A sizeable percent of stalkers do not realize they are terrorizing another person, but they are treated the same as someone who intentionally does so (someone who commits terroristic threats, for example or harassment).
For a case scenario, assume someone has a crush on another person. They follow that person around. assuming that
they don’t know they are hurting them
they would stop if asked to stop
Does this deserve to be penalized at all? if so, does it deserve the same penalization as someone who
intentionally hurts someone
would do so, even if asked to stop
Most states still require a threat to be found guilty of stalking, but many do not. Unintentionally making someone uncomfortable is penalized the same as intentionally making them uncomfortable.
Disorderly conduct (in indiana at least) only applies if you are asked to stop, refuse to do so, and keep on acting up. What about stalking? you dont need to be asked to stop to be found guilty, is that fair?
(p.s., i love this board. It is much more liberal than the other board i waste my life on).
Do you have a cite for that? If you do not have a cite the staement is irrelavent. It would be the same as saying “Most killers did not realize they were killing someone.”
Second, if someone doesn’t realize that their actions constitute stalking they must be an idiot. These things are pretty clear cut.
Do you have a cite for that? If you do not have a cite the statement is irrelavent. It would be the same as saying “Most killers did not realize they were killing someone.”
Second, if someone doesn’t realize that their actions constitute stalking they must be an idiot. These things are pretty clear cut.
Cite, please for a stalking law that finds completely irrelevant the intentions of the stalker,whether the stalker knew or reasonably should have known that the actions would cause fear or harm, and whether the stalker was previously informed to stop the behavior.
Ny’s stalking law:
And the stalker not realizing that the contact is undesired is a far different thing from the stalker not accepting it. I don’t think most stalkers don’t realize that the person they’re interested in wants nothing to do with them- if the victim was interested there’s no need to stalk. The stalker refuses to accept that the victim is not interested - He ( or she) wants to change the victims mind at the very least, or at worst , make the victim pay for the lack of interest.
Cite, please for a stalking law that finds completely irrelevant the intentions of the stalker,whether the stalker knew or reasonably should have known that the actions would cause fear or harm, and whether the stalker was previously informed to stop the behavior.
Ny’s stalking law:
And the stalker not realizing that the contact is undesired is a far different thing from the stalker not accepting it. I don’t think most stalkers don’t realize that the person they’re interested in wants nothing to do with them- if the victim was interested there’s no need to stalk. The stalker refuses to accept that the victim is not interested - He ( or she) wants to change the victims mind at the very least, or at worst , make the victim pay for the lack of interest.