Confronting a squid

on 10/19/07 12:29 PM, Tweak wrote:

> In article <1192817211.251020.22730 DeleteThis @k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> vbrandt DeleteThis @gmail.com says...
>>
>> I don't like violence either. Though I study it, I never glorify or
>> seek it out.
>>
What type of study? Just curious.

>> The question you suggest is a good idea. It is less inflamatory than
>> asking someone if they want to fight, and equally effective for legal
>> purposes. The only downside is it may encourage more verbal bullying,
>> which is all most big roosters will be good for anyway: Posturing.
>>
Of course. If he wanted to fight, he'd start with fighting, not talking.
The guy who threatens you wants to be the biggest rooster in the barnyard,
and he might be ready to fight to prove it. Sometimes all you need to do for
that type of guy is openly acknowledge he is the biggest rooster (e.g.
apologize for the perceived transgression, even if you did nothing wrong).
Or just leave his barnyard.

>> I'd still wait for the other person to make the first move though,
>> unless they were already hurting someone else (or reaching for a
>> weapon). Whenever someone attacks, they create openings in
>> themselves, so it is more effective from a physical combat perspective
>> to wait for the attack. And nothing holds up in court like being
>> (literally and physically) the defender.
>
In my way of thinking, his first move is when he decides that he's going to
fight. If I see behavior cues indicating he's made that decision, why wait
for his fist to start moving? By my conduct and statements ("You're not
going to hurt me, are you?") versus his conduct and statements, any
witnesses already know who started the trouble.

> Except you were the one who originally approached the "attacker", which
> is gonna make it difficult proving in court why and what you did in the
> first place. He said, she said. You approached, he gets hurt, you get
> sued.
>
> Best to mind your own business in the first place. All this talk of
> attacking, defending, etc. is rather silly, as is going up to complete
> strangers and telling them what they are doing is wrong.

We've veered off topic from the original thread, as usual. Giving
unsolicited advice to strangers seems like a iffy move. Though Bob did say
the guy in question was a neighbor, so he wasn't a total stranger.

Definitely it's best to avoid trouble in the first place. See it brewing and
just go somewhere else.

--
Jamin
"Freedom costs a buck-oh-five"
 >> Stay informed about: Confronting a squid