Concern that other movie goers might be armed did not keep Chad Olsoun from annoying others in the audience by impolitely texting his 22-month-old daughter\u2019s caregiver during previews in a movie theater last week.\u00a0 Nor did the possibility that Olsoun might have a firearm keep Curtis Reeves, a retired Tampa police captain, from losing his temper and starting an argument over this annoying behavior.<\/p>\n
But because Mr. Reeves did happen to be armed, Olsoun\u2019s family held funeral services today<\/a>.\u00a0 In this case the \u201cgood guy\u201d escalated the argument over texting in a movie theater until he drew a weapon and shot Olsoun to death<\/a>.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Gun rights advocates have embraced<\/a> Robert A. Heinlein\u2019s suggestion that \u201can armed society is a polite society\u201d as part of the argument that \u201cguns save lives.\u201d\u00a0 Presumably, knowing that anyone we meet could be armed will improve people\u2019s manners.\u00a0 Not so much in this case and it\u2019s worth asking whether or not having a firearm actually made Mr. Reeves more aggressive and willing to confront a stranger.\u00a0 Some studies suggest that firearms make people more aggressive<\/a> or paranoid<\/a>, though I\u2019m not sure they get to the real question: are regular people more likely to start fights when they can pull a gun if things get out of hand?<\/p>\n It\u2019s also worth asking what this says about the idea that a clean criminal record alone qualifies citizens to own and carry firearms.\u00a0 We are all law-abiding citizens until we\u2019re not, and it seems logical to think that those who wish to arm themselves should have to demonstrate some minimum level of mental acuity, responsibility, and training \u2013 perhaps through membership in a \u201cwell-regulated militia,\u201d for example.\u00a0 This shooter presumably passed a background check, which apparently doesn\u2019t cut it.<\/p>\n