5 ms·

> And the police won't do anything until it turns violent. Try violating a restraining order taken out against you and see if you maintain that opinion. The b

> And the police won't do anything until it turns violent. Try violating a restraining order taken out against you and see if you maintain that opinion. The behavior you describe as well as that of the article qualifies for seeking a restraining order, which this entire discussion seems to have forgotten is in existence. Once you have a EPO/TRO/PRO, then the police care when it is violated. A lot. It's easy for them to enforce and requires no investigation, which is the thorn that hits a lot of people when they try to get cases like this going with the police. As an example, my father went to jail more than once for violating my mother's PRO. It's also on the person's record, which is why it is good to involve a lawyer if someone files one against you. I'm one more contact from my own stalker away from filing for one, but he seems to have forgotten about me for now. I'm mystified that the FBI advised your friend and the topic of a restraining order did not come up at all. I spoke with the FBI about my stalker after he threatened to kill me across state lines and it was the first thing they told me to do. Undoubtedly, there is more to your anecdote. In California, as long as you choose the right kind (i.e., not domestic for civil), restraining orders are fairly trivial to get. In some cases you can get a legally-binding TRO from a judge, in a day, for free. They also show up on computers in a police officer's cruiser in California (thanks to the digitization of all of it in CLETS), so if you are literally standing in front of a person on whom you have a EPO/TRO/PRO and get a cop's attention, the crime is open and shut and they will arrest, speaking from experience. Bonus in California and maybe elsewhere: if you successfully take out a restraining order on someone, they have to surrender all their firearms or sell them (yes, really). Seriously. Restraining orders, people. The courts are at your disposal, and they're not just for domestic violence. Edit: Except in New York, apparently, where the author of the article lives. Go New York. New York readers: vote to fix that incredibly moronic situation at once, then travel to a sane state on this like California and go back home with one of ours, which should be enforceable there. Seriously, in the Internet age, the complete absence of a non-dating civil protective order mechanism is an absolute and disgusting shame, and means your only recourse from the courts exists if you make out with your stalker. What a grandly perverse incentive you have there from your judicial system. I'm actually worked up about this from learning it in this thread, and sympathize far more with the article author now than I did before I knew that. California resources: - http://www.courts.ca.gov/1260.htm http://www.courts.ca.gov/1260.htm - http://www.courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-domesticviolence.htm http://www.courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-domesticviolence.htm (dating/relationship/etc) - http://www.courts.ca.gov/1044.htm http://www.courts.ca.gov/1044.htm (not dating, impossible in New York, apparently)

btilly 11y ago
Oh, she got specific advice about restraining orders. The specific advice was, "The point at which a stalker is likely to flip out is the point where it becomes obvious to the stalker that the attention is unwanted and the relationship can never work. There is a real possibility that the act of taking out a restraining order will trigger a murder-suicide." When you're dealing with insane people, you can't expect a sane response to legal threats. (And yes, there is a lot more to my anecdote. But not stuff I'll talk about in public.)
- ryanlol 11y ago
  At that point, why not just buy a gun and start going to a shooting range? Most US jurisdictions have a legal framework that enables you to kill others in self-defense. I don't personally believe that anyone should have to do this, but I also believe that if you feel sufficiently threatened it'd be silly to ignore your legal right to self-defense.
  - hga 11y ago
    Most US jurisdictions have a legal framework that enables you to kill others in self-defense. ALL US jurisdictions have such a framework, although a 7 plus D.C. make it impractical to use by mostly not allowing concealed carry, and a subset of them have a duty to retreat which will likely get you crucified later in court (e.g. Maryland and at times, even in your home, Massachusetts). The author is said to live in New York, which is all but no possession let alone no issue in NYC, and may issue, sometimes liberally upstate, so she probably can't take your advice. ADDED: And it still won't stop the cyberstalking, just give her a backstop if it goes "real world".
    - ryanlol 11y ago
      I wasn't talking about the article, but responding to btillys comment and btilly never clarified the jurisdiction where the events he was describing took place. I do think that the ability to defend yourself would be of great help if you're faced with a serious threat of physical violence, as seemed to be the case in the situation btilly described. > a subset of them have a duty to retreat which will likely get you crucified later in court This is what I was referring to with "most".

btilly 11y ago

Oh, she got specific advice about restraining orders. The specific advice was, "The point at which a stalker is likely to flip out is the point where it becomes obvious to the stalker that the attention is unwanted and the relationship can never work. There is a real possibility that the act of taking out a restraining order will trigger a murder-suicide." When you're dealing with insane people, you can't expect a sane response to legal threats. (And yes, there is a lot more to my anecdote. But not stuff I'll talk about in public.)

ryanlol 11y ago
At that point, why not just buy a gun and start going to a shooting range? Most US jurisdictions have a legal framework that enables you to kill others in self-defense. I don't personally believe that anyone should have to do this, but I also believe that if you feel sufficiently threatened it'd be silly to ignore your legal right to self-defense.
- hga 11y ago
  Most US jurisdictions have a legal framework that enables you to kill others in self-defense. ALL US jurisdictions have such a framework, although a 7 plus D.C. make it impractical to use by mostly not allowing concealed carry, and a subset of them have a duty to retreat which will likely get you crucified later in court (e.g. Maryland and at times, even in your home, Massachusetts). The author is said to live in New York, which is all but no possession let alone no issue in NYC, and may issue, sometimes liberally upstate, so she probably can't take your advice. ADDED: And it still won't stop the cyberstalking, just give her a backstop if it goes "real world".
  - ryanlol 11y ago
    I wasn't talking about the article, but responding to btillys comment and btilly never clarified the jurisdiction where the events he was describing took place. I do think that the ability to defend yourself would be of great help if you're faced with a serious threat of physical violence, as seemed to be the case in the situation btilly described. > a subset of them have a duty to retreat which will likely get you crucified later in court This is what I was referring to with "most".