Man at work joked about bringing in a gun and shooting the place up.

[bertha katzenengel]

Where I work. Yesterday. I told him "That is not funny." He didn't apologize, but he turned beet red. Poor baby embarrassed at being called on the carpet. Too effing bad.

I've told two administrators and I'm told "you have to know him, he's just joking, don't worry. He often gets stressed and says inappropriate things."

Right. That's okay. No big.

:FUME:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I'm sure that is what they said about

the people who then became mass murderers.

[Sweet Freedom]

2. Did you put your complaint in writing?

Unless there's a record on file that you complained, it's your word against theirs. Put it in writing and it becomes a potential lawsuit. Only then will they take action.

[hlthe2b]

7. Good point

absolutely....

[hlthe2b]

3. This is serious. I'm glad you addressed it as so.

Most larger workplaces--at least governmental ones have required seminars on violence in the workplace, just as they do for harrassment... I'd suggest that you press these two administrators a bit on this. It is not a joking matter, even if the person was not "serious."

[Fresh_Start]

4. call your police department

let them investigate.

[BOSSHOG]

5. Very inappropriate

Also don't say Hi Jack to your friend Jack at the airport. Not funny at all. The thought of whipping his ass would have crossed my mind. Surely HR would make him a candidate for psych eval.

[MindPilot]

34. And don't ever, ever mention that the in-flight movie was a...

bomb.

[BlooInBloo]

6. Man at work fired and under FBI investigation, I hope.

[Beelzebud]

12. Yes, to the gulag with him. We should round him and others like him up!

How dare he crack a lame joke! The secret police should snatch that unamerican bastard out of his bed in the middle of the night and disappear him for this travesty!

[BlooInBloo]

27. Indeed - I *must* support gulags and secret police, because I'm against fire-crying.

[Beelzebud]

29. LOL Thanks for the laugh... Fire-Crying.... LOL

Is that how we label stupid jokes we are offended by now?

If we just label speech we don't agree with as "Fire-Crying", is it okay to outlaw it?

[BlooInBloo]

35. Nope - has to actually *be* conceptually comparable to fire-crying.

[MindPilot]

8. Nice to see so many progressives supporting

the suppression of free speech.

SIT DOWN! SHUT UP! CONFORM! YOU WILL ONLY SPEAK APPROVED WORDS!

FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!FEAR!

Remember to be afraid of everyone and everything here in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

[Beelzebud]

9. I'm feeling the same way. For many on our side, humor and sarchasm are a thing of the past.

I myself have made jokes like the one described. Does that make me a bad person?

I can say what I want to. Even if I'm not serious.

[AZBlue]

129. Why would anyone joke about something like that???!??

Explain that to me.

[Richard Steele]

10. Yeah, that's what we're doing.

:eyes:

[AndyA]

11. Famous last words.

I wonder how many people have thought to themselves, "Gee, I wish I'd said or done something after ______________ made that comment in jest about shooting _________________. Who could have known he'd do it a month later?"

Freedom of speech is one thing, but there are some things that respectful people do not say to others, even in jest.

[AllegroRondo]

13. free speech does not give the right

to shout "fire" in a crowded theater. this person basically did the same thing.

[Beelzebud]

15. So a lame joke is now yelling fire in a crowded theater?

[AllegroRondo]

16. it was more than a lame joke

reasonable people (like the OP) felt seriously threatened.

[Beelzebud]

19. Actaully the OP called it a joke in the subject line, and then spoke about the guy's embarrassment.

Embarrassment about being called out on it.

Sounds like a lame joke to me...

[AllegroRondo]

26. see post 22.

[Beelzebud]

28. see post 25

[AllegroRondo]

39. Im not going to get into an argument over what the OP meant

but if she says "he scared the crap out of me", I'll give her the benefit of the doubt on that.

[MindPilot]

17. No, according to the OP it was a joke.

not even an empty threat, let alone a real threat.

Yet there are many here who would gladly put the guy out of work or even jail for something he said. Not something he DID, but something he SAID.

Yelling fire in a crowded theater is not a good analogy because that is an ACT with the express purpose of creating a situation to cause harm.

[bertha katzenengel]

22. "No, according to the OP it was a joke." Who gives a shit if he was joking?

He scared the crap out of me! Jesus fuck, why do you think I reported it?

[Beelzebud]

25. Scared enough to think of him as a "Poor baby embarrassed at being called on the carpet".

[Zuiderelle]

38. One can be afraid of someone in confrontation, and when speaking about it later, not still be afraid

Why are you calling out that phrase as some sort of evidence that she is lying about being afraid?

[Beelzebud]

41. Because at first it was a "joke" and he was described as a "poor baby" that was embarrassed.

Either it was a joke, or it was a serious threat.

Which one was it?

[Zuiderelle]

51. It's quite clear to me that he was "joking" about something that made her feel threatened.

Her first reaction was "That is not funny." Then she goes on to describe his embarrassment, very understandably happy that she embarrassed him.

It's very clear that she never said it was a joke, just that he was "joking." And she ended her OP with :FUME: which indicates to me that she was upset about others thinking it was a joke. I think your interpretation is a bit off.

[uppityperson]

60. It is possible to feel threatened, then later see it as a bad joke.

Timing is critical. Jeesh, have you never felt 1 thretened or even startled, then afterwards not so threatened or startled?

[MindPilot]

49. I don't think Beelzbud is accusing the OP of lying

What it says to me is that the guy was probably not aware that his joke would actually frighten someone. When it was pointed out that it did, he was shamed and embarrassed.

I'm going to hazard a guess that someone truly planning a shooting rampage would not a) mention it in a joking manner, or b) express embarrassment when told his joke wasn't funny.

I suspect the OP's reasoned and measured confrontation has the situation handled.

[Zuiderelle]

53. But he made no apology. He did not acknowledge his mistake at all.

Being embarrassed is not acknowledging anything.

I'm going to hazard a guess that there are plenty of freaks around who would brag about going on a shooting rampage prior to actual doing it. I wonder where you get your rose-colored vision of the world. Where the embarrassement comes from doesn't matter, it's the fact that he caused someone to feel threatened. For that, embarrassment is not enough of an apology.

[MindPilot]

65. Rose-colored vision of the world is most definitely not me

If fact I'm probably one of the more cynical people you'll ever deal with.

We are well into wild speculation on this, but embarrassment and apologies are two different things. Anyone can fake an apology, embarrassment is for real. And when did we go from a threat assessment to demanding an apology? I stand by my original comments.

[MindPilot]

30. OK, then it was either a joke or a serious threat.

You were face to face with this guy. What's your honest assessment? Is he a serious threat or not?

Clearly others who know him don't seem to think he is.

[Zuiderelle]

54. I wonder how many people didn't consider Cho a serious threat.

[Beelzebud]

57. I'm glad Stephen King didn't get turned in when he was a weird adolescent.

[Hobarticus]

76. ...and how many of them are dead now.

If you take a veiled threat seriously, you're a professional victim.

If you don't, you're a potential victim.

Lotsa laffs, this thread.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

96. Obviously hypersenstivity is the answer.

After Cho is like after 9-11. Everything is different now.

:rofl:

[Hobarticus]

103. Obviously, dismissing people's concerns is the only right answer.

People apparently only need to be concerned if you deem it necessary, from miles away.

Dr. Frist is looking for some folks to do some medical evalutaions via video conferencing, you may have a future with that.

:rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

105. Frist?

You lost me. I mean, I get his psychich medical evaluations, but I fail to see how that applies here.

Now if you're up for Republican analogies, how about the one about Bush wanted everybody to be jumping at shadows?

:D

[Hobarticus]

109. He said Schaivo wasn't as incapacitated as she was...

after viewing a videotape from DC. This, in the face of the doctors on the scene in Florida who examined her.

The connection?

You're judging reactions to something that happened miles away from you, without any context, knowing nothing about this workplace or this joker, and dismissing the OP as being hypersensitive. That's a pretty asinine and illogical position to take, being where you are and knowing what you know. Might as well be giving physical examinations over the internet, for as much sense as it makes.

It's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. I just find your conclusions laughable, in light of the lack of context that you have.

Funny, if Dubya had been jumping at shadows and taking threats seriously before 9/11, we'd all be better off, no?

Comparing goofy-ass color-coded terra alerts to office violence is pretty ridiculous, too. You're on a roll.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

116. I'm basing it on what the OP described.

"Comparing goofy-ass color-coded terra alerts to office violence is pretty ridiculous, too."

Now it's actual office violence?

:rofl:

[Hobarticus]

119. Terra alerts aren't actual terra, either...

You're a terrific comedy writer, y'know?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

121. And hence: the comparison.

:shrug:

[Hobarticus]

123. Hey Dr. Frist, I got this pain in my neck...

Can you take a look at it?

:rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

125. Cover up your windows with plastic sheets and duct tape.

Then call me in the morning. You can never be too safe.

[Hobarticus]

126. Keep stretching the context...

Evetually it'll make sense, to....uh....you, I guess.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

127. LOL

Says the guy who started on about Frist.

[Hobarticus]

128. Says the guy who says I'm skeered of terra, because Bush says so...

:rofl:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

154. I'm not saying you're scared of terra because Bush says so.

I'm saying the OP's scared of random shootings, because Nancy Grace, or whoever it is she watches, says so.

[BoneDaddy]

108. Cho

had a very long history of bad behavior. According to the OP, this was not the case and is an example of how fucking reactionary the left can be...I think the "poor baby" comment was projection.

[Zuiderelle]

130. "how fucking reactionary the left can be" Ha

I think that it's the right more than the left who would be reactionary over something like this. But whatever, go ahead and slur us damn libruls.

[BoneDaddy]

139. I am a liberal

but these irrational over reactions and self proclaimed victimhood makes me laugh when I see it among liberals. Sure the conservatives have their own power through victimhood too, but they aint the only ones.

It does a real dishonor to those who are really victimized.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. What do you do for a living?

Work in airport security?

:eyes:

[Zuiderelle]

61. What do you do for a living?

Write for Jay Leno?

[MindPilot]

66. Mods!! A sense of humor for this poster IV push!! Stat!!

The above subject line is a joke. It is not intended in any way to constitute a threat, harassment or denigration. No one who is currently, has been, or will be, hospitalized or received IV drugs or fluids in any other setting should take offense at the aforementioned comments.

[Zuiderelle]

69. I know you are but what am I?

[MindPilot]

72. Just when I have to get back to work....

you wanna start a game of rubber and glue. :D

No officer, I wasn't serious...I made a joke about shooting at my workplace. Hey?! What's with the cuffs?! I work at the rifle range you idiot...zzzzzzzTTTzz...hey!

[bertha katzenengel]

86. That was uncalled for.

Class. Pure class.

[Hobarticus]

88. Not really a surprise, unfortunately...eom

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

95. Hey, if you think that was fucked up...

get a load of the Jay Leno joke.

Ouch.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

14. I second that and lets don't forget...

discontinue use if you start puking blood or your skin starts melting off your body or if your erection lasts more that four hours, otherwise, everything is fine, the T.V. tells me so.

[Fresh_Start]

23. Its not suppressing free speech.

Its making certain that someone is not a danger to themselves and others.
He needs to be looked at by someone competent.

[Little Wing]

31. amen brutha!

[Beelzebud]

45. It's a Brave New World.

[slackmaster]

84. I was wearing a T-shirt that says "GOT AMMO?" at work...

...the day of the Granite Hills High School shooting.

It was pretty embarrassing. I turned it inside out.

[MindPilot]

99. Embarrassment is not enough, SM.

That T-shirt constituted a terroristic threat and you should have been forced to apologize/counseled/fired/jailed/rendered or tortured for what you might do, think or say.

Turning it inside out was just to hide your real agenda which only made you scarier and denied justice to your potential victims.

[SammyWinstonJack]

117. ..

:evilgrin:

[Donnachaidh]

18. Bet that line was used about the kid at VT too

Considering they are throwing in the word *stress*, I'd be worried.

[deadmessengers]

20. I had a similar incident yesterday

Wrote about it here, and got some good advice that would certainly apply to your situation:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x797022

[raccoon]

21. Those admins must have their heads up their arses.

YOu'd think they'd take it more seriously, if for no other reason, for the fear of liability in case, Heaven forbid, something did happen.

And that co-worker is a clueless fool. Of course, there are a lot of them walking around.

[jollyreaper2112]

24. oooh! oooh! I know the answer!

Get a gun. Then when he comes in to shoot the place up, you can blow him away and be an NRA hero. Because real life always works like the movies. Then you can do the twirl-the-gun-around-your-finger thing before you holster it, pop a beer, give the finger to your boss, and take the rest of the day off. And he'll just shake his head while looking at you, muttering under his breath "What a magnificent bastard." Oh, and you can probably make some sort of crude sexual innuendo towards the cute babe from marketing and pat her ass and she'll react positively to that. You know, because this is like in the movies.

[Hekate]

113. Perfect! That's it! We have a winner over here!

You nailed it.

Christ on a Trailer Hitch, what a screwed up world this is.

Hekate

[geardaddy]

32. Complain to the administrators' higher ups.

[Horse with no Name]

33. I think you should file a report at the police station

That was a terroristic threat.

[Beelzebud]

37. It was a terroristic threat? Am I on FR or DU?

[Horse with no Name]

40. I'm not a freeper

and yes, it is a terroristic threat.
What is the difference in calling in a bomb threat to a school or workplace or simply saying "I'm going to shoot everyone here"?
I am fully aware of the First Amendment rights--but while the First Amendment gives you the RIGHT to say anything, it does not absolve you from the ramifications of your words.

[Beelzebud]

42. A lame joke is not a threat, and the OP described it as a joke.

[MindPilot]

43. "people need to watch what they say"

Wonder who said that?

I guess these days terrorism is just whatever you want it to be. Should the guy be declared an enemy combatant and shipped off to Gitmo, or would you be satisfied with just a little rendering?

[Horse with no Name]

44. Nobody needs to watch what they say

but you don't have the right to threaten others and make them feel unsafe in their workplace.

[Joe Chi Minh]

36. She could have said, well, maybe knowing that, we'll all bring in a gun. You know... just in case.

How does that sound to you?

[murloc]

46. Context.

its all about context.

I can imagne those exacts words spoken in such a way that I roll my eyes and continue with the conversation.

And I can imagine those exact words spoken in such a way the scares the shit out of me, makes me file a police report and then I skip work the next day.

In any case, go with your gut instinct. Its usually right.

[Hobarticus]

81. Agreed. I can think of my own office...

Within ten feet, I've got one person who, if he said that, I'd laugh it off.

I've also got another one that if he said it, I'd call HR on it. He fits the oddball lone gunman profile, to a T.

[BoneDaddy]

47. Hold on a sec

Did he say something stupid, absolutely, but it seems you want to see him drawn and quartered. My guess you don't like him personally and that is affecting your ability to see clearly in this matter.

People say things in anger, jest and in stupidity all the time. We need not knee jerk react and crucify them.

Was what he said poor taste? Yes. But it sounds like the supervisors are judging what he said in comparison to his history of civility and are being fair and just under the circumstances.

What would have been satisfying for you in this situation? Having him repremanded? A letter into his personnel file? Fired? Arrested?

[bertha katzenengel]

48. I would think a copy of the page in the policy that clearly states

such things can be construed as harrassment and should not be said, hand-delivered by the highest-ranking person in my office, would be sufficient. Along with a copy of my memo in his file.

[BoneDaddy]

50. Wow

professional victim at work.

Harassment? No, harassment is predicated by a history. One stupid comment does not construe harassment.

If you told him it was offensive and he continued, yes, but it appears to have not been the case.

If the guy has a history of mental illness, has acted out violently or aggressively before or any other predicating factor you may have a point but sometimes in this world people screw up, say the wrong things or make bad choices.

Why do you feel such a need to portray yourself as a victim???

[uppityperson]

62. 1 comment dues not construe harassment? Wrong. Not stalking but 1 comment can=harassment

If someone says something threatening, it is a threat. 1 comment can be harassment, stalking takes more than 1, that needs a history, but yes, 1 stupid comment can=harassment.

[BoneDaddy]

110. Making a bad, tasteless joke

is not harassment. My point throughout this has not to defend the man, but to inject a little bit of sense, fairness and rationality into a post that was very steeped in victimhood, irrationality and overreaction.

If this man had a history of being unstable emotionally or psychologically (as Cho clearly was) then I think the OP may have a point. What I see when I read her OP is a person who totally overreacted on part of someone's bad joke. I bet you a thousand dollars (yeah, right) that she doesn't like this man and found a way to "persecute" him by insisting he was a danger.

Do me a favor... Rent "12 angry men". There is a great scene where they deconstruct the words "I will kill you" said by a son who allegedly killed his father.

Intent is everything. We cannot judge the intent of the man the OP works with but based upon the facts of the story, it appears he made a very bad decision to say what he said. It is the zealous judgement and over the top reaction of the OP I am speaking to.

[uppityperson]

122. Sounds like he does have a history and is this harassment....

History: I've told two administrators and I'm told "you have to know him, he's just joking, don't worry. He often gets stressed and says inappropriate things."

Is this harassment: A higher echelon person saying "bring your cute little ass over here baby, I'd like to do you for lunch."? Answer: maybe maybe not, depending on other factors. My point is that yes, a 1 time thing can be harassment and yes, I agree that none of us know the entire situation, so each of us judges on assumptions that may or may not be true.

If the OP was frightened, then later understood the person was "joking" (and don't forget those quotes as there is a difference between joking and "joking", intent again), that happens also. A person can be startled or frightened, then later, when time has passed, be not so frightened. But still it is difficult and uncalled for.

[BoneDaddy]

137. See

I think that is the problem. You are overidentifying with the sexual harassment that women face in the workplace instead of seeing this as it is, hence the comment "bring your cure little ass over here baby..." Try and stay objective.

The OP may have been frightened, I do not deny that. All I am saying for what seems the millionth time, is her reaction of being victimized and her persecution of the guy when he misspoke. I never said nothing should be done. My issue has been with the Op's paranoid, overreaction.

I for one am glad the OP spoke up, what he said needed to be addressed, but to go to the extreme seems a way bit too much.

[uppityperson]

144. "I've told two administrators " is extreme?

What extreme do you mean? To go to the extreme of talking to administrators? You say you are glad OP spoke up, but speaking up was "to the extreme"? For some reason you refuse to believe that 1 incident can be harassment. Hence I gave another example of harassment, asking if this 1 incident would qualify for harassment in your mind AND pointed out the history. You respond by not answering except to be condescending.

[BoneDaddy]

152. Yes,

I believe putting the man's job in jeopardy is extreme. I think telling him it isn't funny is enough for the moment. If he continued doing it then there is an issue, but I think putting his livlihood in danger is extreme.

[uppityperson]

153. Blame the victim, eh?

Sounds like the same reasoning behind: I was late for work because the police pulled me over for speeding. They made me lose my job because I have been habitually late.

If this man's job was put in jeopardy it was due to his own actions, his stupidity in continuing inappropriate remarks.

[Name removed]

156. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

158. If this man's job was put in jeopardy it was due to his own actions, his stupidity in continuing ina

If this man's job was put in jeopardy it was due to his own actions, his stupidity in continuing inappropriate remarks.

[BoneDaddy]

160. I hope

your judges are as severe as you when you screw up.

Edit: oh yeah (smacks head) I totally forgot I am speaking to someone who calls themself Uppityperson, how silly of me.

[Hobarticus]

63. Wow, you should be a Supreme Court judge...

Harrassment is only harrassment, if there's a HISTORY of it?

Do you have any facts to back that up, or is that just an opinion?

Legal definition of harrassment:

The Modern Penal Code section 250.4(MPC) defines harassment as a petty misdemeanor if with purpose is to harass another, he: 1) makes a phone call without a legitimate purpose; or 2) insults, taunts or challenges another in a manner likely to provoke violent or disorderly response; or 3) calls at inconvenient hours or in offensive language; or 4) subjects another to offensive touching; or 5) engages in any other course of alarming conduct serving no legitimate purpose of the actor.

http://www.uslawbooks.com/books/harass.htm

I see nothing that say anything about a history, ie more than one instance, of inappropriate behavior. Matter of fact, apparently all it takes is ONE phone call.

[BoneDaddy]

111. I am taking into consideration the context

of the story. On it's face value you are correct, but the issue we are talking about has to do with one single errant comment. This shmuck, most likely, was making a joke. It was the OP's responsibility to let him know that his joke was not humorous. If he continued it would have been harassment.

I work in a school where shit flies every single day and kids are mean and cruel to one another. If a kid had said what the OP said they would not have been crucified and a simple determination of intent would have been made.

[Hobarticus]

118. Fair 'nuff...

I'll take that. You just have a difference in opinion as to where that line is; meaning you'd wait until the joker kept at it. Fair enough, everyone has different thresholds.

[BoneDaddy]

138. Actually

I may have said something similar to what the OP had said. Her response and what she said to him that he was not funny have never been the targets of my point in this matter.

In a nutshell: The Va Tech shooting and modern life as we know it can be scary. Fear, as we have seen the neo conservatives use is very effective of making people paranoid, willing to give up their civil liberties and turn all of us upon one another. All I am asking for from people is to not over react. Under reacting, as in Cho's case, is unacceptable to me. But so is over reacting. This issue of free speech does have consequences as we have seen lately, but to go ballistic (no pun intended) and seek to perhaps permanently ruin a man's career for a bad joke seems extreme to me.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. No kidding.

Who's harassing whom here?

[BoneDaddy]

112. Yep

It is the thing I hate most about the left. They can often be as small minded, irrational and fear based as the right.

[Hekate]

132. "Professional victim"? This actually protects the Employer.

I once spent a very instructive four years working for the local university's Labor Relations Manager in what was then known as the Personnel department. He handled all the grievances and such, including the ones that ended up as lawsuits against the university, and as the secretary everything came across my desk and I answered all the phone calls, not to mention the walk-ins who would sit by my desk and spill their guts.

Later on I spent 12 years as a County affirmative action commissioner, and that also involves a lot of labor law.

There are a DUers who have more impressive creds than I do by a long shot, but I can at least speak from my own experience, and I can tell you that an employee who shoots off his mouth like that leaves his employer vulnerable, first, by creating a hostile work environmnent, and second, by them being unable to get rid of him cleanly (if it comes to that) if there is nothing in his file to ever indicate he caused problems.

In the wake of a massacre, you just DON'T make "jokes" like that. Once is bad taste, after that it's stupid, and beyond that, it's a hostile work environment and there ARE laws about that.

Hekate

[BoneDaddy]

140. Hostile work environment?

Well I guess that depends on how much you might be looking for it. Do they exist? of course they do, but to describe a individual's stupid comment as creating a hostile work environment? Come on there comes a time when we need to be able to see one another as imperfect.

I am not saying this person should get off scott free, that has never been my concern. But to claim that the OP is a victim in a hostil work environment is ridiculous.

[Hekate]

146. I was enumerating -- thought that made it clear I was referring to hypothetical repeats.

ONCE is stupid bad taste.

Hekate

[BoneDaddy]

151. Why?

It wasn't the case in this situation. This is what bothers me about threads like this. The perceived victim (a woman) and the perceived perp (a man) is enough to bring out everyone's wounded past instead of looking at this as simply and objectively as possible.

When people say things or behave badly we have a choice on how we are going to react. Everything needs to be taken into context. In most of my situations where people are imperfect, I tend to give them a pass and the benefit of the doubt, unless of course they have a long and dangerous history.

I will chance a bet that the OP does not like the guy personally or his politics and this was her chance to push the issue on this because of the most recent shootings. The truth is she totally overreacted and in turn behaved badly as well.

[Hekate]

147. I was enumerating -- thought that made it clear I was referring to hypothetical repeats.

ONCE is stupid bad taste.

Hekate

[Hekate]

120. That's appropriate.It constitutes a reprimand & starts a paper trail.It harms none. nt

[Blashyrkh]

136. Um, that's denying him natural justice.

I think its also clear that you say "CAN BE" and not "ARE". Small difference, which leaves a decision for management to make, which they did. If you don't agree with it, discuss it with your manager, not him.

[MissB]

52. The guy is an idiot and deserves anything he gets.

The idiot should've known that saying such a thing can easily be misconstrued. It isn't even "joke" material.

Nothing like a hostile work environment, eh? I wish I could say I am shocked at some of the comments you've received here.

[BoneDaddy]

56. ONe stupid comment

does not mean it is a "hostile" work environment. Another victim in training...Stop seeing yourself like that, it is pitiful.

[MissB]

59. When someone threatens to shoot up a place, it is often the only comment

before they take action.

Here is an idea: you try that tactic at *your* work place.

:rofl:

[MindPilot]

71. What are your credentials for analyzing workplace violence

and the potential threats thereof?

I hope they are better than mine because all I've got is I've read a book on the subject.

[Hobarticus]

73. So, you have no credentials to either confirm or deny potential threats, either.

Just checking.

[MindPilot]

78. Pretty much my whole point...never said I did. n/t

[Hobarticus]

85. Love it....this stuff just writes itself. eom

[MissB]

79. Where do you (or have you) worked that they take workplace violence so lightly?

:wow:

[MindPilot]

91. I'm a computer support guy for a big corporation

It's not that we take workplace violence lightly, it's that we don't take jokes seriously.

I've had several conversations on the subject with our security chief--an ex FBI agent--simply because I'm curious about the issue. (It was from him I got the one book I read on the subject.) Fundamentally what he says is there is no profile you can apply to single out someone who may snap. As he puts it, "the signs are everywhere and nowhere."

And we've never had any incidents--I guess we've been lucky--or our security team is really good.

[BoneDaddy]

107. So you would nail someone to the proverbial cross

because they made a stupid comment that, most likely, was meant as a joke? What if he was an exemplar employee, had no history of this type of thing and was only guilty of misspeaking?

My point, which has been lost among the fear mongering, is that we cannot either ignore, or magnify such statements because they need to be taken into context with the entirity of the individual involved and not simply react with such ignorance.

[MindPilot]

68. Hostile work environment....the workplace is intrinsically hostile

If it was all warm and nurturing they would have to pay me to show up every day.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

55. Aww.

:nopity:

[Frank Cannon]

67. I can't believe some of the comments in this thread

I consider myself a fairly laughy happy jokey guy, but it's never even entered my mind to joke about workplace violence. I can't even conceive of doing that. I can't believe that some of you actually think that topic might be even remotely funny, particularly in the aftermath of certain current events.

Something is really wrong here, and I don't think it's my sense of humor.

[MindPilot]

70. I don't think anybody thinks it's funny--that's not the issue.

The issue is the gross overreaction to what was probably nothing more than a stupid comment. A guy makes a bad joke and people want him investigated, fired and jailed.

Was it a real threat? Likely not, but if he does show up tomorrow with a cache of weapons, I will be the first to admit I was wrong.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

82. That should bring lots of solace to the victims.

:eyes:

[MindPilot]

94. The guy hasn't done anything...

and you're already counting bodies.

I'll see your :eyes: and raise you a :shrug:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

114. You wrote...

"Was it a real threat? Likely not, but if he does show up tomorrow with a cache of weapons, I will be the first to admit I was wrong."

Without knowing the dynamics of this work place, you are awfully quick to determine the validity of the threat. Secondly, admitting you are wrong after the fact (should he arrive with a cache of weapons), is fucking pointless. I am counting no bodies, but I would suggest a thorough evaluation BEFORE risking the safety of the people in that workplace.

[Hobarticus]

74. Something else, isn't it?

I'm sure there's an office right now, having lotsa laffs about shooting each other in the face at their desks, somewhere, but I guess I don't get the joke.

Now, the guy who made the comment is being HARRASSED? Oh please...

[MissB]

75. Yeah, unless you're 12 years old, it is inappropriate

to joke about workplace violence.

As I said to Bertha earlier, I'm sadly not at all surprised about some of the comments she is receiving here.

[bleedingheart]

77. Where I work he would have been fired immediately.

They do not consider it a "laughing matter"

[MindPilot]

87. I can only barely imagine working in that much of a tight-ass environment

May I ask what you do?

[bleedingheart]

89. technology/engineering (some govt work)

I also want to add that I worked with a disturbed individual once (different company)...he was a regular laugh riot..
used to send the funny emails, would tell silly jokes...but generally he would get a bit out of control.

Over time he started to feel that he wasn't going anywhere in the company and he started to lash out at younger workers...making them the object of his "pranks"...and then..he started stalking one of the coworkers...she got a restraining order...and yet he still retained his job.

It got to the point that some people left the company because they figured one day he would come in with a gun (as he would sometimes "joke)...

In the end he moved in with another woman from work...terrorized her and her son...and then one day her son went into the garage to find him hanging from a rafter...

At the funeral a few people remarked that they were sad he was so depressed but glad that he didn't decide to take anyone else out with him...

[Hobarticus]

90. On this thread, that would be called "overreacting" and "harrassing" him

..to call him out, and get a restraining order. After all, the poor guy is just trying to lighten the mood.

[bleedingheart]

92. I will never know why he wasn't fired after the restraining order was issued

it started out all "innocent"...

young woman starts working for company...
he lives in an area she where she just bought a home.
he offers to help her with some issues at her home ...(he is much older than she is and she thinks he is just being neighborly)..
he starts coming over at odd hours...(meanwhile he is married)...
She tells him to stop..
he doesn't..and tells her that he likes her.
she says..."thanks but no thanks"...
he is offended by her rejection

she gets the restraining order...

The president of our company knew this and didn't do a thing...

he also stalked one of our customers....and didn't get fired...

when he moved in with another woman at work...(he left his wife when she got cancer)...at one point he put in a new floor in her kitchen...and then randomly woke up in the night and pulled it all up with a claw hammer...no clue why...

I also want to add that when I left the company...he actually started calling me at my new job...(gosh that was creepy)...

[MindPilot]

104. It sounds like most of that stuff happened outside of work

but involved people who work together. Sticky situation but not the employer's issue.

However once the guy started stalking a customer, then it is without question something the employer should deal with.

[bleedingheart]

124. no he harrassed her and other employees at work as well at their homes

it wasn't like he turned on his harrassment for the afterhours...

[MrsMatt]

143. Doesn't matter if it was outside of work or not,

harassing behavior by employees against other employees makes the company vulnerable to legal action. (I just had a refresher course in harassment through work a week ago.)

[Hobarticus]

106. Well, I'm just glad you didn't seek advice with some of our fellow DUers...

Funny how the wisecracks dry up, when you get into the particulars of your situation.

All kidding aside, I'm glad you came out safe. That'd be scary as hell, and it must've been frustrating to find people to believe you if you felt afraid.

[slackmaster]

80. Some topics should never be attempted by amateur comedians

Like Hitler jokes.

[MindPilot]

93. Even us pros can fuck that one up.

So this guy dressed as Hitler with an AK on full auto walks into a bar...

Bartender says "what's with the nazi get up?"

Guy says, "it's ok, I work here."


:hide:

Thanks! I'm here all week...

[alkaline9]

83. mixed responses to this thread show the fear that BushCo has put in us...

That being said, It is only those who know the situation (the office dynamics, the admins, the joker, etc) that can really say for sure what level of threat this "joke" implies. I think that if the OP felt threatened by the co-worker's remarks, (s)he has the right to bring it to the attention of anyone in power that is willing to listen.

I'm on the fence about this. While I would not feel all warm inside about the co-worker's comments, I probably would take them as someone just saying something stupid. What bothers me more is the words used by the admins about the person's previous conduct. "He often gets stressed and says INAPPROPRIATE things." #1 just because someone is stressed does not give them a free pass on saying things they should not. #2 if the admins have already pointed out that his actions have been "inappropriate" and nothing has been done, that shows complicity.

There are generally policies in place from the HR dept. to deal with intra-office issues like this one. Speaking up is as much your right as anyone else's right to "free speech" in the workplace. I think that after a review into the co-worker's actions, a group of admins or HR people could decide if his behavior was acceptable or not.

Just my $0.02

[ChairmanAgnostic]

97. it is NOT FUNNY. Every past case where workers went postal,

there were exactly the same kind of statements and behavior.

THIS IS NO JOKE. If your human resources don't do something, tell them you are calling the local state's attorney

[virginia mountainman]

98. Doesn't your workplace have a "no guns policy"??

If so, that will keep you safe..

:sarcasm:

[slackmaster]

150. Mine does, but I figured out a way around it

About two months after starting on the job, I suggested that for a "Team Building Activity" we take the department to an indoor shooting range for an afternoon of firearms safety instruction and live fire. My idea won in a democratic vote, against several other options including paintball and sailing.

The deal included a catered lunch. A fine time was had by all!

[virginia mountainman]

159. Good deal Slack!

When it comes to guns, a HONEST education is the best antidote for paranoia.

[Forkboy]

100. You'd last three days with me before turning me into Homeland Security.

[Blue Diadem]

101. I used to hear people at work say they were going to go "postal" back when

Post Office shootings were happening. I never gave it much thought or felt afraid. When my kids were in school back in the early 90's, a couple kids in town used to get angry and talk about taking a gun to school or on the bus. In fact, I remember worrying about my kids safety and complaining to the principal that someone should talk with one particular kid about those comments and she laughed at me and said certainly I wasn't serious! I knew the kid had access to guns..his father was a deputy. He was a loner and was always picked on. Luckily nothing happened but it wasn't long before the school shootings began happening and those comments were taken very seriously. The other kid who made those types of threats luckily didn't have access to guns..but after he graduated I heard he went to jail/prison for shooting at someone.

I'm torn on the situation Bertha. I'm not sure if the man you speak of, should lose his job or if he should be guided to stress/anger management counseling. At least he's being verbal when he's upset, sometimes I think internalizing that anger leads to violence. The violence I've experienced or witnessed in the workplace never followed a threat..it always came out of the blue by quick tempered idiots.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

102. Well Since He Was Joking, I Find Zero Harm In It.

Even you recognized he was joking. You should really let it go in my opinion. It appears many are making mountains out of molehills.

[Gormy Cuss]

115. Did I understand this correctly --the administrators blew off your concern?

That's worse than what he said. If they acknowledge that he says inappropriate things when he's stressed and those things include suggesting that he would create havoc in the workplace (and potentially injury or death)the administrators are idiots to allow it to continue from a liability standpoint should he ever bring a gun into the place, or otherwise take an action that causes harm to other workers.

That he didn't recognize the need to apologize for scaring you is itself an indication that someone in the organization needs to check this behavior because he's gotten the impression that he has no responsibility for his outbursts. Those who know him may be secure that he's joking and he may mean no harm, but that doesn't excuse the behavior.


Odds are good that it was a meaningless outburst, but unless he owns the place he shouldn't be allowed to vent that way.

[AZBlue]

131. I'd go to someone above the two admins.

Obviously they are too lazy to do their job properly.

And, ignore the imbecilic and moronic detractors on this thread. It's bad enough you have to deal with the creep in your office - now on top of it the creeps come out of the woodwork on DU!

[woo me with science]

133. The arguments here remind me of "zero tolerance" policies in schools

that end up having students expelled for bringing a nail clipper into school by mistake.

The issue is common sense. If you know the guy and have worked with him for awhile, you should have a sense as to whether the comment is serious or not.

I can see instances in which a comment like that could be cause for concern, depending on the person.

I can just as easily see instances in which I would consider the reporter to be completely overreacting.

Context, people....context.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

134. I have so much sympathy for you.

NOT! I think the admins reacted appropriately to what you characterized as a joke.

[Maddy McCall]

135. You recognized that he was joking...the admins recognized that he was joking.

Evidently no history of behavior that would warrant further action.

Maybe you overreacted?

[tammywammy]

141. ditto

[ikojo]

142. My brother would "joke" about such things

and his employer would suspend him for a couple of days. My brother was a sociopath who often fantasized about shooting a bunch of people.

He never did a spree shooting thought. He took his own life on July 17, 2001.

These people SHOULD be taken seriously when they say such things.

[Paladin]

145. I'm Assuming That The Comments Were Made In The U.S.

You people who are making the "It was just a joke"/"You overreacted" statements might have a leg to stand on, if this troubled individual had made his comments in Antwerp, Belgium, or Bath, England, or Tokyo, Japan, or countless other places in advanced countries with properly rigid controls on firearms. But this is the good ol' U.S.A., where lunatics turning offices and schools into slaughterhouses with easily-acquired guns is becoming an ordinary, every-day occurence. The OP did the right thing, and anyone who thinks differently isn't dealing with current realities.....

[uppityperson]

148. How the HELL was this an over reaction? Confront him, tell admin?

I really really don't get the "this was an over reaction" posted here. How was confronting him, telling admin, then posting on DU a forum where we are (sometimes) a community of friends? How is this an over reaction?

[BoneDaddy]

157. Because

if the administration was anything like you and the OP, you would have worked to can him.

[bullwinkle428]

149. Remember the formula : TRAGEDY + TIME = COMEDY

Stephanie Miller & crew bring this up every so often! People often cope with tragic events by using humor, but there should be some sense of decorum about how quickly one chooses to start making jokes about situations. Several months back, I joked with some fellow employees about another co-worker of ours coming in and shooting up the place after some serious turmoil regarding the company changing hands, as he was stressing out in a very over-the-top fashion. Of course, this did NOT happen in the direct wake of tragic shooting that killed lots of people.

It sounds like this guy was extremely insensitive to make a joke like that at this time, but if his history is pretty much stable, I wouldn't worry too much about it...

[bertha katzenengel]

155. Flame. War.

I've been called paranoid. Do I care? Pfft.