And here I was thinking I was being a bit conciliatory, and that we were actually starting to see where each other was coming from. Jesus, you sure are a piece of work.

So am I not allowed to argue my point based on the facts I know? Am I required to go on a fact finding mission before I speak my mind about anything? Or is it that I am required to take what the police say at face value, at least so long as it assumes that the man is guilty?

I never decreed my eternal wisdom, nor did I ever say that women have no right to go to the police with concerns for their safety. All I ever said was that the police are not obliged to arrest merely on her concern, and in fact are rightfully required to presume innocence until the facts prove otherwise. As far as other things, such as opening a case file and keeping records, or placing an officer on that train, I don't have a problem with that. But I don't want to live in a country where you can be arrested and incarcerated just for staring.

What part of innocent until proven guilty do you not get?

"Let's see, you don't understand how staring, in and of itself, is a threat. You don't understand that the WAY a person stares makes it a threat. If you can't understand that, I can not explain it to you. You have no cultural context to 'get it.'"

Not that I am conceding to anything that you are saying about me here, but I would like to point out that, in the above quote, you yourself are in effect conceding the existence of people who innocently, ignorantly, and naively stare at people. People who don't "understand," as you do, that staring is a threat. People who have no "cultural context." People who just don't "get it."

This is all the more reason to presume innocence, until guilt is proven. These people exist, whether you want to acknowledge them or not, and they don't deserve to be incarcerated just because you are taking their stare as a threat.

FYI - I have been "on the business end" of a threatening stare. While I was walking one evening, a man gave me a prolonged, angry look, and kept staring at me for a block and a half. I encountered him again on my way home, and about halfway back (with about 15 or 20 minutes left to walk) realized that he was following me home. Eventually I found an intersection where there were people, stopped, and confronted him. When he got a good look at me, and saw that I was not the person he thought I was, he walked away.

It was very scary, but there was nothing I could do about it. He hadn't broken any laws. Do I still believe in innocence until guilt is proven? ABSOLUTELY.

Also FYI - I have repeatedly stated in my posts on this thread that uninvited contact does qualify as harassment. So no, I don't think that it is OK for men to grab women's breasts or rub up against them without their permission. I just don't think that staring equates to anything like that.