Office shootings and CCW use

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

logical

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
637
Location
MI
The latest fired worker office rampage around here took place about 2 miles away. A weekend or so after being fired, guys comes in with a shotgun and kills 1, injures 2.
I have a CCW but never carry at work. Just thinking last night though, if I/you are sitting at your desk with a legal concealed gun and some guy gets halfway into a multi-person revenge rampage....what happens to a citizen that puts a stop to it by shooting and let's say killing him. Let's assume he's already shot a few people and is clearly about to shoot many more.....but isn't pointing/looking/calling out me specifically. I mean morally I can't shoot him fast enough but am I going to jail?
 
Many states have a provision in which you are justified to use deadly force to prevent deadly force against a third-person. Check your state's specific codes.
 
If that actually happened, I doubt you would be fired. Can you even imagine the bad press the company would get for firing a hero who saved a bunch of lives? It would be an incredibly stupid PR move on their part and a lot of executives are too shrewd to do something that dumb. If you were fired, its likely that the ensuing public outrage would lead to some job offers.

The real danger of carrying at work is getting caught just carrying the gun when nothing bad is happening. THAT would almost certainly get you fired. If you feel like you really have to carry at work, I'd go with something like a P-3AT in a belly band under a tucked in shirt.
 
MI law would be okay with you blasting the guy - obvious threat. I'm actually surprised no one opened up on him, oakland county has a pretty high CCW rate.

On that note, both of my parents got theirs in the mail the other day...
 
For the record I never said I was prohibitted from carrying at work and I never expressed any concern about being fired. After I posted I realized I needed to read that big thick package of laws they gave me with my permit some day.
 
Close to home

I live about two miles from the shooting site in Troy.

My wife tells me that one of her colleagues is related to one of the shooting victims, so naturally this shooting feels closer that others further away.

The shooter, after shooting his first victim, is said to have gone down a hallway passing several other people -- making no effort to hide his shotgun -- apparently seeking particular targets. To me, the shooting is proof that if that company has a no-gun policy, it should be abolished. Such policies simply take defensive ability from the victims (says the preacher to the choir). How can anyone not see that? If I had been one of those employees, I don’t know what I would have done, fight or flee, but I would forever more feel the need to have the means to fight.

We frequently have threads discussing whether one should carry at work when doing so is against company rules. Had I been there, this would be the decider.

I hope my wife’s colleague will let us know about the company’s gun policies and changes in them.

cambeul41
Rochester Hills,. Michigan
 
I work less than a mile from where that shooting occurred.. this has been a rather hot topic between myself and a coworker for the past 2 days as we work in a "no weapons" workplace. He's of the opinion that he'd rather carry and get fired than not carry and die. I'm not sure where I stand on the issue yet. However, if someone in that office had a gun, maybe only he would have had only one victim?

Obviously if you carried in the workplace without being detected and you ended a threat to the employees, you'd hope your workplace would be lenient toward you and realize that you carrying was more of an asset than they thought. But something tells me there's companies out there that would fire you just the same. I don't think you'd be in any legal trouble though, other than the litigation from the family who will undoubtedly think you shot their child without cause. :rolleyes:
 
If any of you think that the media will hail you as a hero you're smoking crack. It simply doesn't fit the liberal media's agenda of civilian disarmament. The reporting will be "sloppy" and the media will be dumb like a fox. If you don't believe me about the press, someone please post the link to the Virginia Law School shooting up near Grundy, VA a few years ago. You will be fired, of course, but at least you'll be alive. What is more important, your job or your life?
 
Southland Corp. (7-11) and I believe

Pizza Hut (or was it Domino's) have fire employees who used a prohibited (but not illegal) firearm to defend themselves, their workplaces or third parties.

These employees usually get hired pretty quickly by other, more "liberal" employers.
 
The Reason for No Weapons Policies

The reason companies have a no firearms/weapons policy with signs posted is to protect the pocketbook of the corporation or owner of the company. It has nothing to do with protecting employees from death or injury from firearms, as anyone with half a brain can see. If what happened in Michigan happens at a business that is not posted, the next of kin of the victims can sue the company claiming that the company did nothing to make the workplace safe, which allowed the shooting to take place. If the company has a no guns policy and has signs posted stating the policy, the company management can point to the signs and say "we took steps to make this a safe workplace - guns are prohibited on XYZ's property".
 
Oh, it happens but your odds of being fired are far, far greater than having to defend yourself with lethal force at work. I guess if you see a guy that's ready to twist-off..... then maybe you should carry. After you inform the police, co-workers and supervison. Or take a weeks vacation..... (KIDDING)
 
I know it stinks but if there were work place rules prohibiting weapons and they did not fire you for violating those rules even though you stopped the bad guy from killing more people, it would set the company up for law suits from others who have been fired for other reasons because they did not enforce all the rules equally.
 
The reason companies have a no firearms/weapons policy with signs posted is to protect the pocketbook of the corporation or owner of the company. It has nothing to do with protecting employees from death or injury from firearms, as anyone with half a brain can see.

I agree but it appears many on this forum don't realize insurance companies are another big reason. Many insurance companies have clauses in policies that require the policy holder to ban firearms on the premises. They can cancel your insurance if you don't have a no guns policy. In the insurance company's eyes it's okay if the disgruntled employee or stickup man comes on the premises with a gun. Then it's not their fault. If the employer allows legal carry of firearms by employees the insurance company may have to pay out someday. The bigger the company the more likely it will have an insurance carrier that requires a no gun policy.
 
Have you ever seen a policy from an insurance company that requires this or just repeating internet myth?

As a captive agent I have primary experience with my own companies policies, but do see others when we are competing for business. So I have seen a few policies, but never one that bans firearms.
 
If you think your employer wouldnt approve, just dont ask and do it anyway.

If they have a broad policy prohibiting weapons, simply plead ignorance and say you assumed they only meant that illegal weapons and ammunition were prohibited at work. I have personally employed this approach with success, though it made for years of office funnies once my coworkers found out about it.

Your mileage will almost certainly vary depending on how large a company this is, what the culture is like and the attitudes of the decision makers. Tread carefully or do as I do- keep a few years of cash on hand in case you find yourself without a job. The simple fact is that if you need the job they can subject you to all sorts of degredation, including disarmament. If they need you more than you need them, you can pretty much do as you like. The exploitative nature of capitalism works both ways you see. :D
 
LawBot5000:

I like your reasoning! I can hear it now:

"Wow, I really thought that those signs just applied to criminals. I mean, I never thought that you want to prevent ME from carrying safely and lawfully!"

Good stuff!
 
The scumbag who did this, did so because they fired him for being constantly late.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=268281&highlight=Office+shooting

The person who died was the secretary. As the scumbag entered with the shotgun, the secretary yelled for people to get under their desks...that's when he killed her...a 63-year old grandmother! What a POS!

One of my graduate students knew all of these people. What I would throw out as a challenge to all of us is to ask ourselves? Do I really fear being fired more than being killed? Or do I fear being fired more than living with the angony of standing aside as my co-workers are killed? We all have our fears, some of which we express, and some that we don't. Fear is quite normal...in fact, healthy. It keeps us from doing stupid things and taking unneeded risks.

But, as I was taught by the instructor through Target Sports when I trained for my MCPL, once the shooting starts, you ARE in the line of fire. At that time, you have to return fire. I suggest that we all need to spend more time at Target Sport, or Double Action, or where ever you practice, and begin carrying as close to 24/7 as what our employment permits.

Note, in absolutely no way, shape or form is the MCPL course enough! You all need to take a Tactical Shooting Course and an Advanced Tactical Shooting course. Then, you need to practice. Please do not over-inflate what we were taught to be permitted to carry concealed as being sufficient training! It is not. If ever you might need to shoot defensively, you need to have practiced shooting on the move, over protective cover, under protective cover, around protective cover, etc. It doesn't just happen, and you can't wing it.

Wait until you engage in your first tactical shooting. It will open your eyes! For what it is worth, the courses offered through Target Sports are outstanding. Ray contracts with the former Oakland County SWAT director, and with one of the Southfield PD Sgts. (Little Joe) to instruct these courses. They are excellent courses! No, i am not in any way affiliated with Target...I simply train there. JMHO.

Doc2005
 
In most office environments concealed means concealed, and if you do it right, no one will know. FWIW at my prior job the employer had a "no weapons" policy, yet I knew of three folks other than myself who CCW'ed into the office daily.
 
I suspect the primary cause of these stupid gun policies is that many lawyers dont know the first thing about guns and are scared of them. Combine this with your typical law schoool torts education and they say "gosh, if we say 'no guns' our employees can't sue us when someone goes postal."

Which makes sense except for the fact that "going postal" is not the sort of work related activity that an employer would be held vicariously liable for anyway. Obviously this would be different if the employee was carrying a gun as part of his employement, but such employees wouldnt be subject to a "no guns" policy anyway, would they?

Also, there isnt really any theory of liability that having a "no guns" policy is a defense against. Better to have a "no threatening your coworkers with violence" policy or a "no goofing off" policy since these are the two gun related activities that any employer should be concerned about.

Keeping silent on the subject would have about the same effect on liability as making all sorts of silly HR policies.
 
Southland Corp. (7-11) and I believe

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pizza Hut (or was it Domino's) have fire employees who used a prohibited (but not illegal) firearm to defend themselves, their workplaces or third parties.

These employees usually get hired pretty quickly by other, more "liberal" employers.
Click to expand...

That would suck to lose a good job like that. And to lose your job and only walk a way with your life, would it really be worth it?:barf:
 
Many insurance companies have clauses in policies that require the policy holder to ban firearms on the premises.
Click to expand...

I was in the commercial insurance business for 10 years or so, my father has been in that business for 50 years.

I've never seen a GL or any kind of business owners policy that said anything at all about firearms. Not one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
A law for CCW holders that should be instituted. Why is it not?
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Sergeant Sabre
S
R
  • Locked
CCW, the media, and saving lives
Replies
3
Views
348
Standing Wolf
S
D
  • Locked
(TX) Hurst police officer involved in shooting
Replies
2
Views
682
Matthew Courtney
M
K
  • Locked
Private citizens more effective than police in mass shootings.
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
X-Rap
X-Rap
C
  • Locked
20th Anniversary - San Ysidro Massacre
Replies
1
Views
311
mondocomputerman
M
Back
Top