:rolleyes:
Best chuckle of the week!
Re the OP’s dilemma we’re getting into pre-crime territory here where calling on a Facebook post (quoted below) that might be interpreted to be a hazard* if* there are kids milling around *if * there are people protesting on his street and if he drags his gun out into the yard etc.
I get that he’s a racist jackass but if I was policeman and received this call as something that needed addressing by law enforcement I’d think you were the nut not him. Put yourself in the officer’s position and tell me exactly the speech you would give him when you get to his door.
“There’s this guy in my neighborhood whose behavior is concerning me. He seems to be going downhill mentally, is high on drugs most of the time, rants about the new world order and other conspiracies, and although he is legally blind he has guns and is obsessed with them. He lives right next door to the library where all of the kids and tourists and protestors congregate. Do you think I need to be concerned?”
Police departments and even individual officers vary widely; I have no idea how Beaverton PD might react. However, most of the officers I have known elsewhere have a reasonably good grasp on who the repeat customers and problem people are in their area, and they may be able to say, “we know about him, and we’re pretty sure he’s harmless” or “we are concerned, too, so please let us know about any further incidents.” Even if they don’t, they may appreciate knowing about possible future problems. For example, if there is a noisy protest scheduled at/near the library, the officer planning security would probably like to know about who is likely to be in the vicinity. If somebody reports a guy with a gun across the street, the police response is likely to be somewhat different if one of the officers can say, “yes, I know about him, he lives there.”
Finally, if the guy really is deteriorating mentally, it is an act of kindness to get him at least an offer of assistance before things deteriorate further. It’s unfortunate that law enforcement is too often the first responder and gatekeeper in cases in mental instability; that said, they usually have somebody in the department who has a handle on what kinds of resources are available in the vicinity.
Excellent post, and I agree 100%. In my experience, law enforcement will be glad to know of a potential problem individual when they are responsible for the safety of protesters.
They may know about him or they may not. If he’s a loner and rants mostly on Facebook, it’s entirely possible no one would ever say a thing. When crazy people live alone, they don’t always garner the attention they need, either for the safety of themselves or others. My own mother was nutty as a June bug living alone for years, endangering herself more than anything. We knew of her condition but couldn’t get anyone to check on her because of a dispute about her state of residence (long story). When she nearly died because she didn’t look after an abscessed tooth, she finally got the care she so desperately needed.
To me, here is the test: If you later learn that someone was injured or killed in an incident at the protest as a result of being shot by your neighbor, could you live with your choice?
Oregon is an open carry state, but even open carry has its limits and a requirement to handle your weapon responsibly. Brandishing is still an offense. Brandishing under such circumstances as openly during a protest – which is exactly what it sounds like he means to do – is a volatile situation about which I feel sure law enforcement would be glad to have a heads-up.
Personally, I would be hesitant to discuss it with neighbors, even if they have more experience with the guy. As seen in this thread, people have a widely varied tolerance for risk. I wouldn’t want a neighbor to ever mention to the nutter that you’d discussed your concerns with them. I’d speak quietly with the police at their station house and then leave the situation in their hands.
It is supposed to inform you that not all people who are legally blind are absolutely sightless. Many have limited vision that enables them to largely care for themselves, even in terms of self defense.
The threshold for “legal blindness” is, in theory, the point at which a worker does not have the requisite vision to perform all functions of employment in the work force at his customary job.
In the USA, only about 10% of the legally blind population has no vision at all, the other 90% have varying capabilities, which often would include aiming a firearm at an assailant.
I should have been more clear. I meant put yourself in the position of the officer showing up at Mr Cranky’s door. What do you tell Mr Cranky as the rationale for why you are at this door questioning him as an officer of the law.
Your neighbor thinks you are a mentally unstable, drugged out racist.
Your neighbor thinks you have a lot of guns and can’t see well enough to accurately place your shots if you go nuts.
Your neighbor thinks you are a conspiracy theorist.
Your neighbor is concerned that you posted some stuff on facebook about your 2nd amendment rights and protesters.
Nothing you have provided as “evidence” rises to the level of something an policeman should need to address unless he’s being active public nuisance or a threat to public safety.
If the police officer is vested in keeping the neighbors out of things altogether, something as simple as “We’re doing a neighborhood check, talking to residents, seeing if there are any concerns or issues. Do you need any assistance with grocery shopping, taking care of your house, getting to medical appointments? Do you have any concerns about crime or suspicious people?” If he’s as loony as the OP implies, it won’t take long for it to come out in casual conversation. If the officer sees anything out in the open in the house (huge hoarding problem, dead hippies, whatever), they can investigate further.
If the officer doesn’t care what the guy knows, then a simple “We got a call that some of your neighbors are worried about your welfare. Can I ask you a few questions?” will suffice. Sure, the guy can say no and slam the door in the cop’s face, but chances are more likely he’ll go on a paranoid rant about how They are always watching. Cop can evaluate the situation and decide if the guy needs medical intervention or not.
That’s* greatly * reassuring, should I ever visit.
I tell people to think of the situation this way. If something happened to him or a bystander, would you feel bad that you didn’t tell the police something? If you would feel bad, go to the station, bring something that you can show them his post and let them decide what to do with the information.
By doing this, you have it off your conscience and if something does happen, at least you told someone.
The police may or may not take action with your information, but at least they are aware of it. Many people on the internet talk big, but would never do anything like they say, but then there are the people who talk the talk and walk the walk, you never know which one he may be.
I think BobKitty covered it pretty well–just ask some questions to see how he reacts, and go from there.
Part of the answer depends on what the cops already know. If OP is the first person ever to say anything about him, they’d probably react a bit differently than if they find the guy is under three restraining orders, has been the subject of a mental health hold, has a current warrant out on him, etc.
If there’s time and resources, another approach is a variant: “We’re reviewing security plans for the library and are asking the neighbors if they have any concerns or questions.” Work protestors into the conversation somehow. Start at the houses of some of the neighbors, and work up the street to this guy. If the first three neighbors all respond with “um, the guy in that house over there” as a concern, then maybe he really is a concern. If nobody else mentions him, then maybe the OP is overreacting.
Part depends on the personalities of the officer(s) responding, too–some officers could carry off “we got this complaint, we think it’s bullsh-t but the sergeant says we have to come ask” and some can’t. In some areas, the police may be able to refer to another agency, perhaps a social services group that does welfare checks.
How are you planning to assess whether a guy who is the subject of somebody’s concern is a threat to public safety without at least talking to the guy?
No, thank God… I guess. This was literally right down the street from my house. My wife was leaving for work and got caught up in it. I don’t know if I personally know the cops involved with this one, but I know several of the officers in he department. They are really good guys, and I know it messes them up terribly to do something like this. I believe it was one of the Beaverton guys that told me once, “I hope if I never have to pull this gun out. Its the scariest thing we have to do.”
It’s this kind of shit that bothers me though. I don’t know a whole lot about psychology, but there seems to be a breaking point that these people get to and just snap. They also seem to have gun hording tendencies and that’s a dangerous mix.
With the guy that was right down my street that was waiving a gun around on his roof and fired it in his house, I’m going to take this advice. Since the cops had to shoot that guy, I haven’t seen them in my neighborhood yet just filling out their paperwork.
I know that taking that guy out was the last thing they wanted to do, but he was firing his gun and waiving it around like a crazy person right across the street from the elementary school. It had to happen before something worse did.
Its not “the hood” here at all for those that were wondering. The house I rent is worth well over 300k. I live right by Nike’s World Headquarters.
That’s kind of my point. Police “visits” are not innocuous. Siccing the police on someone is insanely annoying and intrusive and upsetting. Let me send the police to your house to talk to your kids one at a time to see if they are OK because I heard your wife yelling at them through the window and I’m concerned she might act out with violence toward them at some point.
If the police show up at my house knocking on my door and it becomes clear this is in response to some anxious, worry wart neighbor who does not like my facebook posts and the fact I own guns that’s borderline harassment.
And what if it is because you, like the person in the OP, are making credible threats of violence in your facebook posts?
This isn’t just someone with a different political affiliation, this is a person who has fairly implicitly threatened violence against speech that he dislikes. That’s harassment. Having the authorities ensure that he will not carry through on his lethal threats is not.
ETA: And to your example of overhearing someone through the window… If you hear them yelling that they are going to get their gun and exercise their second amendment right if they don’t clean up their room, you’d be very remiss in not calling the police.
We ALL own guns here, as far as I know, there are many gun owners here in Oregon. Now we don’t all threaten to go out and confront the protesters that walk around downtown upset about whatever they are upset about. We aren’t worried that there is some World Order lead by “the hippies” that are wanting to take our guns away. Rounds can fly for miles, whether they were responsibly fired off, or if they are let loose by the hands of a shaky unstable person that isn’t really in touch with reality.
I’m not afraid of having the guns I have inherited taken away from any gov’ment official because I’m not doing anything silly with them.
The last time I fired the 22, I killed a 6 foot rat snake that was striking my cat. The shot gun got its last fire when I had to put a dog down that was hit by a car and his guts were torn open. Both of these events happened when I lived in rural Texas on a large spot of land. Now that I live in the city, any use of the fire arms that I have in my backyard is a big no no. I understand this as a function of being a normal rational adult.
He’s saying he may choose to stand on his property with a gun in hand while they exercise their rights to protest. Rude behavior perhaps and I’m not sure if it passes muster with the OP’s state gun laws but I’m missing the part where he says he’s going to start killing people. If may be perfectly legal under state law to do exactly what he is saying he will do.
And in fact it appears it would perfectly legal for him under Oregon State law to stand in his private yard with his gun while protesters pass by.
And if it turns out my spouse beat the two-year-old to death the next day, after you heard, became concerned, and chose to do nothing, are you going to be able to live with yourself, yes or no?
That question has been asked, in various forms, several times in this thread (see, e.g., #31). The OP has recounted an incident in his own past, where he failed to report a concern and somebody died; “I wake up sometimes hearing that woman getting beat again.” Living with regret because somebody got hurt or somebody died, when you might have been able to prevent it, is really really hard.
And if you think the police knocking at your door to discuss a concern is bad, what do you suppose happens when the police AND THE MEDIA come knocking to ask about why you were concerned and chose to do nothing?
Given the facts recited in the OP, I think you’d have a very very hard time convincing a jury of twelve that nobody could possibly be a bit concerned about a drug-addicted whackjob with guns ranting and raving next to a place where children congregate. The OP isn’t sending the police to go knock on your door; he’s asking the police for advice. As a response, the police may choose to knock, or they may choose not to do so, perhaps based on what else they may know, but that’s a professional judgement for professional law enforcement (and perhaps professional mental health providers).
You seem to have already decided that a drug-addicted whackjob with guns ranting and raving next to a place where children congregate isn’t and couldn’t be a threat, and the OP must therefore be a worry-wart; may I ask on what you base that decision?