Violence in the Work place training.

[pgrass101]

Last week I had to complete some mandatory training and for October it was violence in the workplace. This had to be the most herd mentality training class I've ever been too. I'll give you some highlights:

1 We should expect violence in the work place,

2 If we witness someone being attacked we should leave the area

3 We should pay close attention to people who have guns, hunt or have a fascination with weapons as they are the most dangerous.


Well let me give you a little background about me and were I work. I am a microbiologist for the Alabama Department of Public Health. I have Dept. Of Justice Clearance to work with and have control over select agents (list includes anthrax, smallpox) Before working with ADPH I worked for Homeland Security (in cooperation with the State) in the state/regional bioterrorism laboratory. Before working at the lab I worked at the Anniston Army weapons depot monitoring for an accidental chemical weapons release. I am over the physical building security system (which is a secure building).

But despite all of the above I am a threat because the BATF approved my for a C&R permit. I might get mad at a coworker and attack them with one of my replica Viking weapons. I got really worked up during this training and asked if the State would pay for the mental anguish I would suffer if I did not help some one defend themselves. I got no response and had to get a cup of coffee to calm myself down.

Sorry had to vent.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[JD]

I feel your pain, we have a lot of "Corporate Training" none of which will actually helps me in my job. Most of it is the touchy feely BS training.

I hate it.

They make us sit through this crap for hours. But when I call HR to actually get a valid job descripiton for my billet it takes two stinkin' days to get an answer

[Bob The Great]

I've got my workplace violence training coming up soon. I fully expect it to be laughable, though if they actually stereotype hunters/gun owners as "at-risk" or "to be watched," I'm gonna raise some hell.

[Musketeer]

3 We should pay close attention to people who have guns, hunt or have a fascination with weapons as they are the most dangerous.

Sorry to say but this one came from studying those workplace rampage shootings which have already occurred. The criminals generally did collect weapons and were well known to have done so. That doesn't mean everyone with a gun is a rampage killer but when a link is seen between the two it is bound to be made public.

You too should pay attention to such individuals because they are statistically more likely to be the one who commits a ramage shooting than the sheep. I don't expect docile sheep to bite.

How does one conduct oneself in such a situation?

Robert A. Heinlein said:

"In a society in which it is a moral offense
to be different from your neighbor
your only escape is to never let them find out."

[havegunjoe]

Why should we expect violence in the workplace? I suppose if you are a pizza delivery driver or stop and rob night clerk that is true but there are millions of other jobs where people go to work every day without incident.

Yes run and hide if you see someone being attacked, that is how we are bringing up our children these days. I'm not saying jump in guns blazing but man we are becoming a weak society with a run and hide attitude. If it is your wife or daughter being attacked do you hope everyone "leaves the area"?

80 Million gun owners in this country and everyone of them a ticking time bomb of destruction. Never mind that every time you buy a gun you go through an FBI check. Or that virtually every permit holder has gone through additional checks. That doesn't matter to these idiots.

[Bob The Great]

Sorry to say but this one came from studying those workplace rampage shootings which have already occurred. The criminals generally did collect weapons and were well known to have done so. That doesn't mean everyone with a gun is a rampage killer but when a link is seen between the two it is bound to be made public.

Correlation does not prove or even imply causation, and it especially does not prove causation in the direction that is stated in the OP (have guns => violence).

Now, the opposite may be true; people with violent tendencies may seek out a gun for the purpose of performing violence. But the same is true of any other weapon, whether designed as a weapon or improvised. Singling out gun ownership reflects only the opinion of whoever wrote it, nothing more.

Unfortunately, that opinion can be contagious, and can generate a lot of distrust and suspicion toward gun-owners who aren't ticking time bombs (ie. the vast majority of us).

[P95Carry]

We should pay close attention to people who have guns, hunt or have a fascination with weapons as they are the most dangerous.

There is a (potential) morcel of truth in that - a statistically very small one but ...........

Unfortunately, that opinion can be contagious, and can generate a lot of distrust and suspicion toward gun-owners who aren't ticking time bombs (ie. the vast majority of us).

Bob has the measure of it however ........ and yes if over-played all that does is smear the whole darned lot of us - the mega majority of sane armed folks who choose to take responsibity for their own welfare. It is in itself an over sweeping statement/generalization.

[AutoFan]

They are reversing cause and effect - violent, dangerous people have a fascination with weapons as a way to express their violence.

Correlation is not causality. If you looked at the people who commit workplace violence, you would note that they all were currently employed or were recently employed. Does that mean we should pay close attention to the employed, as they are the most dangerous? Furthermore, I'll bet all of them drove or rode in a motor vehicle the day they commited their violent acts. It is a meaningless correlation.

[friesepferd]

i worked with about 6 people this summer, pretty department.
5/6 of the people hunted
3/6 had had ccw at some point in their lives
1/6 still had his
there was only one person who wasnt 100% pro gun, well no i even take that back, she had zero problems with guns, she just wasnt a gun person.
having said that, the people i worked with knew i was in the process of getting my CPL and thought it was awesome. i couldnt carry to work b/c of their rules, but i wasnt there long enough after i got it for it to make much of a difference.
That was the department I worked in, but as I said there was a 100% no weapons policy, not even in car. im pretty sure my knife wasnt suppose to be there, but nobody cared. In any case, it was just a summer internship and I left.
Somehow it came up later in a meeting there after I was gone that I carried, the head of the company was SO shocked (as most people are granted).
Anyways. where I am getting at is that at least there people werent too retarded, but I am not looking fwd to when I get a real job. Especially since Ill be working in some kind of industrial / plant type setting (or at least in the office of one), these kind of meetings will be something I get to look fwd to.
I cant wait (gag).
Hopefully I can find a job which will let me carry.

Is it weird to ask for the employee handbook before excepting an offer?

[retsupt99]

Sorry to say but this one came from studying those workplace rampage shootings which have already occurred. The criminals generally did collect weapons and were well known to have done so. That doesn't mean everyone with a gun is a rampage killer but when a link is seen between the two it is bound to be made public.

You too should pay attention to such individuals because they are statistically more likely to be the one who commits a ramage shooting than the sheep. I don't expect docile sheep to bite.

How does one conduct oneself in such a situation?

Robert A. Heinlein said:

I understand that most rampant killers drive cars, too...did they warn everyone about watching out for people who drive cars?

[dr_cmg]

I understand that most rampant killers drive cars, too...did they warn everyone about watching out for people who drive cars?

100% of the people who commit workplace violence do the following: breathe, drink water, eat, digest, and think. All we have to do to prevent workplace violence is to make sure that our workers don't do any of those five things.

[ccw9mm]

Window dressing. Irrelevent, misguided window dressing. Or, as others have so eloquently put it: touchy-feely BS.

[pgrass101]

Well I questioned the expect violence we should be prepared for a violent act if one takes place, but I really don't expect violent acts by my co-workers.

I also didn't like the blanket statement of all people who own guns. If mayhem was my goal I have much better tools at my disposal than firearms.

I believe that it is better to watch for co-workers who are emotionally unstable or are going thru some type of personal crisis (divorce, death of spouse or child etc...) as most likely to be envoled in a workplace shooting.

I also disagreed with the leave the area statement. Why not call 911 or leave and call 911. I agree that a pair of nurses in a rural health clinic are limited in their options in responding to violence (especially since the have to have special permission to be armed) but they need more options than running away or dieing.

[Eddie]

We should pay close attention to people who have guns, hunt or have a fascination with weapons as they are the most dangerous.

This statement would encircle 90-95% of the employees at my employer. In my opinion, I am safer with this scenario than if the number were a minority. There are a number of us who visit the local gun range on a regular basis, including my boss.
Being a world wide company, we routinely have visitors from Europe. About a year ago, we took a group of visitors to the range. The word spread like wildfire. Now, everyone who visits wants to go to the gun range. I guess you can say that I am spreading my fascination. To date, no one has went insane or died in a gunfight, but I have made a lot of valuable friends.
I understand your anger over the required training. I was required to take a similarly titled course, but the content was quite different. If mine had been similar to yours, HR would be receive my complaint first, then corporate would be next. Finally, if my employer feels that they must mandate training, written by the likes of Sarah Brady, then I will decide if my rights and my safety are more important than my job. It sounds as though they are a step away from hanging a "gun free zone" sign on the front door.

[Mtbiker]

People who have guns are more likely to shoot people than people that do not have guns.


This just in: People that have cars are more likely to drive than people that do not have cars.