cartman
9mo ago
While I appreciate that you make your point fairly reasonably, this still seems like a bit of a ludicrous reaction to me. I agree that in the majority of situations, a kid waving an axe or a hammer around is not very likely to murder someone. but as a stranger and not the responsible parent of this child, it is not my job to assess how serious they are about harming me with an axe and I think it is not a realistic proposition to expect any other sane adult stranger to waive their safety in the face of someone threatening them because it's not LIKELY to turn out with them murdered. I do not have the skills to categorically determine which type of axe waving person is in front of me.
From personal experience, while a normal kid might wave a hammer around, no kid that I associated with to my knowledge ever actively threatened someone with a tool like that once they were anywhere close to their teens. This is not 'normal' behaviour to be gently course corrected imo. I think it's kinda serious.
Pulling out a phone and recording is a bit of a weird move in most situations I agree, but I could see a situation where it might seem reasonable in the moment if they started threatening to accuse you of things and you thought you had a chance to "prove" otherwise in the heat of the moment.
cartman
9mo ago
Do you think the difference in the damage a 12 year old and an adult could potentially do with an axe is really so significant?That seems ludicrous to me. If I would call the police on anyone older than a toddler waving an axe and threatening people, I do it equally on a 12 year old, because they still have the strength to kill many members of society.
"Take her toys away himself". So it's not important enough for the police, but it's also somehow important enough to initiate a violent confrontation over? This doesn't make sense.
cartman
9mo ago
You've provided a map without much context with regards to population or voting demographics, so in the absence of that information the map doesn't demonstrate much of anything about the prevalence of gerrymandering
cartman
9mo ago
This is not a war and no one is participating in some holy revolution. This is not what war looks like. Social institutions do not function like militaries, nor is it wise/necessary to 'break' or 'level' the ones you don't like or which have issues. This is the same fallacy that leftists who want to defund the police engage in.
I think this is a terrible recommendation for someone who is bothered by this behaviour.
Regardless of whether the police are more armed than you or not, I think it should be fairly self explanatory why there are both legal and practical reasons why it's preferable for the police to deal with this situation, again, assuming it bothers you. They have legal authority, there may be multiple of them, and the assailant will likely respond differently to them than a random stranger.
You haven't actually explained, why "should you" deal with it yourself? You open yourself up to legal liability. You invite the risk of being harmed in an escalation of the conflict. The only benefit I can see is that you can potentially dearm the assailant faster than the authorities can get there and do so. But if they're so minor of a threat anyway in your eyes, then that doesn't matter very much. So what is the upside?
Also, you are equivocating between the damage a 12 year old can do against an adult man who is already facing and confronting her vs the absolute damage they can do. If this person is waving an axe around people in public threatening them, I think it's totally reasonable to have a valid concern they might hurt someone more vulnerable.
I also think that while you're probably right in a lot of situations it only ever takes one or two unlucky swings/stumbles for the underdog to win. I don't agree that the threat is so minimal as to be essentially ignored
More options
Context Copy link