So you confront someone you think is a criminal with a group of men and get into a brawl. How much time are you willing to spend in jail?

Even if the gent is a stalker and you are right - you still instigated a brawl! You still assaulted (or more) someone.

If your thought process is "ah but he won't have a gun! My lads and me will really have an easy time now!" that may be a sign you are doing something unwise.

And what if he does have a knife or improvised weapon? Are you looking forward to explaining to your buds wife why he's room temp in the morgue over a stalker?

> you still instigated a brawl!

Why go in with an assumption that violence is going to occur? That's a recipe for trouble. You would have to pick your friends carefully, so none of them loose their cool. If there is going to be violence or any contact, let the stalker initiate it.

I'm not arguing that it would be risk free or a lark. It's a case of accepting the risks and being happy that the likely outcome would justify the risks.

If you don't believe violence is going to occur, why not go alone?

The point of going with a group of friends is to make it clear to the person you are implicitly threatening that if there is a fight they will lose. The more unbalanced the forces on each side the less likely the weaker side is to initiate violence.

I agree, which brings me back to my original point - why are you seeking out violence via street brawl and are you ready when you or your buddies goes to the morgue or the jail?

These people use the implicit threat of violence to get someone to stop doing a thing they don’t want to continue. They believe that the chance of going to the morgue is very low and the chance of going to jail is also extremely low. So they do it because they think the expected benefits outweigh the expected costs. They would be less likely to do so if they lived in a country where most crime is punished and reports of crime are generally investigated. That’s not Scotland though.