear.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-14-2014, 05:44 PM:

Actually, once you have the audience trained it gets to be less of a problem. As everyone here knows, I take a hard line on phones in my theatre and these days it's relatively rare that I have to tell anyone to shut their phone off. I think the secret is to be consistent and to keep an eye on what's going on so you can jump on anyone with a phone as soon as they haul it out.

It does make me wonder what's wrong with some people, though. They walked past two signs telling them to turn their phone off, sat through a policy trailer telling them the same thing, and then they decide to send a text to their brother's cousin's neice's mother-in-law as soon as the show starts. "Hey, turn off your phone. It lights up the room." "Huh?"

Posted by Mike Rivest (Member # 5500) on 01-14-2014, 07:00 PM:

From France:
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/videos-floride-abattu-au-cinema-a-cause-du-bruit-de-ses-sms-14-01-2014-3492485.php

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-14-2014, 11:54 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Reports also say the retired cop left the theater to find a manager, but gave up on that, returned to his seat and pursued the argument with the phone user. I think that's going to be an important issue if a "stand your ground" self-defense claim is made. A smart person would have been persistent about finding a theater manager (which really isn't hard to do). If management refused to do anything about the situation the customer could demand a refund. The retired cop did exactly what he should not have done: go back into the theater and get into it with a total stranger.

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. In other words, he's claiming that the shooting was in legitimate, pre-emptive self-defence. Needless to say, no gun was found in the victim's pocket.

Agreed completely with Bobby that this man at the very least acted was monumentally stupid in creating a totally unnecessary confrontation, let alone a fatal one. There was a fatal stabbing in a British cinema in the '90s under very similar circumstances, the only difference being that smelly fast food rather than texting was the cause of the initial confrontation. Sadly, stupid people will do stupid things.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 01-15-2014, 03:28 AM:

quote: Joe Redifer
The theater where the shooting took place now has a complete ban on electronics. Not sure how they plan to enforce that but there you go. At least it'll make it so that when people pull 'em out in an auditorium they can be ejected.

Sorry, you can't bring your pacemaker or hearing aid with you, but since your gun is a purely mechanical device, no problemo.

In the digital age, it shouldn't be hard to run a trailer for each and every presentation indicating when the silent period starts.

I personally don't mind people talking or texting while commercials are playing and the house lights are still on or dimmed. Unfortunately, every chain or rather every location implements its own more or less consistent sequence of events before the feature starts, making it hard for some people to recognize when the actual movie starts. Often people keep on talking and texting right into the feature presentation, sometimes right until the first dialogue starts: Hey, ssht, the movie is apparently on...

So, whether or not those visual cues regarding when to shut your face and fingers are a bit childish, some people rather seem to need them.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-15-2014, 11:23 AM:

I'm curious if that Good Samaritan was also armed.

Posted by Don Furr (Member # 1469) on 01-15-2014, 11:36 AM:

I heard on the news this morning that the good Samaritan was an off duty cop. I bet he was armed.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 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.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 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.

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 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]

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 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.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 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).

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 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.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 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?

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 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

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 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.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 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.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 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]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 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.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 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.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 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.