<p>Exactly, romani. Get help. Don’t try to intervene and be a rodeo clown. Reminds me of all those “What would you do” scenarios on ABC by John Quinones. In several of those scenarios, while the person who intervenes is seen as a hero, I think to myself “that was risky and possibly dangerous”. Better to call 911 and let the cops handle it."</p>
<p>Jym, thank you. That video is much better. </p>
<p>My pleasure, m2ck. In that report, the reporter says that “you can see Reeves hand coming out of his pocket and then the fatal gunshot wound” or words to that effect. Not sure what he is basing that on. Cant really see whats in Reeves’ lap. Also wonder when a male is sitting and has a weapon in his pocket, does it naturally start to come out to the edge of the pants pocket just by virtue of being in a sitting position? And more importantly, wouldnt the safety be on???</p>
<p>While not usually one to speculate, I am guessing that Reeves and Oulson smarted off at each other several times. Again, it looks like part of Oulson is visible in the earlier frames when Reeves leans forward 3 times, so am surmising that perhaps Oulson has turned around and is arguing with Reeves. They are each likely fueling the fire. Read the comments below the article I linked. One commented “I have had a CWP for 25 years now… and have learned to walk away from trouble, even when I don’t have to”. Who wants to end up on the nightly news?? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And I and many others strongly disagree with that as it punishes the victim and actually strengthens the bully’s hand as most schoolyard bullies don’t care about being punished from my observations. Especially considering many public school admins prefer pursuing the path of least resistance rather than resolving and solving the root of the bullying problem…the bully him/herself instigating the incidents and oftentimes his/her enabling parents. </p>
<p>I witnessed and experienced this firsthand in junior high though the school admins weren’t absurd enough to decide to use the “pox on both their houses approach” to this issue yet. It was bad enough most of the admins allowed the enabling parents of bullies to impede the school from giving them the already reduced punishments from what the school had on the books, especially considering the local cops* felt those admins were impeding their efforts to hold them accountable for the crimes they were committing in the neighborhood. </p>
<p>Not to mention there are cases of school admins favoring bullies as a way to maintain an illusion of school order and as another path of least resistance. </p>
<ul>
<li>Many years later, I found from one that all those bullies ended up at Rikers or prisons upstate because they continued their crimes and bullying to the point their parents and sympathetic school admins were no longer able to protect them from the consequences of their actions. Unfortunately many more kids ended up getting violently bullied before that happened. I was relatively lucky my bullied friends and I had the wherewithal and the gumption to fight back when they attacked again after realizing none of the school admins/teachers were going to do anything about the issue.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>Did you watch the part where the reporter asks the Oulson’s attorney about phone throwing? He says he can’t answer that question. Well, why not?</p>
<p>And Cobrat - The bully thing, sigh. Being a victim is better than being dead. </p>
<p>Regardless of the sequence of events, to shoot the jerk, is not acceptable. Here is a tragic case that would have likely ended with both of these bozos doing some time in a cell to cool off, suing each other, getting probation, etc, but no one seriously hurt or dead if a gun were not in the picture. The chances of death would be far lower had they engaged in a fight with blows instead of bullets. Both hot heads, but the gun is what escalates this to this tragic conclusion. </p>
<p>ANYONE who will use a gun in such a situation is unsafe. ANYONE. So, one guy is dead, his spouse shot as well and injured, a family loses a member, kids left fatherless, a wife turned into a widow. And the shooter’s life as well as his familie’s is about as ruined as it gets too. They will get financially cleaned out over this, get horribly terrible press (and I don’t care about Reeves getting it, but his kids, his grand children? His wife? They will all be horribly hurt and damaged) </p>
<p>So I don’t care what the sequence of events was. There is no excuse in this scenario for shooting the guy. If the other guy drew out a gun, that might change the scenario, but that did not happen. </p>
<p>
Take it up with the school systems, Cobrat, if and when you ever have a kid. This is the CORRECT way to handle it. Have not heard anyone but YOU disagree with this. Much has changed in 20+ years since you were in junior high school. Not the least of which is its not even called JHS any more. Its middle school. C’mon into the 21st century. You might like it here.</p>
<p>It is possible that if it goes to jury that there will some seated that would feel that the jerk got his due, and Reeves does not get convicted. That’s why plea bargains are often done. I don’t sense this sentiment, but then I’m not on the scene. I do have a good friend who is a criminal attorney, and depending on venue, some pretty blatant cases risk getting a hung jury which could mean years of retrials and an enormous amount of resources expended by the state. This sort of thing, by the way, is common in certain areas around NYC where I live, maybe not with guns but with hot heads overreacting and damages inflicted, sometimes death, and getting a jury of peers to convict is no sure thing in most of those cases, as too many feel they’d react the same way. Doesn’t seem the case here, but the prosecutor’s office will have to test the waters on this. What happened in the CaseyAnthoney case is that public opinion due to media mistated how a jury looking at the facts of a trial would react, and this may well be the case in this situation too. If too many people in that area have the reaction that “the B*** had it coming”, well, I think the case needs to be so handled. </p>
<p>However, when people are on a jury and are directed as to how to handle the evidence and make the decisions, they do tend to attempt to do due diligence at the task at hand. </p>
<p>For the life of me I don’t understand why the victim confronted Reeves with the “did you go tell on me?” question. By that time, hadn’t he put his phone away already? Reeves may have calmed down after a point and the victim would still be alive. I’m wondering if one elderly bully actually targeted a young bully. You know, poked the sleeping bear, so to speak. I’m sure we’ll hear much more about Oulson if there is a trial. </p>
<p>From current reports about the incident, and if they are true, it really seems like Oulson was determined to pick up the conflict where it left off when Reeves came back into the theater. It’s really too bad they couldn’t have both just shut the hell up and enjoyed the movie.</p>
<p>My ponderings above are in no way a suggestion that lethal force was indicated, even if the victim did throw a phone or popcorn at the shooter. He probably thought he had the edge on Reeves in terms of youth, strength, and size and had no inkling the gun made all those advantages moot. Very sad miscalculation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it is not the correct way to handle it. Your assertion is just as much an opinion as is mine. So please, don’t act as if your word on the matter is the final and definitive one, here or on any other points in this or other discussion. </p>
<p>There’s also been much commentary and parental voices which vehemently disagree with your assertion and feel the same as I do…that it not only doesn’t solve the bullying problem, but worse…punishes the bullying victim and obscure the issue as in such an environment…bullying victims are likely to remain silent rather than complain, risk no action or worse, possible punishment for being involved in the incident despite it being instigated by the bully him/herself. </p>
<p>On the other hand, it’s great for school admins as it means they can effectively sweep the problem under the rug or mindlessly impose punishments on victims without much investigating/thought. And those were some of the issues cited by those who feel such rules are absurd, encourage injustice, and encourage victims to suffer in silence. </p>
<p>You stance on that issue does clarify why you prefer the overly simplistic “a pox on both their houses” approach toward discussing this case. Much easier to say both are to blame than to actually take the time to analyze and weighing the facts and issues so one can come to a just assigning of responsibility. </p>
<p>How would you have any clue what the parental voices in the schools systems are? Do you work with school systems? If you have an empassioned personal interest in and experience with this, then I would implore you to voluteer with programs involved i stopping school bullying and school violence, ;learn how these issues are being addressed and helping todays youth. </p>
<p>If the schools these days did not , with the input , advice and recommendation of many , many professionals, think this was the best way to handle it, they wouldnt handle it this way. There has been a lot done to address the problem of bullying in the schools. But along with that is the zero tolerance rule, as schools have responsibility to keep all their students safe. I am not just sharing my opinion, I share the opinion of the experts in the field who are addressing school safety. SOme of your opinions are frankly so off the wall they don’t deserve a response. Plesae pay attention to the comments posted by the other posters and listen to the feedback. </p>
<p>Really, what can you do if you sit next to a jerk in a movie who talks on the cell phone, grabs your popcorn and things escalate? You can report to the theater management, but if they don’t move on it, you leave. Pure and simply you get the heck out of Dodge. You don’t stick around crazy people like that. And, yes, I have not always followed my own advice, but this is a lesson to be learned in that you just don’t know where “road rage” can lead. People are out there who can lose it to a point where they are willing to put their whole lives, and their families at risk and kill you just because they get that angry and lose it. Not gonna help you if they cause your life permanent damage, or kill someone along the way, even if you get some retribution by having them put away. </p>
<p>I foolishly, very foolishly got into a road rage situation where some guy accused me of cutting him off. I didn’t, but he was hot–I should have just let him go when he started honking and screaming, but being the one who could take the right of way over him-which to me determined in this case who had it, I did, and had him going crazy on the spot. He did cool down, but if he’d had a gun? Could be me in the news. What a way to go–fighting over one car’s length on a slow moving parkway. </p>
<p>These opportunities present themselves a lot. I was not even aware of doing anything until the guy started going nuts. So, yes, i think Reeves needs to stay put away for life. I hope someone can explain to him and his family that the best thing is for him to go into some form of lock up rather than trying to get free. The life for his family will be better as well, if he were removed from society at large. No way I’d feel safe with someone who has confirmed he has a loose screw and temper is on the loose.</p>
<p>I’m a big proponent of the defense as a rule, but in this case safety prevails. Better the family look for other lock aways other than jail and work towards that as a solution than getting him loose.</p>
<p>Will not participate in yet another digression to take this thread off topic and to your personal agenda, Cobrat, so will leave you to read about the issue of school bullying and how the National School Boards Association is addressing it. I am sure you and your invisible friends and relatives will take issue with it. Do consider reading it though. They are not as ill informed as you seem to feel they are. <a href=“404”>http://www.nsba.org/Bullying</a> This is not MY opinion, as you seem to want to believe. This is the opinion of the national organization. Sorry to disappoint, but the are not in favor of schoolyard brawls.</p>
<p>Glad you came out of that unscathed, cptofthehouse. Many of us probably have similar tales to tell. I was in my neighborhood on my way to work one morning when some guy at an intersection apparently thought it was his turn to go instead of mine (I’d gotten to the intersection befor he did, so made my right turn) .He pulled around me, after honking and carrying on, and then at the stop sign he got out of his car and started to come back to engage in an argument at my car! No way was I going to participate in that! Scared the bejeezus outta me. I simply drove arond him (he was on foot) and around his empty car! What a jerk. Ironically, we were near a police station, and I’f Id been smart enough to get his make/model of car an license # would have gone in and reported it. </p>
<p>“In that report, the reporter says that “you can see Reeves hand coming out of his pocket and then the fatal gunshot wound” or words to that effect. Not sure what he is basing that on. Cant really see whats in Reeves’ lap. Also wonder when a male is sitting and has a weapon in his pocket, does it naturally start to come out to the edge of the pants pocket just by virtue of being in a sitting position? And more importantly, wouldnt the safety be on???”</p>
<p>I agree. I don’t see where he’s reaching into pants pockets.</p>
<p>As for the safety, that’s a good question. don’t know what kind of gun was used. Some (I think) don’t have safeties…but I could be wrong. I don’t think revolvers have safeties. But again, I don’t know what was used. </p>
<p>From what I can see from the video (albeit limiting), there just doesn’t seem to be enough delay…he seems to ready to shoot immediately…as if gun was drawn and ready.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are cases where the “experts” have been proven wrong. Not to mention some lawsuits over the zero tolerance policies and/or school systems trying to sweep the bullying problem under the rug. </p>
<p>And incidentally, I used my network of friends to help a client find a lawyer experienced in litigating against a public school district over bullying because a relative of his was being stalked and violently attacked by a bully and yet, the school tried to ignore her problems and attempted to accuse her of provoking them. </p>
<p>I am well aware there are many public school admins/bureaucrats who feel the same as you do. It has been a factor in why most HS classmates who experienced similar/worse bullying than I have in public/junior highs and witnessed similar admin apathy/ineffectiveness refused to consider becoming teachers in the public school system. The idea of working with the very folks who were part of the problem and now, made it worse with the “a pox on both their houses approach” in punishing the victim is revolting to them. </p>
<p>It’s also a factor in why some of my educator friends left the profession in sheer frustration because they felt the bullied victims were being victimized again and effectively silenced for the sake of bureaucratic/political expediency and that their efforts were completely futile in that environment. </p>
<p>"Did you watch the part where the reporter asks the Oulson’s attorney about phone throwing? He says he can’t answer that question. Well, why not?
"</p>
<p>Well, for one thing he wouldn’t want to go “on the record”, but also he’s logically waiting for the more enhanced copy. And, Oulson is not on trial.</p>
<p>And who the heck is “Oulson’s atty”. The dead man has an attorney? </p>
<p>He was with the wife who would know if her husband threw a phone. Maybe, he was a prosecutor or her lawyer. I don’t know who he was but it’s not a hard question if the wife was sitting next to her husband and holding him back during the confrontation. I can’t answer that is not a no is my point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many revolvers have safeties. Moreover, all firearms used by law enforcement agencies…including revolvers must have safeties due to agency firearm safety policies. Granted, I am citing what I heard from some friends who were/are NYPD…including my youth softball coach who was a detective at the time. </p>
<p>Also, I don’t know, but wouldn’t surprise me that there are restrictions on carrying guns without a safety in CCW or public carrying situations. Especially considering that can be a serious public safety hazard. </p>
<p>Hasn’t the wife already said that she didn’t see him throw the phone? If so, how can that attorney say otherwise.</p>
<p>I don’t know which atty this was, but if he’s the widow’s atty, then he’s not part of the case. She’s not on trial and neither is her dead husband. In high profile cases like this, the victim’s family often has an attorney that has come forward to advise them in hopes of getting paid later with a lawsuit. Think Gloria Allred. She’s often a victim’s family’s atty. She’s not part of the actual criminal case. </p>