|
Wow that's a biggie, I read as I reply...
Originally Posted by jack
Are you going for a walk or are you following someone?
I'll assume you get to the legal difference between the two later in your post.
These are attorneys answering this very question:
Nope, doesn't answer my question.
Originally Posted by random attourney
Merely following someone is now the crime of "stalking".
Jeez, so if I'm walking through town and someone is behind me going in the same direction, I should call the police? I mean, I'm being followed. Maybe I need to turn right or left and see the other person make the same change before we are legally classed as "being followed". Still, maybe they were going that way anyway. Where's the line?
You are actively looking for a confrontation. That's why. Particularly if you do not know the person you decided to play Magnum PI on. What exactly do you think will result from this action?
You're assuming this is "actively seeking confrontation". If the follower keeps some kind of reasonable distance, then it's perfectly reasonable to assume the follower only intends to call the police if he is witness to a crime. That isn't confrontation.
See what lawyers above think about you going for a walk and just "happen" to follow a person around.
Yeah those lawyers were really clear about that. I'm still unaware who makes the determination that a person is following someone, as opposed walking in the same direction as someone.
Yes. Do you like being followed around by some random person for no reason you can think of?
I don't believe I have the right to stop someone taking a walk in public. I will walk at a good pace to ensure reasonable distance, and if he still gains on me, and I'm convinced he's a threat, well I probably just run. If he starts running too, well now it's more than "merely following", there is no question he is in pursuit of me, and it's a different ball game.
The idea it's illegal to "merely follow" someone is ludicrous. That's certainly not the case here in the UK. There would need to be aggravating circumastances for it to become criminal.
So you are just about your business, and you notice someone is following you. Quite intently. I assume of course you have not done anything wrong, it's not like you just robbed another person at gunpoint or something. I cannot see how the question in that moment is anything but: why the fuck are you following me?
Yep, "why the fuck are you following me" is definitely something I would think. So I walk faster, try to remove myself from this potentially dangerous situation. At no point do I think "this guy has no right to walk the same direction as I am walking", because that would be insane. I am out in public.
Mmmmm. So you think following a person is not a bad thing to do, yet you too keep an eye out for this exact thing. So, if you do not think it is a wrong thing to do, why do you care?
I am pretty sure that every time I thought I was being followed, I wasn't, I was just being paranoid. And herein lies the problem. Who determines if my paranoia is justified?
"Merely following someone" is not a bad thing to do. Following someone to rob them, confront them, or otherwise aggravate the situation, that's not ok.
I care who's following me because I am aware there are bad people in the world. But I don't think someone patrolling the streets as some kinf of crime prevention initiative is a bad person. How can I tell the difference? How do I know if I'm just being paranoid or not? Do I err on the side of caution and have everyone within five meters of me arrested?
How do you not see the problems here?
Which is my point to begin with. The only reason you'd be following me is to do me harm. There is no other proper reason for you to do so. Why are you arguing with me?
I'm giving you a legitimate reason to "follow" someone. Patrolling the streets. That isn't with intent to do harm, is it? We can argue about whether it's necessary, or perhaps even legal, but it's not intended to do harm, so why are you immmediately assuming anyone who follows you intends to do you harm? And again, we come back to, how do you know you are being followed?
In such situations, you do not know how you will react. Not everyone remains cool as a cucumber here.
I know if I feel threatened by someone who might be follwoing me late at night, I run.
I have been quite clear on my stance on this IMO.
I'm not asking for your stance, I'm asking for legal clarification on the difference between following someone and walking in the same direction as someone. You haven't answered that, you've deflected because it's a very hard question to answer.
And that is my point about the situation and the escalation of said situations. He did me wrong by following me. Now I do him wrong by confronting him. How can this end well?
Well, no. The problem is that you think he's doing wrong. First of all, you might just be being paranoid. But let's assume you are convinced you are not being paranoid. Well, I think you'll find the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right" applies here. If you're going to confront people who have the balls to blatantly follow you, no I don't think it ends well. Hence, your actions are irresponsible. You're either confronting someone who gives no fucks, or you're being paranoid and starting on some guy walking home. This is better than running?
Then why do you feel the need to protect yourself from that situation?
Because I take responsibility for my own safety, instead of demanding people have less rights to make me safer. I understand that some people are bad, while also understanding that people have a right to be out in public. I understand that I can't really tell the difference between "being followed" and "walking in the same direction as", so I err on the side of caution late at night and maintain reasonable distance. I also understand that maybe there are locals who like to keep an eye on the streets because of concerns about crime, and I don't personally have a problem with that, in fact I applaud it.
Would be my way of protecting myself from that situation. Remember, people are different
You're not protecting yourself. You're doing the exact opposite.
And he infringed on my right for privacy
There is no such right in public.
Do not follow me around. Do I have to clarify what I mean by that? Isn't the "Don't follow me around" part clear?
No. Can I walk in the same direction as you?
And this situation could have been perfectly avoided by simply respecting each other's privacy.
Privacy is a really poor choice of words when referring to a public place.
Would he not have gone after him had he not had the warm feels provided by the piece he was carrying?
I dunno. You think everyone who follows someone else has a gun?
Again. See something suspicious? Call it in. That's all you have to do. This is what a lawyer says:
So here we come back to one reason why you might follow someone... maybe, just maybe that person looks a bit shady, but nothing more... you're gonna call the cops and say "shady mofo on the streets"? Nope, you might decide to take the dog for a walk and see if he's up to no good, and call the cops if you witness something criminal.
My point about the uniforms/indication as to who you are. Identify yourself, and your intentions. That is why cop cars in the UK have battenburg markings.
Don't all countries have LOOK AT ME cop cars? I also assume all countries have unmarked cop cars.
Where's my "taking the dog for a walk" uniform?
He ABSOLUTELY CAN go where I'm going. That's the reason for the movement stops. If he is actually going where I'm going, he would continue moving, no problems with that, right?
No. Maybe your sudden stopping has him paranoid, and he doesn't want to gain on you. Maybe he's trying to keep reasonable distance, and you're not letting him. How is he intimidating you and not the other way around?
All of this hypothetical could have been avoided had he just NOT FOLLOWED me.
Officer, I was walking the dog.
|