Would you press charges?
Offline Story from: http://kazimskorner.blogspot.com/2007/09/we-have-couple-of-agave-cacti.html
This is quite an interesting story about how an atheist dealt with a Christian vandalizing their lawn. Pay particular attention to how the situation was handled. I want to know, would you have pressed charges, or is this guy doing an admirable thing?:
We have a couple of agave plants decorating the sidewalk on both sides of our driveway. They're sharp spiky plants, but that's not so unusual; there are a number of neighbors around the block who have a cactus or two.
We also have a couple of very prickly neighbors. They're an old retired couple living two doors down from us. We've been living at our current residence for nearly six years, and those folks haven't spoken a word to us in about five. Ginny says she smiles and waves at them and they scowl back at her.
When we first moved in, they were friendly and invited us to church, which we politely declined. We used to host a regular gaming night with our mostly atheist friends. They started asking "Why are there so many cars here on Mondays, and what are all those bumper stickers about?" So my wife told them. And that's about the time they stopped talking to us. I never felt like it was outright hostility, but she did. In any case, we haven't had much contact.
We have a couple of our own bumper stickers. She has a Darwin fish and a "Freedom from religion" sticker. Mine is more humorous; it says "Knowledge is Power. Power corrupts. Study hard, be evil."
This weekend one agave was cut. I don't mean carefully trimmed, I mean completely hacked up all across the front. Ginny has some pictures on her blog. We found pieces of spiny leaves in another neighbor's trash can on trash day, but we knew that they had been away on vacation so it wasn't them. Ginny was sure it had been this unpleasant couple. She was angry about it. Since I tend to have a bit of a more diplomatic approach to people than she does, she asked me to go over there and talk to them. I wasn't looking forward to it, but I wanted to hear their side of the story without prejudging them, hoping it was perhaps a big misunderstanding.
So I rang the bell and greeted them in as friendly a manner as possible, all smiles. I reintroduced myself to the woman and asked if she perhaps knew anything about the chopped plant. Despite giving me a fairly frosty reception, she invited me in and called her husband down. I had a seat on their couch, they took positions opposite me, and the husband had his arms folded the whole time and a very sullen scowl on his face.
Yes, he cut down the agave. I received a lecture on how dangerous it is to the neighborhood kids, and all sorts of gruesome scenarios about eyes being poked out. But what struck Ginny and me as weird later was when we realized that they hadn't cut any of the spines facing the sidewalk -- only the side on the street. (Again, see the picture.)
They then went on to lecture me about the general awful nature of our yard. Now, our yard may not be the most beautiful and well-kept in the neighborhood, but it is mowed regularly and there are quite a few houses that look worse than ours. I'm not a gardener myself, and I'm really busy with school, but I think Ginny does a reasonable job with it.
I took all this politely and said I understood their concerns, and is there anything else? Then we got into the bumper stickers. The wife said several times that they "make her sick" and she is very angry that we disrespect her religion. That she could never be friends with someone who doesn't "share her values." That she is firmly set in her beliefs and would never change them.
I said I don't want or expect her to change her beliefs, I have never asked her to. I don't proselytize to people who haven't approached me about the subject. And while I sympathized with her feelings, the very fact that she is willing to announce that the bumper stickers sicken her is unfortunately one of the chief reasons why we feel the need to express ourselves in this way. That Christians -- not you, I stated -- feel that it's acceptable to go door-to-door inviting people to their religion, and that we are expected to keep quiet about our opinions because they are supposedly offensive. We are sad that you view our bumper stickers that way, but we see it as a small but legitimate exercise of our free speech.
I then went on to state that while I understand the safety concerns regarding the spikes, it would have been polite if he had come over and brought them up with my wife. Then perhaps they could discuss the appearance and come up with an effective way of trimming it, or let her handle it. His wife restated the fact that they could never be friends with us. I said "I would never refuse to be friends with somebody just because of their beliefs. Only their attitude would make it difficult." Then I said I am not asking to be their friend; I'm only asking them to be friendly as neighbors and be a little more willing to open up lines of communication with us before taking it upon themselves to redecorate our property. I nicely asked him to come over some morning and discuss his concerns with my wife so that she can understand them as well. He agreed, but I'm pretty sure he didn't liked it.
As I mentioned before, I'm the more diplomatic one in the family. Just for good measure, this morning Ginny called the local police to talk about the incident, describing it as trespassing and vandalism. Before I left for work we were visited by a very cheerful and friendly cop, who got to hear all about the history and laughed at the notion that our yard would be an eyesore to anyone.
We didn't want to file charges. He offered to go over there and talk with them, even give a warning that they could be arrested if they were on our property again. We declined that too. I said I'm still hoping that the husband will come over and work things out amicably.
But I did happen to glance over at the neighbor's house while the cop car was in our driveway, and I saw the window blinds being pulled up. It was bright outside and I didn't get to see the expression on her face as she watched us talk to the policeman, clearly discussing our plant. But I have a pretty good imagination and I have to admit, it was kind of satisfying.
I personally believe this is a damn mature way to handle the situation, and one that will do more to change people's minds about atheists then pressing charges. Not to mention I think that the atheist understands that this was an act out of fear, and that he is doing the right thing by having a conversation to lessen that fear.
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
- Login to post comments
I think he handeled it the right way, but if something simialr happened again, then it would be time to kick up the response a bit. Attacking the plants the way he did was very cowardly.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca
At what point would you file charges? It is a misdemeanor that probably only results in a fine, it's not as if the old couple would do hard time, but they might think twice before vandalizing because someone hold differing opinions.
If it happens again would you file charges?
If it was the car instead of the plant would you file charges?
If the old couple would not speak to you about it would you file charges?
What if it was bodily harm, should they then file charges?
I just would like to know how far your personal rights need to be violated before you press charges, I am not being facetious, I honestly would like your opinion.
I do not know what I would do. In this situation though, the couple who had the plants cut could try scheduling a private meeting with the head of the other couples' church. It might give them an opportunity to debunk some of the stereotypes associated with atheists to a person that can reach a fair number of believers. It might also be possible that the church leader would disapprove of the other couples' actions and speak to them about it. I doubt any church leader would approve of vandalizing property as an appropriate way to express displeasure over another persons beliefs.
I think I would definitely press charges if they damaged the plant again. I would also press charges if they did any serious damage, like to my car.
It's a tough call in this instance because it is a plant. While the couple had absolutely no right to do what they did, pressing charges could possibly make it worse.
With regard to what jce said about contacting the clergy from the couple's church, I think it would be interesting if the atheist couple had done that. If the clergy seemed a little more open than this older couple, I would request to speak at the church during a sermon. I would explain to the congregation what had happened, leaving out names, of course and let them know that just because a person doesn't believe the same things they do it gives them the right to behave in such a way.
Of course, the congregation would probably immediately throw me out or burn me at the stake.
If god takes life he's an indian giver
If anything happened again, I'd press charges. They have been confronted in a polite manner already. If anything else happens then it shows that such measures will not work with them.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca
LOL! Maybe, but you might be surprised.
The thing is, my opinion is that the younger couple chose to handle it the way they did, but I would not necessarily describe their decision as mature. Had this simply been a case of vandalism for the sake of vandalism, they probably would have pressed charges. It seems that they chose not to more out of fear than anything else. I am not saying their decision was wrong or that I would have done anything different, but I am not sure the term 'mature' applies here.
I would have pressed charges. More bad things you say? Good. Maybe I'd be able to stir up some trouble in the right places and show how kind hearted I am as an atheist and how nutty they are as a christian.
What if the vandalism was because of race and not religious beliefs?
This question is for Tomcat:
At what point does pressing charges become 'mature'?
I would say a police report is infinitely more mature than vandalism.
P.S. I know it was just a 'plant' but at what point does it become less about the object that was vandalized and more about rights infringement?
I find it suspicious that you didn't answer my question, but that you throw out your own at me as a red herring. It makes me want to believe that you feel strongly about what you would do, but that you aren't sure if you could defend it. So as not to be accused of the same thing, I will answer yours.
If it happens again would you file charges? Yes. They have demonstrated that they reject the compassionate gesture that the atheist gentleman put forward, and thus I would not trust them to stop vandalizing my property if I used the same approach again.
If it was the car instead of the plant would you file charges? Depends on how serious. If they slashed my tires, or broke my windshield, or made a major dent in my car, yes I would file charges. If the old geezer took a shit on the hood, or made a small scratch in the paint, I would not. In the cases where I would file charges, these damages directly impede my ability to use the car (or easily repair/ignore the damage as with the major dent), and thus are a different class of offense. Shit is nasty to clean up, but I'm not gonna file charges, nor am I going to over the ignorable scratch. Aesthetics are only so important.
If the old couple would not speak to you about it would you file charges? No. I would have the officer speak to them (which he had offered to do so). They need some kind of warning after performing the act that they did.
What if it was bodily harm, should they then file charges? Most definatley. As with the car scenario, and more significantly in this one, they are impeding my ability to use in proper condition something that I own (my body), and seek to otherwise prevent me from doing things that I would be free to do.
So basically, I see the plant as an aesthetic luxery, something that is pleasant to have, and not a crucial necessity important for survival/living. I wouldn't sue a theist if he squirted ink on my nice shirt during a debate with him in which I was pwning his arse.
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
I think this was handled very well. A rapid escalation to formal charges would create an even more hostile environement. He made the religious couple look really foolish and they are fully aware of that.
My Artwork
I don't blame you. I think there are better ways to handle it, but I really don't blame you. It is a plausible action to take.
Don't read from this that I think it would be absurd to charge these old fogeys with a crime (I don't see that you did, just using your post for this further enumerating of my position).
I think there are other, less correct ways to go about handing this that other fricken morons might do, like go decapitate the poor bastard and fix that agave plant atop his shoulders as a replacement head...
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
See! Even the THEIST agrees! (lol just joshin ya, wavefreak)
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
No need to find anything suspicious. Yes, I probably would file charges. The first thing I would do is confront the offenders like the couple did, when I received the response they did and no apology I would then file charges. I am sorry if my position wasn't clear in my response.
I don't think any of the questions I put forth were red herrings, all are plausible scenarios and I was interested in finding out when you thought it would be appropriate to pursue legal action.
You mention aesthetics, what if it were spray paint on the side of the house? That is only aesthetic, would that warrant any different action?
I am just interested in the length you are willing to allow your right to be violated before charges are the appropriate response.
They should have at least had the cop talk to them. Maybe scare them at least. I would have pressed charges. It's pretty obvious these people will never be friendly neighbors anyway.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
This is a good question. Again, I look to the degree of how much it effects me. I don't like nasty spray paint scrawled on my home, but if he made a little dot on the backside corner near the ground where it's dirty anyways, I wouldn't press charges either. I would go talk to them, yes, but I would just simply either paint it over myself, or if the old guy was sorry I'd hope (or politely ask him if) he would do it himself.
If he drew a giant penis across the front of my house, now that's a different story. That takes more then just a little work to make it look nice again. I'd still go talk to him, hopefully with us coming to some understanding, but that still doesn't make the penis go away. The little rascal should compensate me for damages. Sheesh, old people can be like kids sometimes, huh?
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
Agreed - the first course of action should be to address the vandals, I have done this before with no repercussions, but if I received an indignant response, such as the one put forth by the old couple, at that point I probably would file charges.
I would actually just call it even. Sure, the Christians may have vandalized the atheist's physical landscape, but for the past 30+ years atheists have been vandalizing the spiritual landscape of the mother country, the United States of America, the bountiful fruited plain that Jesus so valiantly died and rose again into the spacious skies for.
LOL
You don't give us enough credit, it has been a lot longer than thirty years!!
Yes, BGH has it right, you're leaving out a lot like how we godless heathens invaded your Eden on Earth, corrupted the "streets paved with gold," spread a malaise of immorality and hedonistic pleasure-seeking, and murdered Elvis.
Seriously though, is that how you see us as? Vandals? Petty criminals?
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
I think he did the right thing, and I agree that it probably would have created a more hostile environment to press charges. The couple would probably have been more likely to do something again if charges had been filed.
I would have personally been a bit more firm, though. While remaining diplomatic and as polite as possible, I would have pressed for some kind of agreement and at least some recognition that what was done was wrong. I probably would have had the cop talk to the people and see where it went. If the cop wasn't able to get them to at least acknowledge that what they did was wrong, then I probably would have made one more attempt to communicate with them, letting them know that if an agreement can't be reached then legal mediation would be necessary (ie pressing charges, or maybe seek a restraining order). I would, however, try to do so in as polite a manner as possible, and get them to understand (in one way or another) that it is their behavior that prompted the action, and that there are solutions that would be easier on everyone involved.
I'd say that they definitely did the correct thing in getting the incident on file. If something happens again it will likely help.
I might even call the church and ask the pastor if I could expect such action from more of their congregation
I'm thinking that while there was no direct quote of the old couple saying that what they did was wrong, I believe that there probably was some recognition of that by the fact that the atheists were let into the home and allowed to stay for dialogue. Just because these whiny babies were still whining about the atheist bumperstickers and shit, there are clues that point towards their own aknowledgement of guilt. But don't get me wrong, if this couple has a speck of integrity in them, they should apologize and admit what they did was wrong. I just think it would take time. I wouldn't be surprised if it happend not too far in the future.
But if it doesn't, I'd say shaming them would be appropriate. Tell the neighbors. Tell the local newspaper. Maybe you'll get lucky and get the article published. Or maybe, yes, talk to the man's priest and get him to admit that a member of his flock screwing up your lawn in the name of religion is wrong.
Good stuff.
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
I would press charges.
I think the situation was handled admirably. At the very least, it showed the old people that atheists can be reasonable and willing to talk things out.
Starting an out-and-out war with neighbors can never come to any good ending. Next thing you know, the vandalism will intensify.
I think it would be tremendous fun to stay up with a camera and get pictures of them doing the deed. Surely a copy of that picture with an appropriate caption (WWJD maybe?) would embarass the hell out of them.
Or a video of old people vandalizing things sent to the local news.
Would they do the same if a Muslim moved into the neighborhood? Or Buddhist?
Does it qualify as a hate crime?
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
hi folks,
I am the wife of the young couple who had to deal with some unpleasant older "Christian" neighbors. I think we did the right thing by not pressing charges. The old guy is probably quite harmless to us, even though he proved to be harmful to my plant.
In any case, it doesn't make me feel good to have to deal with people like this, but I try to show them that I am a reasonable and good person. There are comments and an update over on my blog if anyone would like to wander over.
If you decide to leave comments on my blog feel free, but keep it friendly please. This is my personal blog mainly for friends and family, and where I journal all kinds of stuff. I'm happy to share with others outside of my inner circle a piece of who I am as long as they stay respectful.
I've made some good friends through my blog and just want it to remain a happy place as much as possible. So if you think I'm horrible or stupid or whatever the case may be, for how I handled my neighbors, you don't need to tell me. I am aware that not everyone agrees with how I handled the situation. Thanks!
Ginny Glasser
www.ginnyglasser.blogspot.com
You are a horrible person. Obviously you haven't read your atheist handbook. Page 28: "All disputes with elderly theist neighbours must be settled with a flaming paper bag full of dog poop. Failure to comply will put you at risk of eternal non-existence upon death."
"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien
Welcome Ginny,
I don't think anyone thinks you were stupid in how you dealt with the situation. I have stated I would have done exactly as you did and speak to the couple first, only after their response of indignation and disdain would I have filed charges. Had they been more apologetic I might have been inclined to let the issue drop.
I only wonder how far we are willing to allow our rights to be violated before we feel legal action is warranted. If the situation were slightly different and the vandalism occurred because of skin color and not religious affiliation, this situation would be considered a hate crime. We are entitled to lack belief in someone else's god, without risk of vandalism to our property, it is one of our personal rights and that right was violated. That is the part that irked me the most, I know it was only a plant but the principle is more important.
I hope you can stick around here and have some discussions with us.
Nah, I think you guys handled it as well as you could have. I probably would have flown off the handle and done something rashly.
If god takes life he's an indian giver
I would not have pressed charges, but I would have gotten a restraining order if possible. Got to cover your ass against people like this, I don't care how old and harmless they are.
"The powerful have always created false images of the weak."
Unpleasant neighbours are sadly sometimes a fact of life. I think it's important to remember that they come in all shapes, creeds, colours and ages though.
I think this situation was handled well because the couple didn't let religion dominate the issue. This was more about dislike - admittedly religiously influenced - than anything else.
Freedom of religious belief is an inalienable right. Stuffing that belief down other people's throats is not.
This was more about dislike - admittedly religiously influenced - than anything else.
Exactly. The guy wasn't trying to vandalize my plant just for the sake of screwing up the plant. I think he found the agave to be annoying more than anything because that morning he was tending my immediate next door neighbor's yard. He admittedly hated our yard and just figured sense he was in the near vicinity he'd just do a little chopping behind our backs because it was so much easier to him that way instead of having to talk to his scary atheist neighbor.
Plus it's my opinion that he didn't want to take the chance that approaching me about the plant might result in me denying him the pleasure of chopping up something of mine that I cared about. It was a very passive agressive act on his part because of the ill feelings he holds towards us to begin with. I think some people are missing the point on this...not any of you...but a reader on my blog and on some other message boards are missing this.
And besides that, maybe he knew that even if I did find out about what he did, I couldn't do much about it despite what the officer told me. The neighbor did mention to me before he apologized that he thought it was "right of way" property and that I couldn't press charges even if I wanted to. Whatever dude. You got caught doing something very un-neighborly regardless of any right of way laws.
Oh and get this...his wife told my husband that they are embarrassed to have company over to their house because of us lol. I think that is amazingly sad. They don't even live directly next door to us and man it's not like we have old cars and dryers sitting in our yard...far from it lol!
So thanks for the warm welcome to your message boards. I might hang out for a while and venture into other threads.
Ginny Glasser
www.ginnyglasser.blogspot.com
Welcome to the hizzle! Yeah check things out, it's a fun place to be.
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
It happened:
The approach worked.
The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...
I'm really glad to hear that ending. Maybe the old couple* learned something in this exchange. There's no doubt that the explanation was a fib, but it was probably very hard for him to apologize. But he did it!
It's quite silly to be embarassed to have company because the neighbors have bumper stickers with which you disagree. Most people would just point, laugh and not worry about it. How many times do we see "WWJD" and "I knew you before you were in the womb - signed God" and (the most offensive) "Vote for Bush".
By the way, welcome to the forums. We're glad you're here and hope you stick around awhile.
*Ginny, you look like perhaps you're in your 20s. Since I am probably the age of the "old couple", perhaps I shall simply refer to them as your neighbors from now on!
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Ginny, you look like perhaps you're in your 20s. Since I am probably the age of the "old couple", perhaps I shall simply refer to them as your neighbors from now on!
Thanks! telling me I look like I'm in my 20's just made my day! I'm actually 41, but the neighbors are probably in their 60's.
Ginny Glasser
www.ginnyglasser.blogspot.com
I REALLY hope you are being facetious. If not, you are a disgusting and vile waste of the resources required to sustain your physiology. At least you're conserving glucose by only utilizing your base cognitive functions.
Atheist Books