Had a strange night

Status
Not open for further replies.
To the reponders:

Please read all the post before replying!

At least look at the dates of the post so you know where the conversation has already gone!
 
Your fiancee is afraid of you because you keep making rash decisions that can have very serious consequences.

By scowling at the guy, you escalated things with him.

Think of it like this: He's driving down the street, and then he sees you, the guy who he got into it with last year. But whatever, that situation is done with.

Then, he notices that you're giving him the stink eye for no reason. Given his aggressive and reactionary tendencies in the past, this could very well re-awaken that old anger he had when you chased him off the first time. If nothing else, it puts you back on his mental radar as someone who caused him grief.

Long story short, you did pretty much the same thing that you did last time, which is, you inserted yourself into a situation that you didn't need to be inserted into. YOU started the trouble this time. Hopefully he doesn't continue it.

If he's still in the neighborhood, just keep an eye on him. Sneering and making faces does nothing to help you, and in fact can make things worse.
 
He sounds like a punk kid but there is no reason you can't be civil with him.
I wouldn't be "civil" with him. I wouldn't be ANYTHING with him. I'd outwardly ignore him while being situationally aware of him.

He REALLY sounds like the kind of person I work EXTRAORDINARILY hard to avoid any dealings with.

In short, he sounds STUPID.

  • Stupid people do stupid things.
  • Stupid people create stupid situations.
  • Stupid people involve unwilling third parties in their stupid situations.
  • Stupid people NEVER take responsibility for the consequences of their stupidity.
Avoid stupid people. Your life will be SO much more tranquil.
 
Reading both of these incidents makes me ponder how bizarre the male ego really is. I'm not taking a shot at the OP, because I've done similar things.

We are tempted to do things in front of a woman that we wouldn't do on our own, simply to exhibit alpha behavior. Carrying a weapon can also have the same effect, stepping up our warrior posture.

And that's why responsible people get firearms training. Not only for the mechanical skills, but to learn the legal and civil ramifications and responsibilities that come with a gun.
 
Going back to the first confrontation, like the OP I also would have gone out to investigate. The difference is that I would not go OWB, but would conceal the firearm.

Maybe it's the smarter strategy to stay indoors, rack a shotgun and call the police, but my natural inclination is to go out myself. My property, my neighborhood. I don't like calling the cops on people unless there are good reasons to do so. Here, it's unclear what the situation is and it seems OK to me to go check it out.

When the girl says that she has permission to be there, I'd ask her a question to verify she knows who lives in the house. If she does then there's no problem and no need for 5-0.

The way the flashlight and gun were used to intimidate the driver seemed to create a worse situation than originally existed. Regarding the second incident, I fully agree with the sentiments above that ignoring the clown would be better than giving him the Mal Occhio.

A lot of what's going on here involves being a good neighbor, but some of it also involves not creating unnecessary conflict where you live. Forgive much and complain little.
 
Die zombie thread die!

It's not a zombie thread. The OP returned with an update and a new question. Thus, the conversation has continued.

When the girl says that she has permission to be there, I'd ask her a question to verify she knows who lives in the house. If she does then there's no problem and no need for 5-0.

What about the marijuana smoke and the parked car that the driver hit? I'd sure want to involve the cops in taking care of those issues.
 
So although I didnt feel like it I gave him a scowl.

Hmmm...I understand where you are coming from, but I think the response of "no response" may be a better choice for a couple of reasons.

Based on your first experience with him, suppose in this instance he called the cops: "...every time I go to my girlfriend's her neighbor threatens me or menaces me. Last year he pulled a gun. Today he looked like he was going to attack me." Every story has two sides.

Also, the interactions to date sound like they could lead to someone getting hurt or killed. And for what reason?

Disengage and disassociate with this guy. It's not going anywhere good.

Thanks for the update.

Be safe,
DFW1911
 
I disagree with most of the advice given here. Had you lit the punk up a year ago, you'd have no issues now. He was on your property, acting in an threatening manner and you could very reasonably have feared for your safety. I say you could have lit him up and been done with it. Period. The end. From your desscription, the gene pool would have been better off.

This attitude that your best approach is to relinquish responsibility for your safety to a state authority is rubbish, IMO.
 
Had you lit the punk up a year ago, you'd have no issues now.

Except for the "issue" of explaining to the police and jury why he felt it necessary to go out to confront the people in the car, ARMED, when there was no evidence of any type of violent crime occurring.

He was on your property, acting in an threatening manner and you could very reasonably have feared for your safety.

Possibly true, but once again, the OP instigated the confrontation, and escalated it by patting his firearm. There was NO THREAT until HE made one.

I say you could have lit him up and been done with it. Period. The end.

Unfortunately, you're not the one who makes and enforces the laws.

From your description, the gene pool would have been better off.

That's probably true, but that's not your decision to make. Neither is it the OP's. We don't go around shooting people because "the world would be better off".

This attitude that your best approach is to relinquish responsibility for your safety to a state authority is rubbish, IMO.

What's rubbish is the attitude that it's OK to go out and essentially force a confrontation with an unknown individual(s), which could very well end up devolving into a violent (and potentially lethal) encounter, when there are better, less risky, and ultimately equally effective solutions available.
 
I say you could have lit him up and been done with it. Period. The end.

You really should use those smiley face thingies ;) when you write stuff like that so we'll all know you're kidding.

You ARE kidding...right?
 
I disagree with most of the advice given here. Had you lit the punk up a year ago, you'd have no issues now. He was on your property, acting in an threatening manner and you could very reasonably have feared for your safety. I say you could have lit him up and been done with it. Period. The end. From your desscription, the gene pool would have been better off.

This attitude that your best approach is to relinquish responsibility for your safety to a state authority is rubbish, IMO.


if the op had followed that advice he'd most likley be in prison. the op had no justifiable reason to use lethal force.

-when the car left his driveway and went to the neighbors they had not presented any threat.

-the op left his home to walk to the neighbors (not his property), and then confront them while shining a flashlight in their faces as if he were leo.

the op's actions caused the punk kid to get out and confront him about who he was and what he was up to.....ironic huh? how many here would have let someone approach their car shining a light and trying to initiate an impromptu interrogation without feeling alarmed?

-the op felt intimidated and patted his gun to try and scare off the punk kid, the kid did not get intimidated and stood his ground. if either of the people in the car had decided to call the police the op could have been charged with brandishing or worse. the worst the kids would have been looking at was a misdemeanor pot charge and traffic tickets/small stay in jail for the collision and being under the influence.
 
The best option, install Self-iluminating (infrared night, color day) camera system attached to a DVR capable of storing all camera's feeds at once, for at least a year.

THEN be ready to call the police. There are a lot of people in the world growing up believing they answer to no-one.

You want backup, trained to defuse, and control the situation.

Save the threat of violence for when they start cutting the wires on your cameras before LEO get there.
 
First of all I would like to question why some people on this site take offense or pass judgement so easily, quickly and sometimes sarcasticly. I thought we were all here to learn from each other by sharing our experiences and helping one another make good or better decisions if we are confronted with similar incidents. If people get tired of the topic then go to another one (there are 100's of other topics on THR).

There have been some excellent observations, opinions and suggestions made here in dealing with this issue and I feel certain everyone reading them has learned a lot.

Just my opinion: Webb should have remained in his house. He should have called the police and explained his concerns, suspicious car, strange activity, possible intoxicated driver and given as much discription of the car as he could see from his house. When he first turned his light on the car he created a situation. People don't like having a light pointed at them, especially when they are smoking pot or making out with the neighbors daugher. When he walked out of his house towards the car he escalated the situation further. When he once more turned the bright light on the car it was further escalated. That is likely what brought on the verbal altercation with the driver. His failure to back down tells me this guy is a potential risk. When Webb patted his side indicating he was armed the situation took a HUGE jump and seriously increased the danger. Only some very good luck kept it from getting out of control and someone getting hurt.

As far as calling the police I can understand the comments about not bothering them with the problem and checking it out yourself. I think we all feel a little macho, especially when we are packing and we think we can "do it oursleves". The attitude is that this is my neighborhood and we have a tendency to want to protect what is ours. However in this day and age it just isn't practical to do get as involved as happened in this case. There are just too many variables that can suddenly get you way in over your head.

BTW I don't know many officers that feel they are bothered by being dispacthed to check out a call like this. It's their job and believe it or not they do want to do their job. Of course with as many 911 calls that are received and the number of police officers there are to handle them there has to be some prioritizing. I do feel that this call deserved a 911 call and not a call on the business line. Maybe what is going on doesn't seem particularly important to you at the time and you can check it out yourself but maybe that car in the next door neighbors drive way was being used as a get away car from a serious crime that was being committed by accomplices (say robbing or raping the widow). The car might fit the discription of a car used in other crimes and MO's (methods of operation). The police are probably going to have more knowledge about this than the homeowner and can respond to the call accordingly. Let them make that decision. As far as police not showing up right away at a loud party I can understand the frustration when they take awhile to show up. However like I said before, the calls have to be prioritized by the nature of the seriousness of the call. Do you have any idea how many noise complaints a police department receives in one night? This doesn't include calls of robberies, assaults, domestics, vehicle accidents and the list goes on and on. Police officers do appreciate the assistance of the public but the public needs to try and understand the situation from their position as well. Upon arriving at any situation emotions are likely going to be high and a lot of yelling going on. The punk would most likely have yelled at police "that guy pointed a gun at me", he told the girls father that. Had the police arrived while this situation was in progress they wouldn't know who was the bad guy and who was the good guy. If a gun was mentioned Mr. Webb would have found himself at the point of their guns and nothing was going to get resolved until any gun is under their control. The police officers job first and formost is to protect everyone involved. Like I said the potential scenarios for someone getting hunt are endless. My opinion is that people should report suspicious incidents to the police and let them handle it. That was also pointed out in several posts and is good advise, be a good witnes not a suspect or a victim. Stay in your house, protect yourself and your family and the gun doesn't get used until someone breaks through your door or window.

On the subject of trying to stare down this punk I don't feel it is a very good idea. What might have been dropped and forgotten was just refreshed and if this kid is the punk he sounds like he is he may not be finished with his grudge and cause further probems. Just ignor him if there should be another meeting.

Boy did I ever get long winded. Just my humble opinion. Feel free to disagree.
 
The first incident, 2-mill spot light from the house till they left. 2-mill in your windshild is uncomfortably bright. Second occurance, smile and wave, he pulled in the drive where he is suposto be. I got no problem with that.
 
Gee.

Machismo posturing topped off with plenty of killemallletgawdsortemout attitude.

Wonder why this one got closed?

lpl
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top