Keeping fire hundred feet away doesn’t matter much if one of you is a good shot with a .45. Make sure you are the good shot, AubreyAnn, not him.
Oh, and follow spooje’s advice. Except replace “bust a knee” with “shoot his head”.
Just a technical followup to Derleth:
Civilians should not try for head shots or other fancy shots in a self-defense situation. Go for the chest – it’s the biggest target, and even if your shot doesn’t kill, you should hit him hard enough to put him down.
Only get a gun if you are CERTAIN that you’re willing to use it. If there is ANY question in your mind about your readiness to shoot him, then train in a non-lethal weapon instead.
for fuck sake people, why are you so quick to recommend she goes and gets a gun? What fucking society do we live in that recommends extreme measures for what at the moment could be an easily solved problem?
By all means learn how to protect yourself, but that doesn’t always mean “get a gun”.
Aubrey, I hope this works out ok for you. Start keeping a record of all he does and says. Take self defence lessons and carry a can of mace. Speak to the police and a lawyer. keep everything you do above board and legal and hopefully he will get the message and leave you alone.
Actually, I’m pretty impressed by those advocating the possibility of firearms in this thread. I don’t think ANY of the recommendations, save maybe for spooje’s, were “quick” to recommend one either.
Most of them have the added caveat: IF you decide to go this way, make sure you are well-trained and are confident that you could pull the trigger.
Even minor mistakes, such as Derleth’s suggestion to shoot him in the head, were quickly corrected.
All in all, I those in this thread advocating firearms as a possibilty have done gun owners a great service by demonstrating the truest and ideal traits of a responsible gun owner: emphasizing safety and training.
-j
Sofa King (and/or Blalron and/or istara),
The “stalk the stalker” idea seems ludicrous and dangerous, especially as you outlined it. When the stalker found out that his personal info was being collected he would take it as a strong sign of interest, and probably redouble his own efforts. I suggest you rethink your proposition.
spooje, but stalkers don’t choose someone to victimize. They truly believe that they are in love with this person, and that this person will reciprocate. It’s not about terrorizing someone, or bullying them. It’s about obsession. “Wooing” them.
That applies for any weapon, including unarmed. Weapon skills require extensive training, or you’re more of a danger to yourself than to the intended target. (In a pretty bad case, the aggressor could talk calmly to you, get in close, then take the weapon, all because you weren’t ready to use it.)
I hope Badge stops by with a professional opinion.
neuroman, in my very limited experience, just the opposite happened. Stalkers know they’re on the wrong side of acceptable behavior and also the law. When the one I knew discovered that his little game was being carefully documented for future use against him–legally or otherwise–he suddenly decided not to play the game any longer.
I will not go into any further detail except to say this–he never found out for sure who was following him or why. Just knowing that he was being observed by someone was enough to make the lad stop his annoying behavior.
Let me reiterate.
I don’t think any face to face confrontation should occur. Yes document his behavior and tell him on the phone to go away but face to face confrontation can easily get out of controll. Especially if you or your husband bring a gun.
What if your husband shoots this man?
So you bought a gun and then walked up to the guy to confront him and now he is dead. Your husband could very well be tried for murder. Or you if you shoot him.
The police are trained on how to confront criminals. You are not. Let the pros handle this.
Zebra, if only the criminals would wait until the police are around to terrorise us. Stalkers, by their nature, seek us out. They initiate contact and they escalate the situation. You need to defend yourself, plain and simple, and that means becoming proficient in the use of a firearm.
You can’t beat a firearm with mace. Nor with a knife. Nor with a tazer.
IMHO, we live in a society that allows predators to have much more freedom and rights than the victim has. Instead of our local law enforcement officers asking my ex what possible reason he had for lurking around my alley at 11:30 p.m. when his last known address was 35 miles away, they were openly irritated with me for calling the police when (wait, you’ll love this) “he hasn’t done anything to you yet.” WTF?! He hadn’t done anything to me yet?! I’m sorry … I’ll wait until I’m bruised, bloody, and lying in a ditch before I BOTHER you, Officer Assmunch.
I don’t think anyone here is advocating going out, buying a gun, and shooting someone in cold blood … we’re strictly talking self defence here. Let’s be realistic … the majority of stalking situations are FAR from an “easily solved problem.” The man has already threatened Aubry’s husband (“If he were out of the picture …”) so I think the “you’ve gone too far line” is about 20 feet behind him at this point.
My roommate told me I was overreacting too and refused to let me change our phone number … I think her exact words were “Duh, just tell him to get lost.” About a month later, when he was sitting behind the house, taking pictures, calling and hanging up, cutting the gas line on my car, stealing my mail AND her mail … oh, and the cherry on top was the creepy five-page note he NAILED to the front door detailing not only MY comings and goings but HERS as well … oh yes, I think she saw that the situation was getting dangerous and I was NOT overreacting.
BE PREPARED … people have given some wonderful advice here.
Involve the police … but don’t expect too much from them because many times their hands are tied.
Document everything … keep notes with dates, times, and detailed descriptions of every nutty-ass thing he does.
Don’t talk to the stalker … don’t argue with him, fight with him, write him notes … completely shut the information train down.
Tell your employer, security at your workplace, your children’s school, your husband’s employer … basically everyone that may be able to see and report anything strange going on. Anybody who can look out for you should be on notice.
Arm yourself … it doesn’t have to be with a gun … it can be with mace … or a ball bat … or a taser. Train yourself or get training … whatever option you choose you must be comfortable with it.
Nobody wants a situation to result in violence … and hopefully if you’re informed and prepared, it won’t ever come to that.
I’m really gun-neutral, however, I will say, I don’t think the automatic solution to everything is “buy a gun”, nor do I believe owning a gun is the end all and be all of keeping oneself safe.
It’s not the only solution, but having and carrying a gun you are well trained to use can be a huge plus if you ever have to defend yourself.
Or I’m biased by personal experience of having chased a burglar out of my apartment with one.
Yeah, you told me about that at the last PittDope.
shrugs I’m just saying, that some people seem to think a gun is magic. Not all people are comfortable with guns. For those that aren’t, and have reservations, I can see why it would be better off FOR THEM not to have one.
That’s all. But, I have nothing against gun owners, and I really don’t feel one way or another about guns. It’s a non-issue for me, really.
Well it’s true that if you’re not 100% sure that you will be able to point it at the attacker and pull the trigger you shouldn’t rely on a gun.
In a situation like that it’s too easy to have it used against you.
And wouldn’t producing a gun force the stalker to do 'something"?
You think it will force him to go away. BUT THE STALKER IS NOT RATIONAL! HE WILL NOT HAVE A RATIONAL RESPONSE TO HAVING A GUN POINTED AT HIM! Just becasue you can hit what you are aiming at does not mean you know how to handle a confrontation with a CRAZY PERSON!
Anyone who thinks that has probably not gotten very good firearms training.
If you’re a fully trained police officer, and have backup on its way, go ahead and point the gun at someone and bark out your orders. If you’re a small, frightened civilian dealing with an angry psychopath, you pull out the gun for the sole purpose of immediately putting several rounds into the center of mass of the target. Not as a leverage for negotiation, or to reassure yourself that you’re actually in control of the situation now that you’re armed. Only to kill.
Don’t get a gun if you don’t think you can do that. You’ll probably just get yourself shot. But Derleth’s right-this kind of person isn’t going to just leave you alone because you’re not trying to ‘confront’ him. And you can only run so far …
Agreed. But it does seem that this sort of problem defies a civilized approach. I mean, this nut came back after 24 years. Many have tried the civilized route with the police and the courts, and have still been terrorized. Granted, the law is catching up, but not very fast. You said yourself that these bozos are delusional.
Serious question: What if the uncivilized, violent approach was to work? What if it has worked? That’s probably not the kind of thing that would make the evening news, unless the stalker was actualy shot and/or killed. What if a seriously aggressive approach by the victim could actually break through a stalkers delusion? How would we know? It’s not the kind of thing that lends itself to rigorous study. Could it actually be that a passive approach (which having the courts and cops do the confronting is) is actually feeding in the stalkers delusion?
Disclaimer: I have nothing to add on the OP, either.
My brother was a stalker, once. He had a brief relationship with this woman, it ended, and she was not clear enough to him* that it was over.
He called her often and was told to stop. Eventually he was told never to call her again. She had her roommate tell him that if he called again, she would call the police.
He interpreted this as a message that he had to show her he was serious by coming to see her in person. (From 200 miles away.)
I found out about all this when he showed up at my doorstep to tell me about it (I lived in the same city as the woman) and that he had been to her house and rang the buzzer. He “was sure she was there, but she didn’t answer.” I talked to him for about 5 hours that night and convinced him* that she really wanted nothing to do with him, to go home and stop thinking about her.
He got about halfway home, then turned around and came back to my town. Went to her house again. No answer, thank goodness. He did finally go home. (On the way he was stopped for speeding. He asked the officer if they could get it over quickly, since he was in a hurry.)
*This is the way we found out that my brother is a schizophrenic. He is not a psychopath, and wasn’t then. And there are doubtless many stalkers (nearly all of them?) who are not mentally ill. But some people are truly unable to tell reasonable from unreasonable interpretations of the facts they receive. No finality from the poor woman he scared to death or reasoning from me, explaining that she really meant it, could convince him.
Actually in the majority of case where a firearm is used for self-defense, the bad guy does runs away or give up and no shots are fired. Of course you’d be terribly foolish to count on that, and in a stalker situation he might come back another day.
**No. You shoot to STOP. ** Its purely coincidence that the fastest and most reliable way to make a person STOP being an immediate threat tends to be fatal.
Maybe a good coincidence, maybe not. But if you shoot someone once and they stop being an immediate threat, and you shoot them again, you could go to prison for murder. Of course it depends on your location, in NH and I would guess in Idaho, they might give you the benefit of the doubt.