One of the concerns that most people have when dealing with potentially violent situations is the fear that doing something will only escalate the incident. This fear or concern exists for security professionals as well. In a video obtained by the Portland Press Herald, concerning a discussion between Sagadahoc County Sheriff Seargent Aaron Skolfield, and Army Reserve Captain Jeremy Reamer, there is concern expressed about attempting to seize Robert Card’s firearms under Maine’s “yellow flag” law, as it was felt doing so may escalate Card’s behaviors and actions. A few weeks after the conversation, Robert Card carried out a mass shooting/rampage killing (25th October 2023) at the “Schemengees Bar and Grill”, and the “Just in Time” bowling alley, in Lewiston, Maine. The shooting saw 18 people killed, and another 13 injured. It is important to note that even had Card’s firearms been removed/taken prior to the 25th of October, that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have found a way to acquire others, and commit a rampage shooting. The point that I am trying to make is that even seasoned professionals with a background/history of making such decisions have concerns about the repercussions of intervening in a potentially dangerous situation, even when they are legally justified to do so. Human beings are naturally optimistic creatures, and we have a bias that sees us wanting to believe in the best possibilities and downplay the worst etc. This means that we sometimes don’t intervene and/or ignore situations which have clear and urgent warning signs. Doing nothing is a coping mechanism that allows us to not have to face difficult realities, such as dealing with a potential mass killer. In this article I want to look at why it’s important – however difficult it may seem – to address entryway behaviors that alert us to danger, rather than ignore them because we believe confronting them would escalate a situation.
As someone who was bullied as a kid, I became conditioned to the fact/belief that it was better to endure what I was experiencing rather than change the script and risk making things worse. Like the proverbially frog that gets gradually boiled to death but fails to recognize this is happening because the incremental increases in heat are small enough to avoid detection, I failed to identify the escalation of events. When you are used to being treated badly it is hard to register if one incident is worse/more significant than the last one etc. However, from the bully’s perspective and enjoyment, things can only head in one direction. Like any addiction the next fix has to be stronger than the last. There has to be an escalation, even if it is undetectable to those being targeted/who are supplying the fix. I don’t know to what degree an individual is conscious of this, or whether it is something they realize much later but a verbal insult given today isn’t going to yield the same reward when it is repeated a few days or weeks later. If I had my time again, and know what I know now, identifying and addressing the first slight, the entryway behavior, at the earliest opportunity, would have in all likelihood stopped the further abuse, or at the very least constructed a very different context and exchange of power. However, at the time of my first incident of bullying, I laughed it off, telling myself that it was a one-off event, that wouldn’t be repeated, and it wasn’t worth saying anything in case I escalated things. There are times to ignore things, and that’s usually when you have an opportunity to immediately disengage, and never see the person again. However, when a “relationship” has to be extended beyond an initial social interaction, calling someone out on the way they are treating/interacting with you is usually the safest way to avoid them being given a green light to treat you however they want.
One of the things I’ve learnt over the years working in security is that addressing entryway behaviors as soon as they occur – if you don’t have a disengagement opportunity, which allows you to exit the environment immediately -is usually the best way to stop situations escalating e.g., if you don’t address shouting, pointing, swearing at you straight away, an angry and emotional person understands that this is acceptable behavior, and that this represents a baseline of what you are prepared to tolerate etc. This doesn’t mean that you have to address such behaviors in a challenging and/or confrontational manner which would escalate things, but you need to address the behaviors themselves e.g., “I understand that you might be angry but it’s not necessary to use that type of language in order for me to address/solve the situation,” etc. I have found that one of the best ways to assess where a person is at is to talk to them. If they don’t/are unable to verbally communicate, there’s a problem. If they mix up the order and/or garble their words, there’s a problem. If they fixate on the issue/injustice and can’t get past this to look for a solution etc., there’s a problem. Using positive language is unlikely to escalate a situation that isn’t already heading there, and by judging how a person responds to your verbal communication, you should have a better idea about whether you need to prepare yourself for dealing with a physical assault.
Often social awkwardness will see us wanting to avoid confronting someone who is acting aggressively towards us. At some point in our lives, we have probably been informed that if we ignore angry/bullying people etc., they will go away. It would be nice to think that such a universal rule exists. If you can physically disengage, and get out of a situation immediately, ignoring someone may work, however if such an option/opportunity doesn’t exist, it is safer to address entryway behaviors as soon as they are expressed.