Gentleman in Bed Declares War

There are many ways to spend a quiet Saturday evening in Carson City, and most of them do not involve a knife, an argument, and a deputy with a notebook. Yet a 50-year-old gentleman on North Roop Street chose the more theatrical option, which proves that while wisdom is said to come with age, it often misses its appointment.

The deputies arrived at 5:26 p.m., summoned by a lady who reported that her former companion had introduced a knife into their conversation, an object not generally listed among the approved tools of reconciliation. They found the gentleman still in the apartment, which suggests either confidence in his innocence or a lack of imagination about escape routes.

Deputies told him of his rights, which he accepted with the calm of a man who believes explanation is the same thing as absolution. His account was simple and almost tender. He said he was in bed, already a suspicious circumstance in any argument, and that the lady began poking him in the forehead, which is a method of persuasion not taught in the finer schools.

He further claimed she held her keys between her knuckles as though auditioning for a prizefight. At this point, he rose, as any citizen might, and denied having a knife, which is precisely what a man without a knife, or with one, would say.

The lady’s version had more scenery. She agreed to the poking, which shows a commendable devotion to accuracy, adding that the gentleman reached under his blanket, produced a knife with a sheath, removed it with ceremony, and advanced.

She even supplied an audio recording, a modern miracle that allows replays long after good sense has left the room. In it, the gentleman urges her to stop. And when questioned about the knife, he declares that he was defending himself, a phrase that has carried many a man from his living room to a courtroom with remarkable efficiency.

The deputies, who believe in evidence before poetry, were led to the kitchen, where the knife was discovered in a drawer, having retired from active duty. It was collected with the solemnity due to any object that has just participated in a domestic disagreement.

Now, it must be said that this entire affair has the flavor of modern living with two people who have parted ways but continue to negotiate the terms of that parting with enthusiasm; a disagreement that escalates from poking to weaponry; and the firm belief on both sides that they are the reasonable party in a world gone mad. Add to this the gentleman’s existing conditions with the Department of Alternative Sentencing, suggesting we are out of first ideas and are stuck with secondary ones. It’s a picture of progress that would puzzle our grandfathers.

In earlier times, a man of fifty was expected to possess a certain steadiness, a reluctance to engage in forehead-poking contests, and a general disinterest in drawing cutlery during domestic disputes. Today, we are more flexible. We allow adolescence to linger well into middle age, and then act surprised when it overstays its welcome.

Deputies booked the gentleman for suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon and placed him on a hold, which is the law’s way of insisting that, for the moment, he conduct his debates without props. Whether this lesson takes hold is uncertain.

But one hopes that next he feels the urge to argue, he will choose a safer instrument, perhaps silence, which has never found entry into evidence.