Follow up to "the things some people do"
Feb. 22nd, 2007 09:46 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumThere are two things going on in that story.
1: The guy got involved. That's laudable. He didn't parse things out well, which is where the other part comes in.
I've called the cops on things which looked like they needed some intervention (the guy screaming down a two-lane road in a sports car, driving sloppily, got our attention. The weaving and the odd speeds made us wonder. The beer bottle flung out the window made us call the Highway Patrol).
And, when there were no cops, or not enough time to wait, or even a situation where they'd not get involved, I've stepped in. On those occasions the threat (usually implied) of force was needed. At least once (as I cast my mind back) force was actually required (the kid decided that my telling him to stop picking on someone, meant I had to be beaten on, to prevent his loss of face. He didn't know how to fight).
It's that sense of his doing the right thing which has people saying this wasn't so bad (and I've seen this on more than a couple of blogs, blogs where the guy who had his door kicked in is made out to be the bad guy, and the sword-waver is a hero, who shouldn't face any charges).
2: The guy failed his saving throw for common-sense.
He heard screams. Ok. He decided to get involved, Ok. So far, so good.
He can't call the cops (no phone, and the ubiquity of cell phones means most places don't have a pay phone in easy distance anymore).
He figures things might get out of hand.
This is where he seems to fall off the clue-train. A sword is a really great defensive weapon. It allows for decision making (someone busting in through the back-window at three in the morning, I grab a sword. If it's a housemate who forgot keys, and didn't want to wake anyone, I can breathe a sigh of relief and tell them to wake me up... the phone ringing is less stressful that thinking someone is invading the house), but it's a so-so weapon for disuasive offense.
Why? Because it's not subtle. This guy was going to keep it out of sight, using it only if he needed it? Right. In the dark, defensively, I've done things like that, but it's iffy, and if someone sees you hiding it they will decide you aren't acting with good intentions, because you are planning to ambush them, with a freakin' sword.
For the situation he was looking at (someone might be in trouble, but someone might not, and no way to know) the best weapon is... a pistol.
Oddly enough, I don't know anyone who would say someone should just grab a gun without training, and wade into a situation where shooting might take place.
But lots of people (and I am not pointing fingers at anyone here) seem to think a sword is different. It is. They take more training, and more regular practice.
Why a pistol? Because you can hide it.
Which means he could knock on the door. Wait a couple of minutes and pound on it. Wait another minute and then kick it in. All with the weapon out of sight. Which means he's not committting ADW, and the whole thing probably blows over.
Why? Because people (who have training, and half a brain) know a gun is a serious threat and having one makes them more careful.
That, I think, is the real breakdown in thinking here. He didn't see the sword as a "real" weapon, so he didn't think the effect of having it would be all that serious.
1: The guy got involved. That's laudable. He didn't parse things out well, which is where the other part comes in.
I've called the cops on things which looked like they needed some intervention (the guy screaming down a two-lane road in a sports car, driving sloppily, got our attention. The weaving and the odd speeds made us wonder. The beer bottle flung out the window made us call the Highway Patrol).
And, when there were no cops, or not enough time to wait, or even a situation where they'd not get involved, I've stepped in. On those occasions the threat (usually implied) of force was needed. At least once (as I cast my mind back) force was actually required (the kid decided that my telling him to stop picking on someone, meant I had to be beaten on, to prevent his loss of face. He didn't know how to fight).
It's that sense of his doing the right thing which has people saying this wasn't so bad (and I've seen this on more than a couple of blogs, blogs where the guy who had his door kicked in is made out to be the bad guy, and the sword-waver is a hero, who shouldn't face any charges).
2: The guy failed his saving throw for common-sense.
He heard screams. Ok. He decided to get involved, Ok. So far, so good.
He can't call the cops (no phone, and the ubiquity of cell phones means most places don't have a pay phone in easy distance anymore).
He figures things might get out of hand.
This is where he seems to fall off the clue-train. A sword is a really great defensive weapon. It allows for decision making (someone busting in through the back-window at three in the morning, I grab a sword. If it's a housemate who forgot keys, and didn't want to wake anyone, I can breathe a sigh of relief and tell them to wake me up... the phone ringing is less stressful that thinking someone is invading the house), but it's a so-so weapon for disuasive offense.
Why? Because it's not subtle. This guy was going to keep it out of sight, using it only if he needed it? Right. In the dark, defensively, I've done things like that, but it's iffy, and if someone sees you hiding it they will decide you aren't acting with good intentions, because you are planning to ambush them, with a freakin' sword.
For the situation he was looking at (someone might be in trouble, but someone might not, and no way to know) the best weapon is... a pistol.
Oddly enough, I don't know anyone who would say someone should just grab a gun without training, and wade into a situation where shooting might take place.
But lots of people (and I am not pointing fingers at anyone here) seem to think a sword is different. It is. They take more training, and more regular practice.
Why a pistol? Because you can hide it.
Which means he could knock on the door. Wait a couple of minutes and pound on it. Wait another minute and then kick it in. All with the weapon out of sight. Which means he's not committting ADW, and the whole thing probably blows over.
Why? Because people (who have training, and half a brain) know a gun is a serious threat and having one makes them more careful.
That, I think, is the real breakdown in thinking here. He didn't see the sword as a "real" weapon, so he didn't think the effect of having it would be all that serious.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
disuasive offense
Date: 2007-02-22 07:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-22 08:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-22 09:00 pm (UTC)The guy has a list of dismissed cases, for disorderly conduct, impersonating a police officer and jumping bail.
He wasn't convicted, and I don't have the details, but I don't have to look at this as a prosecutor.
From an outside standpoint (and based purely on the charge sheets, because I don't have the statements), the guy seems to have some problems, and a desire to play the hero.
So I'd probably press charges, at the misdemeanor level. I'd want to get the max, suspended, with some counselling.
At the very least I'd have a bit less than three years where he'd not be playing Zorro, the Lone Ranger.
TK
no subject
Date: 2007-02-22 11:29 pm (UTC)That, I think, is the real breakdown in thinking here. He didn't see the sword as a "real" weapon, so he didn't think the effect of having it would be all that serious." excuse me? who could possibly think a sword is NOT a real weapon?
no subject
Date: 2007-02-23 12:11 am (UTC)Firearms are real weapons, because they operate at a distance.
Swords, however, are old, they don't have "menace" because you have to get close to someone. If they run away you can't hurt them.
It's like a baseball bat, but sharp, and a bat's not a "real" weapon.
The sad fact is lots of people think do think like that.
TK
no subject
Date: 2007-02-23 09:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-24 07:45 pm (UTC)The only problem I see is that pistols carry a rather negative stigma. I do wonder if the people who initially lauded his actions would possibly say the opposite in a similar situation where someone he had knocked/pounded first, not gotten a response, and proceeded with a forced entry with a drawn pistol in a situation that turned out to be benign.
Sigh.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-24 10:44 pm (UTC)Here's the deal... a naked blade (from pocket knife to sword) is an overt threat.
It's very presence increases the risk to everyone involved.
A hidden weapon doesn't.
And if the guy has a gun, then I have to either run him through, or get shot.
If I have a concealed pistol, I can back out, or react.
It increases my options, and I'll take the stigma, for an increase in options, every time.
TK