I was pointing out the causal relationship. If you act like an asshole people are going to act accordingly. If you poke a bear and he attacks you there is a causal relationship. They are not innocent in the interaction. Can the situation be handled better? - sure. Should you be shocked when it's not? - no. Staring people down is an aggressive act. If you act aggressively toward someone they will act aggressively towards you. If you don't regulate your own behavior eventually someone will regulate it for you.
I agree with what I think you're trying to say, but I disagree with your diction. Words and phrases like "act aggressively" imply a conscious choice to provoke, harass or intimidate; "staring down" assumes an intent that may not be present; "regulate" implies that the "regulator" is upholding some kind of order. Acting with an intention to provoke, by deliberately stepping over another person's reasonable boundaries, is not the same as acting in a manner that does
provoke because of another person's poorly defined boundaries (not "your rights end where my nose begins", but "I will jump in front of where you're walking and then blame you for pushing me"). That's not "regulating", that's drawing an unreasonable line that a reasonable person can't help but trip over and then calling it a transgression when they do. The distinction matters, very much so. A person walking late at night is not "acting like an asshole", "poking a bear" or "acting aggressively" -- let's be very, very clear about that.