A man finally finds a good use for movie theater popcorn, and this is the thanks he gets? For shame!
As widely reported, there was a ridiculous and horrifying incident in a Florida movie theater at the beginning of last week, in which a moviegoer shot a fellow moviegoer to death for the crime of sending a text message while the coming attractions rolled across the screen.
We all fantasize about doing terrible things to the people in the theater who won’t shut up. Well, here’s a guy who actually did.
And we can’t say he wasn’t provoked. According to the official report, 71-year-old Curtis Reeves had asked 43-year-old Chad Oulson to put his phone away, but Oulson refused. Following an unsuccessful attempt by Reeves to locate an usher, a full-on argument broke out between the two men, which escalated when Oulson launched a mysterious projectile in Reeves’ direction—an object that has since been identified as a bag of popcorn.
Reeves, apparently fearing for his life, squeezed off one shot from the .380 semi-automatic handgun he happened to be carrying. The bullet, after passing through Oulson’s wife’s outstretched hand, struck Oulson squarely in the chest, and that was that.
What makes this sordid little episode interesting is the way it calls to mind the philosophy of America’s gun rights community, which presumably would look at such an unfortunate incident and conclude that the main problem is that Reeves, a retired police officer, was the only person in that theater who was packing heat.
As far as the National Rifle Association and its supporters are concerned, the ideal scenario in any public setting is for everyone to be armed and to assume that everyone else is as well. After all, why would anyone ever behave rudely toward anyone else with the sure knowledge that it will result in a firefight?
It’s “mutual assured destruction” on a micro scale, and the logic has a certain simplistic charm: You can kill me and I can kill you. Since neither of us wants to die, we’ll try our best to leave each other well alone and co-exist peacefully.
They say good fences make good neighbors. Why shouldn’t the same be true with deadly weapons?
Having always resided in the Northeast, I have long tried to understand this mentality, precisely because it is so alien to the environment in which I grew up. I have never so much as held a gun, nor (to my knowledge) have there ever been any gun owners among my family and friends.
Walking the streets of Boston or New York, I assume that some passersby are wielding lethal weapons of one kind or another—obtained legally, one would hope—but then I don’t often think about it at all. It’s none of my business and, with a little luck, will never become so.
And so it is with sheer idle curiosity that I wonder whether, and in what situations, this NRA utopia of near-universal gun ownership might work—“work” as in “foster a safer, more virtuous society.”
On paper, it certainly could. Imagine: You sit in a movie theater and there’s a guy texting in front of you. Aren’t you (and everyone else) less likely to start a nasty argument if you assume his weapon of choice is a pistol rather than popcorn?
For that matter, would anyone in that auditorium dare to send a text message in the first place, knowing that it could incite any number of folks in close proximity to whip out semi-automatics and ensure it was the last phone call he ever made? Sure, he may be armed as well, but also horribly outnumbered. Would it really be worth the risk? If his message were really that important, would he not be compelled to take it outside, as basic movie theater etiquette demands?
In a world of rational actors, we could do a lot worse than to conduct our daily lives as if the slightest breach of social decorum could—or rather, would—bring about our sudden and violent demise at the hands of our dear fellow travelers. To foster a culture in which such offenses as texting in a movie theater were subject to such harsh recriminations that no sane person would undertake them.
It would be nice to live in such a world, and I wish we did, because it might well lead us to treat each other better and truly think before we act.
Unfortunately, the world we actually inhabit is replete with irrational actors who behave in insane ways. Who mistake a bag of popcorn for a weapon of mass destruction and destroy innumerable lives as a result.
It’s a shame that the social policies affecting so many seem to be dictated by the actions of so few.