The "Suited Shootist" Got Made at Work

[Guerrero]

...and it didn't go well. Video is definitely worth watching.


https://youtu.be/yE6qHwcHoM4

[LittleLebowski]

Twenty minutes? Cliff’s notes?

[shootist26]

Man works in TX and carries in an office that is technically no firearms permitted
Some coworkers are gun people and shooting/gun talk occurs often
Under impression that company policy about CCW is "dont ask don't tell" because he overheard a boss say that or something
Attends generic corporate "active shooter" powerpoint presentation one day
A coworker makes harmless remark to him "oh if there's a shooter, I'm definitely following you"
A short while later gets called into HR and told to lift shirt, roll up pant leg, etc. (probably some 3rd party overheard, and reported it to HR)
Desk gets searched and carry gun is found in work bag
Immediately escorted out and fired
Couldn't find a new job for a year
Wife mega pissed
Etc. Etc. Etc.

This could've been done in like 5 minutes max

[JHC]

Twenty minutes? Cliff’s notes?

Jumping through it, worked in a cool small company. Got acquired by a larger company with lots of HR and rules. In TX most didn't seem to give a hoot.

He shifted to off body carry buried deep in a non-descript container in his bag.

Thought he was slick.

Then some old time co-worker made a quip, "if a bad thing goes down, so and so will get us out alive".

Some pussy overheard that and ratted that wisecrack out to HR.

They searched his shit . . . worst year of his life.

That's as far as I got.

[JHC]

It's a brutal scenario. BTDT. My choice was leetle gun, deep carry. ON BODY

For many years it's been a non-issue as I drafted the fookin' HR policy (we also kept multiple bottles of primo whiskey available and used them).

Now it's WFH.

My sympathies to those under the lash of big HR.

[Artemas2]

So basically if you work in a no guns company, keep you mouth shut and don't have a massive youtube channel...
It sucks on a few levels here, but I'm not even going to bother with the tiny violin on this one.

[jh9]

A short while later gets called into HR and told to lift shirt, roll up pant leg, etc. (probably some 3rd party overheard, and reported it to HR)
Desk gets searched and carry gun is found in work bag


Not that it would have helped him, but if anyone in HR asks me to essentially start disrobing I want that request in writing so when I say "no" I have something to work with for the inevitable lawsuit.*


*- that I wouldn't win because in some states, TX amongst them, your employer is essentially your owner. Still, the "lift shirt, roll up pant leg" has to be out of bounds.

[RevolverRob]

So the moral of the story is:

Don't fucking talk about your interests at work; studiously avoid all conversations related to these and other topics that are expressly verboten in the employee handbook. Whether you're into guns, picking up transvestite hookers, or smoking crack - Don't fucking talk about it; joke about it; elude to it, or otherwise share any information with you coworkers about your proclivities that may be found morally objectionable.

Your topics of conversations can be: Work, Food, Weather, Family

__

I might share with my colleagues that I am restoring a car and therefore bought a tool this weekend of something if asked what I did over the weekend. But usually I answer the, "How was your weekend?" question on Monday morning with a, "It was good. We relaxed and I grilled."

[Default.mp3]

Obligatory repost from an old TPI thread:

Perhaps I am not being specific enough, but here is my point. If you need to work day/in, day out in a business, business casual, or similar type of 'uniform', then I have never seen a setup that will work over time.

I've seen lots of things that will work for a day, or a visit, or a meeting. Yes, you can conceal a SIG in Hickey Freeman, Keswani custom suits, and a host of others. I've done them myself, and it's possible. But when you're going to do it every day, for years at a time, you will eventually be made.

[Maybe I should clarify: Are we perhaps talking past each other due to different definitions of an NPE? I am using the term NPE to mean you CANNOT get made or it will dramatically affect your life, livelihood and/or family. So the 'occasional' bust is unacceptable in what I call an NPE. To clarify - a museum visit with a 'No guns' sign is NOT an NPE; if I get made, I get escorted out - no big deal.]

So for me, guess what - any 'tuckable' holster that has a clip that I can see - is simply useless. If I work with someone for 6 months, and every day they see my clip at 1 o'clock, eventually they will ask. Or wonder. And someone in the office will recognize it and say, I know exactly what that is. From there, refer again to my definition of an NPE.

Todd, I understand what you're saying. However, this sentence here really caught my notice:

When I'm somewhere that has a particularly high penalty for getting caught with a gun, I've opted for something smaller (like a P30 or G19/G26) in SmartCarry.

That is the crux of the matter. The smaller you go, the more concealable it is.

Now if I'm I'm 'visiting' somewhere that has a high penalty, I can dress around it and it doesn't matter; I can hide anything for a day.

But when I'm not visiting, but I actually LIVE there? Then the little tells add up over the months and eventually you get busted. As for me, when I go with a belly-band setup, there are slight adjustments I need to make when I sit/rise, and that's with a PM9. If I try that with my SIG, those adjustments get noticeably more pronounced. And all it takes is 1 day, getting up quickly from a lunch meeting, or talking on the phone next to someone who is sitting at a desk with their face right at waist level, or spilling a drink in a cafe and they see a print, - once again, reread my definition of an NPE.

When you WORK in an office environment, people notice all idiosyncracies over time. The way Bob always lines up his pencils, the way Tom's right shoe always comes undone, the way Mary's bra strap always gets exposed when she wears that shirt, etc., And they BS and gossip about all that crap,the world over. So if you're the guy who always wears a coat - you're a freak and you'll get busted. If you always adjust your pants when you get up, but aren't a fatass - people will notice. If you have a clip on your belt, people will notice. If you have a really fancy, nice custom handmade belts, people will notice.

Finally, two anecdotes - because as we know, the plural of anecdote is data :D

One is from HH, I read it awhile back so I may be misquoting it. HH, please correct and clarify if I am mistaken. He was in a dress environment and the lady he was talking to suddenly asked him if he'd lost a lot of weight in the past. If I remember correctly, he was wearing pants that were custom made to allow him to CCW, and she noticed that the pants were cut slightly larger in the waist than elsewhere.

As for me, I worked in a major consulting firm. I made friends with the secretaries, and was listening to one of their conversations. They had determined which of the new hires had purchased custom suits, which ones were off-the-rack (but high-end) suits, and which ones were just very nice suits. And they were right.

People are generally clueless and unaware - until they're not.

Source: https://www.totalprotectioninteractive.com/forum/forum/main-category/the-codex/15778-living-in-the-npe-building-bruce-wayne?p=271838#post271838

A wonderful thread overall, really. A shame TPI is extra slow these days in just navigating the site, makes digging up old information there a real pain, and certainly doesn't help to generate any traffic, sadly.

Obviously, if the guy got busted with a bag gun, some of the post is moot, but the point that people notice little things still remains, so even if you never talk about guns, just your demeanor, mode of dress, accessory choice, etc. can be tells.

[CCT125US]

That's rough, as someone who very easily could have become that guy.

Many years ago, I was known as the gun guy at work (just sort of happened). I was an instructor, had done carry classes for upper management, sales guys, ladies in accounting. I carried every day in a Smart Carry. Guess what mode of concealment was never mentioned in class?

The things people confide in you, thinking they are being cool. Policy was no guns at work, period. Figured even if I did get burned by the wrong person, it would get shut down by management. I eventually made my exit.

[Hot Sauce]

So the moral of the story is:

Don't fucking talk about your interests at work; studiously avoid all conversations related to these and other topics that are expressly verboten in the employee handbook. Whether you're into guns, picking up transvestite hookers, or smoking crack - Don't fucking talk about it; joke about it; elude to it, or otherwise share any information with you coworkers about your proclivities that may be found morally objectionable.

Your topics of conversations can be: Work, Food, Weather, Family

__

I might share with my colleagues that I am restoring a car and therefore bought a tool this weekend of something if asked what I did over the weekend. But usually I answer the, "How was your weekend?" question on Monday morning with a, "It was good. We relaxed and I grilled."

Sounds like a miserable work environment. Highly professional and disinfected, but highly miserable. There's probably a middle ground between a tell-all book and TMI. Used to be called contextual common sense.

[RevolverRob]

Sounds like a miserable work environment. Highly professional and disinfected, but highly miserable. There's probably a middle ground between a tell-all book and TMI. Used to be called contextual common sense.

Work isn't supposed to be fun; it is supposed to be satisfying.

I've never left work and thought, "I'm really satisfied that we had those three meetings today to discuss casual Friday, gender politics, and the company fun run on Sunday. I'm really happy that Joan-Bob feels comfortable enough in the work environment to share the pictures from their hemophrodite assignment surgery."

When I leave work satisfied is, "I managed to get more than the to-do list done and not get interrupted by bullshit for three hours today."

It's interesting because I am well liked in the office environment. But more than once I've been told that is because I hold myself and others to a high professional standard. No one wonders how they stand with me, because I want to get work done.

And I've found the people who don't like me in the work environment aren't worth wasting time and effort on. They either have nothing of value to offer and/or they quit quickly.

[Hot Sauce]

Work isn't supposed to be fun; it is supposed to be satisfying.

I've never left work and thought, "I'm really satisfied that we had those three meetings today to discuss casual Friday, gender politics, and the company fun run on Sunday. I'm really happy that Joan-Bob feels comfortable enough in the work environment to share the pictures from their hemophrodite assignment surgery."

When I leave work satisfied is, "I managed to get more than the to-do list done and not get interrupted by bullshit for three hours today."

It's interesting because I am well liked in the office environment. But more than once I've been told that is because I hold myself and others to a high professional standard. No one wonders how they stand with me, because I want to get work done.

And I've found the people who don't like me in the work environment aren't worth wasting time and effort on. They either have nothing of value to offer and/or they quit quickly.

My work is fun. And I've made some great friends amongst some of my colleagues, which has benefitted me both in life, at work, and in finding other jobs. I must be doing it wrong.

But please, don't let me stand in your way, that strawman you outlined above is begging to catch a beatdown.

[LittleLebowski]

I’ve never once thought that off body carry was wise, especially nowadays with the Phlster Enigma.

[Rex G]

So basically if you work in a no guns company, keep you mouth shut and don't have a massive youtube channel...
It sucks on a few levels here, but I'm not even going to bother with the tiny violin on this one.

If I remember it right, this happened before he had a you tube channel. Also, this occurred in a changing corporate environment, from a time when guys could openly talk about guns, to new owners changing the landscape.

[blues]

I’ve never once thought that off body carry was wise, especially nowadays with the Phlster Enigma.

"Enigma" seems to be the wrong name for something that's supposed to be the solution.

[RevolverRob]

My work is fun. And I've made some great friends amongst some of my colleagues, which has benefitted me both in life, at work, and in finding other jobs. I must be doing it wrong.

It's possible there are multiple ways to do it right?


But please, don't let me stand in your way, that strawman you outlined above is begging to catch a beatdown.

Glad you're making friends at work. Because here you're not doing so well on the winning friends and influencing people regime. But whatever, maybe you're doing it wrong.

[backtrail540]

I’ve never once thought that off body carry was wise, especially nowadays with the Phlster Enigma.

The first thing that popped in my head was the Demonstrated Concepts method of enigma use. Adjust below belt line while on the way to HR. Nothing to see when shirt lifts etc... Probably plays out better in theory than in real life but seems plausible pending if you can find the correct moment for subtle adjustment.

All this assuming you decide to take the risk of carrying at work.

[TGS]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9fQ4-eqaoE

[Borderland]

We had a no firearms in the building where I worked. I think they were pretty serious about that. I never carried in the office or in a vehicle that was agency property, also a policy. The garage I used to park my personal vehicle was also agency property but a public garage. They couldn't mandate an employee not having a firearm in their personal vehicle. I left my carry there when I went to work. Big sign at the entrance stating they were not responsible for any theft from a personal vehicle so what's in there isn't our concern or our responsibility. Cool, I can deal with it.

Everyone in my office knew I was an avid shooter and hunter because I had discussions about that with friends that I worked with. I had several women ask me about concealed carry because they were contemplating getting a permit and wanted some advice about training. I offered my private range as a guest and instruction without any compensation. I've trained a few women with the safety component, along with some range time.

Trying to skirt around company or agency policy is a fools mission. If you like your job it would be wise to adhere to the firearms policy.

That guy is a dick head. Cry me a river.

[Borderland]

The first thing that popped in my head was the Demonstrated Concepts method of enigma use. Adjust below belt line while on the way to HR. Nothing to see when shirt lifts etc... Probably plays out better in theory than in real life but seems plausible pending if you can find the correct moment for subtle adjustment.

All this assuming you decide to take the risk of carrying at work.

Or just deposit the GD pistol in the locker they need to provide for people who carry into a restricted building. We had those.

[blues]

Or just deposit the GD pistol in the locker they need to provide for people who carry into a restricted building. We had those.

I think the guy freely admits he fucked up. Must be nice to go through life without a blemish.

[Borderland]

I think the guy freely admits he fucked up. Must be nice to go through life without a blemish.

Oh, I've had a few blemishes, but I never got fired from a job.

[HCM]

Or just deposit the GD pistol in the locker they need to provide for people who carry into a restricted building. We had those.

If you had lockers for your gun you were lucky to have them.

Private businesses don’t need to provide shit.

Many states, including TX mandate the ability to have a gun in your car in the parking lot. That’s it.

[pangloss]

People make choices and get to face the consequences. Count me among those who never carry at work. I do occasionally mention guns at work, but when non-gun people want to talk about hobbies, I start talking about soap making.

Sent from my moto e5 cruise using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Oh, I've had a few blemishes, but I never got fired from a job.

*takes a drink*

Oh, are we not playing "never have I ever..."?

[Borderland]

If you had lockers for your gun you were lucky to have them.

Private businesses don’t need to provide shit.

Many states, including TX mandate the ability to have a gun in your car in the parking lot. That’s it.

Then he probably should have kept his gun in his vehicle if he liked his job.

[CleverNickname]

One thing I like about telecommuting is I can have a loaded Glock sitting on my desk and my coworkers don't say anything about it.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Is it visible in zoom along with having no pants?

Anyway, if the law and/or employer rules are clear, you have to be aware of the consequences. I was known to be a firearms person but I also knew the rules. Of course, I was protected by tenure but did get flack from some for my opinions. As I did say before, I spoke out for gun rights but I was the only faculty member who did. Another did write an op-ed for the local paper but in meetings was quiet. It was thought that it was a waste of time, that might have been and still be true.

In academia today, lose a good position and you are toasted.

[CleverNickname]

Is it visible in zoom along with having no pants?
We don't do videoconferencing, just audio.

[HCM]

Then he probably should have kept his gun in his vehicle if he liked his job.

You’re assuming that’s an option in his state.

[WobblyPossum]

I thought the video was worth a listen. These are consequences many people don’t contemplate in the depth that they should as they make their life decisions. I’m glad someone liked to the TPI Building Bruce Wayne thread. I’ve been meaning to reread it. I’m a bing fan of a lot of the ideas that Claude Werner shares regarding carding guns at work.

In my career field, I don’t have to worry about any consequences coming from people knowing I’m carrying a gun. That doesn’t mean my life circumstances will always be the same. One day I’ll be retired from this job but I’ll likely continue to work just for something to do. It’s for those future circumstances I really pay attention during these discussions.

[Hot Sauce]

You’re assuming that’s an option in his state.
This is an important point that ought to be highlighted.

This article is a few years old (https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/dear-littler-do-i-have-allow-guns-workplace), so I don't vouch for the accuracy of the minutie.

The general things it notes are that half of states have no laws preventing a company policy that legally bars storage of guns in a car parked on a company lot.

It also starts out with a Dear Abby style question, with company leadership getting the willies after hearing that someone's got a gun nearby on company property. I think this probably falls in line with the view of the faceless corporate everyman.

Again, using common sense would be prudent. Regardless of what your state laws allow, telling someone you got a gun waiting for you in your car is unwise. That's not the same thing as discussing your hobbies.


I’m a vice president of a retail company operating in five states. While visiting one of our stores, I overheard some employees talking about their handguns. One mentioned keeping her firearm in her car, while another said he has a concealed carry permit. I don’t like the idea of firearms in the workplace at all – brought in by employees or customers. Can we create a blanket policy prohibiting all weapons anywhere on company property, including the parking lots?


—Nervous in Nashville

As everything else to do with gun laws, it's a complete patchwork.

https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/picture-3.png
https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2020/06/parking-lot-laws-their-content-and-applicability/

[jh9]

This is an important point that ought to be highlighted.

This article is a few years old (https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/dear-littler-do-i-have-allow-guns-workplace), so I don't vouch for the accuracy of the minutie.

The general things it notes are that half of states have no laws preventing a company policy that legally bars storage of guns in a car parked on a company lot.

It also starts out with a Dear Abby style question, with company leadership getting the willies after hearing that someone's got a gun nearby on company property. I think this probably falls in line with the view of the faceless corporate everyman.

Again, using common sense would be prudent. Regardless of what your state laws allow, telling someone you got a gun waiting for you in your car is unwise. That's not the same thing as discussing your hobbies.



As everything else to do with gun laws, it's a complete patchwork.

https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/picture-3.png
https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2020/06/parking-lot-laws-their-content-and-applicability/

The map is interesting. It lists Texas as "employees" while car carry is legal without an LTC for "everyone". So I'm not entirely clear on what the map is illustrating.

edit: Company policy doesn't matter outside employees. If Wal-Mart's policy is people can't have guns in their parking lot that's great. It has zero impact on anyone with an LTC in Texas, a CCW in AL, etc. The distinction on the map is odd because it doesn't seem to matter.

[HeavyDuty]

The map is interesting. It lists Texas as "employees" while car carry is legal without an LTC for "everyone". So I'm not entirely clear on what the map is illustrating.

I’m guessing it’s where the right to parking lot storage is protected by law.

[jh9]

I’m guessing it’s where the right to parking lot storage is protected by law.

Yeah, I guess that's where my confusion is. I've held an LTC in TX and a permit in AL both. Unless I'm employed by the company in question I don't really care what their "parking lot" policy is because it doesn't matter.

[Clusterfrack]

I do not carry at work, and if I did I wouldn’t tell you. I don’t welcome discussions of a personal nature in the workplace, and definitely don’t discuss self defense topics.

My early career training included the concepts that no one at work can be purely a friend, that every interaction with a coworker has professional consequences. Might sound cynical, but I think it’s actually better to see it that way.

[Cecil Burch]

I’m glad so many people on this forum are perfect and always know the right thing to do. So you probably don’t need to watch that video or listen to anything Alex has to say.

But for most people, who don’t think about these things and do t really experience them until it’s too late, they just may gain something from listening. The video is there as a warning. He did not have to do it at all, but he did to help others who may face that same conundrum someday.

Someone mentioned a particular thread on TPI. There were actually multiple ones where guys like Claude Werner, Chris Fry, and myself - with all of us who were used to living in the real world under restrictive conditions- trying to tell the gun professionals that these things could happen. And we were laughed at and made fun of, and argued with - with some well known folks being on that side - and told it was no big deal and it was easy to carry a duty size gun in any area always. Now 1O years later, more people are realizing the reality, but it’s still not a popular notion, and newer people get bombarded with moronic messages that it’s easy to carry, you will never get made, “just find a new job ( and ignore the fact you might be 15 years into a profession and the schooling you did before but who cares? Just get a new career)”, and if you do get caught just stand by your second amendment rights.

The above video is a good attempt to try to help people learn from his mistakes. You don’t like it? Cool, you can go your own way, but insulting someone who is trying to do something positive, and assuming tons of ignorant facts without checking just makes you look foolish.

[Borderland]

You’re assuming that’s an option in his state.



He said he was in TX. You said yourself that he was protected by state law.




Many states, including TX mandate the ability to have a gun in your car in the parking lot. That’s it.

[Jim Watson]

Geez, I worked for a government agency and the idea of wearing a gun to work never even entered my mind.
Ever, 31 years.
I was well known as a Gun Person, not a detriment in that time and this area, I feel it got me on some interesiing projects.

[RevolverRob]

I do not carry at work, and if I did I wouldn’t tell you. I don’t welcome discussions of a personal nature in the workplace, and definitely don’t discuss self defense topics.

My early career training included the concepts that no one at work can be purely a friend, that every interaction with a coworker has professional consequences. Might sound cynical, but I think it’s actually better to see it that way.

Before I went to my first professional conference my mentor sat me down and said, "From here on out - every single interaction you have, particularly with new people - until you get tenure if you get tenure - is a job interview."

It was and remains absolutely great advice to keep in mind that all interactions can have an impact on your career until you arrive at a protected place. And if you want to get that protection and keep that protection you'll act in a professional manner.

Which is why one of my pet peeves in the workplace is when ostensible established professionals try to play "gotcha games" with other people and find ways to "teach the youngins a lesson". Everyone has it hard enough trying to do their job and conform to ever changing standards for people to also be assholes and try to catch them acting in unprofessional ways. Which is why I try very hard to always be professional and I hold others to those standards.

Only twice in my career has someone called me unprofessional and in both cases they were steadfastly wrong and realized it quickly. Although only once did I get an apology, the other person is still carrying a grudge about it.


He said he was in TX. You said yourself that he was protected by state law.

It's important to know the law protecting people in this way was not passed until 2011.

[JRB]

About 4 years ago I got a panicked call from a friend of mine. He's a medical professional that was carrying a G42 in the most NPE of NPE's and he'd been 'made' and was about to face the music with some sort of HR/Supervisory stuffed suit types. They told him to report to room XYZ and talk to some people ASAP. Totality of circumstance he knew it had to do with carrying a gun.

So I told him to just leave. At first he was really freaked out about pissing off his supervisor, being charged leave, etc. I told him 'would you rather be charged leave and have an annoyed boss, or would you rather get fired?'.

So he told his supervisor that something came up - he rolled with the punches well, and said his wife ran out of gas on the interstate and they didn't have roadside assistance. So he just up and left. His supervisor said to go to that meeting first, he said his wife was stranded on the highway and it could wait. So he took the black eye on his record for having left in the middle of a shift, and was charged leave for doing so. But they never 'made him'.

Two weeks later, the suits drop by his floor while he's on shift and pull him away. They searched his shit and the hospital security (who he was friends with) gave a genuinely thorough pat-down. He'd quit carrying after the scare, so he wasn't made.
He was grilled about leaving in the middle of a shift, he gave up some leave, but he wasn't looking for a new job for having been fired for carrying a gun.

I personally wouldn't ever carry in an NPE. Because honestly if that's the place's policy, my policy is fuck them and fuck everyone else I'm just leaving the second I hear shots fired, and if they get shot for their managers rendering them defenseless for feel good stupid bullshit, that's on their management and the blood is on their hands as much as the murderers - and I'll happily tell a news crew exactly that.
But if you carry in an NPE, be willing to piss off your boss by just up and leaving or having a similar exit strategy to avoid getting made.

[Mark D]

I thought the Suited Shootist's video was good. He's honest about fucking up, and owns it. He made some stupid decisions and freely admits that. For those that haven't watched the video, his incident occurred a while ago and his career seems to have recovered, albeit after a very rough patch.

I have friends who talk about how easy it would be to carry in a NPE office job, despite not working in that environment themselves. The video is a splash of cold reality for those folks, and therein lies its value.

[olstyn]

My early career training included the concepts that no one at work can be purely a friend, that every interaction with a coworker has professional consequences. Might sound cynical, but I think it’s actually better to see it that way.

It is cynical, and it sucks, but you are also not wrong.

[mmc45414]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9fQ4-eqaoE"Wow, that is slippery..."

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[mmc45414]

Someone mentioned a particular thread on TPI. There were actually multiple ones where guys like Claude Werner, Chris Fry, and myself - with all of us who were used to living in the real world under restrictive conditions- trying to tell the gun professionals that these things could happen. ... and told it was no big deal and it was easy to carry a duty size gun in any area always.

I recollect an interesting podcast with CW where he (in support of his advocacy of small revolvers as a primary) challenged people to take a seasonal side job at some prohibited place like Home Depot (where it wouldn't end a career to get fired ETA:and includes more physical activity than taking a selfie in front of a mirror) to prove they could go a a few months without being busted with their full size gun in an NPE.

[Wheeler]

A few years ago there was a rather spirited debate about carrying full sized guns in NPEs. The two camps were those that argued that it could be done on a daily basis and those who chose smaller guns as an alternative in order to not be made. I can’t recall if it was on this forum or on social media and it really doesn’t matter at this point. I’m glad to see that folks are starting to understand that carrying a small gun is a viable alternative for folks that don’t have a lot of choices or tolerance in their work environment.

[Wheeler]

I recollect an interesting podcast with CW where he (in support of his advocacy of small revolvers as a primary) challenged people to take a seasonal side job at some prohibited place like Home Depot (where it wouldn't end a career to get fired ETA:and includes more physical activity than taking a selfie in front of a mirror) to prove they could go a a few months without being busted with their full size gun in an NPE.

I’m an electrician by trade and spend a lot of time in office and retail spaces. I’ve tried most every form of on body carry available and have concluded that pocket carry of a small gat is the most effective method for me. AIWB might be an alternative except I wear a tool belt and end up in a lot of odd positions, like laying on the ground, seated on the ground, bent over backwards to access under cabinets, etc.

Claude and I have discussed it at length as I was looking for better options. My final decision was based on the premise that I had no intentions of trying to quick draw against someone and would have to adjust accordingly.

I gave up on trying to convince folks that my method suited me fine and didn’t want or need their advice which was formed by an unrealistic view of how things work outside of their own narrow perceptions.

[mmc45414]

I wear a tool belt and end up in a lot of odd positions, like laying on the ground, seated on the ground, bent over backwards to access under cabinets, etc.
Sometimes I would say to people something like "Sure, you can stand still in front of the mirror for a photo, but could you go out and wash your car in your driveway without the neighbors seeing it?"

[Le Français]

This story is a good reminder—good for him for (albeit very long-windedly) trying to warn people about miscalculating the odds and stakes.

Most of us have probably heard a lot of chest-thumping silliness (I’ve read it here) about carrying guns into Mexico, carrying despite “no gun” signs with the force of law, keeping ARs after a “turn them in” ban (which is a very similar situation), etc. It’s not lost on me that most of these optimists have never been to prison.

[rob_s]

I could have been that guy.

Small local GC. Carried almost every day. Acquired by larger, publicly-traded company. Former owners stayed on, and their rifle and shotgun collections stayed in their offices. Figured “goose/gander” and kept carrying. Fiancé got sick, economy went in the shitter, keeping A job got more critical, find a new job became harder, making THIS job more critical, stopped carrying at work.

I personally view a lot of these workplace carry issues the same way I do HOAs and other things. People opt in to them to one degree or another. Then they also want THEIR right to bear arms to trump their boss’s right to control what happens on their private property.

Growing up in a “right to work” state I suppose I came away with a pretty unsympathetic perspective on employment.

[BehindBlueI's]

I recollect an interesting podcast with CW where he (in support of his advocacy of small revolvers as a primary) challenged people to take a seasonal side job at some prohibited place like Home Depot (where it wouldn't end a career to get fired ETA:and includes more physical activity than taking a selfie in front of a mirror) to prove they could go a a few months without being busted with their full size gun in an NPE.

I went about a year carrying a 1911 in a Smart Carry. It wasn't a real physical job, mostly desk drone stuff, but I did occasionally have to crawl under a desk for a cable or something.

If anyone noticed a slight bulge, they didn't say anything. Of course, one of the girls in the Training branch did seem real interested in going to lunch with me...

A lot will depend on body size and shape as well. I was definitely obese at the time, still in my post-Army "Fuck everything, let's get drunk!" phase.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

So if HR calls you for a meeting, you won't tell them that you had a boating accident?

Sorry - Le Fran! I agree with what you said. Too much absolutism, like leave your job or state over some sort of ban. Life isn't that easy.

[olstyn]

I personally view a lot of these workplace carry issues the same way I do HOAs and other things. People opt in to them to one degree or another. Then they also want THEIR right to bear arms to trump their boss’s right to control what happens on their private property.

The number of medium to large corporations which don't have prohibitive policies is pretty small, at least as far as I understand. Your employment opportunities in a LOT of fields are significantly reduced if you decide that you can't work anywhere with prohibitive policies, and even if you do find one, there's no guarantee that corporate policy won't change tomorrow.

[Cory]

Most of us have probably heard a lot of chest-thumping silliness (I’ve read it here) about carrying guns into Mexico, carrying despite “no gun” signs with the force of law, keeping ARs after a “turn them in” ban (which is a very similar situation), etc. It’s not lost on me that most of these optimists have never been to prison.

I don't carry at work, and it bothers me to be without. A blade is very acceptable (in fact, expected. Damn near a requirement). I do what I can do.

That being said, I view keeping ARs after a ban as completely different. We each make our own choices, and the way you evaluate the risk/reward doesn't have to match to have mutual respect. Often someone who has put in an honest assessment and come to a different conclusion is instantly dismissed as "chest thumping silliess" or outright stupid because their choice is different. Don't always assume the evaluation didn't happen. Not directed at you Le Français just kind of a general pet peeve when everyone assumes others haven't been diligent in choice making.

[Yung]

I think making a decision to not carry at work is probably the easiest part compared to taking whatever steps are necessary to not leaving the gun at home (or perhaps even having to leave the gun at home) and adapting everything else accordingly.

I also wasn't aware that Alex started making videos. I still look at his blog sometimes, though a lot of it doesn't really fit into my circumstances.

[rob_s]

The number of medium to large corporations which don't have prohibitive policies is pretty small, at least as far as I understand. Your employment opportunities in a LOT of fields are significantly reduced if you decide that you can't work anywhere with prohibitive policies, and even if you do find one, there's no guarantee that corporate policy won't change tomorrow.

I still fail to see the issue.

While I can agree it sucks, particularly if somewhere you work either changes the rules or gets acquired (as happened in my case), it’s still the rules and (as a right to work state makes clear) you have a right to A job, but not necessarily THIS job.

Since my general views on carry are often counter the the majority here, that likely contributes to my opinion on this as well

[rob_s]

I don't carry at work, and it bothers me to be without. A blade is very acceptable (in fact, expected. Damn near a requirement). I do what I can do.

That being said, I view keeping ARs after a ban as completely different. We each make our own choices, and the way you evaluate the risk/reward doesn't have to match to have mutual respect. Often someone who has put in an honest assessment and come to a different conclusion is instantly dismissed as "chest thumping silliess" or outright stupid because their choice is different. Don't always assume the evaluation didn't happen. Not directed at you Le Français just kind of a general pet peeve when everyone assumes others haven't been diligent in choice making.

I think the original post was less about the actual activity of keeping a newly-illegal forearm and more about the bravado on gun forums relative to hypotheticals about non-issues from the safety of a situation where the threat doesn’t actually exist.

In other words, everybody is a tough guy on the internut.

[Cory]

I think the original post was less about the actual activity of keeping a newly-illegal forearm and more about the bravado on gun forums relative to hypotheticals about non-issues from the safety of a situation where the threat doesn’t actually exist.

In other words, everybody is a tough guy on the internut.

I understood the original post, and was addressing the reply I quoted.

Bravado on the internet is a given and a cavalier attitude about the risks is foolish. My point (which I fear was misunderstood) is that making a choice that others don't agree with, doesn't mean considerable evaluation didn't happen. It's not always about bravado when some makes a choice that has incredible consequences if it doesn't work out.

Thats all I'm trying to say. No more - no less.

[Le Français]

I don't carry at work, and it bothers me to be without. A blade is very acceptable (in fact, expected. Damn near a requirement). I do what I can do.

That being said, I view keeping ARs after a ban as completely different. We each make our own choices, and the way you evaluate the risk/reward doesn't have to match to have mutual respect. Often someone who has put in an honest assessment and come to a different conclusion is instantly dismissed as "chest thumping silliess" or outright stupid because their choice is different. Don't always assume the evaluation didn't happen. Not directed at you Le Français just kind of a general pet peeve when everyone assumes others haven't been diligent in choice making.

I sympathize with not being able to carry at work; it’s too bad that so many find themselves in this circumstance.

As for the AR ban issue, I have respect for the people who make bad choices (or resolve to make them in the future), but I do not respect the bad choices.

Let’s say—thankfully it’s not likely—that Florida passed a “turn them in” AR ban enforceable as a felony, and that you decided to keep yours. Live fire practice with them would be extremely risky, and out of the question at public ranges. Defensive use of them would likewise expose you, unless you covered up the shooting entirely (new set of problems). Even having them in your house would be risky; a visit by firefighters, EMS, or police for some unrelated reason could expose you, as could any other person who happened to see them.

So, what would be the point? Would it be to bury them somewhere in hopes of being able to dig them up after a hypothetical societal collapse?

I’m not putting these words in your mouth, but realize that a lot of people who talk a big game about keeping banned guns mean that they’d be keeping them so they could shoot it out with the “tyrannical cops” who would eventually come knocking. If that’s on any level part of your plan, I urge you to reconsider.

[rob_s]

I understood the original post, and was addressing the reply I quoted.

Bravado on the internet is a given and a cavalier attitude about the risks is foolish. My point (which I fear was misunderstood) is that making a choice that others don't agree with, doesn't mean considerable evaluation didn't happen. It's not always about bravado when some makes a choice that has incredible consequences if it doesn't work out.

Thats all I'm trying to say. No more - no less.

And I think maybe you DID miss the point, which is that an opinion, considered or not, against a hypothetical and non-experienced threat isn’t exactly the same thing as when one is facing a real threat, or hasn’t experienced the consequence (e.g. his original point about having not served prison time themselves) first hand.

[Cory]

And I think maybe you DID miss the point, which is that an opinion, considered or not, against a hypothetical and non-experienced threat isn’t exactly the same thing as when one is facing a real threat, or hasn’t experienced the consequence (e.g. his original point about having not served prison time themselves) first hand.

I understood your point, but you failed to acknowledge mine. That's okay. I still respect you. I don't feel the need to explain my position any further.

[olstyn]

I still fail to see the issue.

The issue, in my view at least, is that corporations say one thing and do another in regard to the policies in question. They SAY they care about employee safety, but what they DO is make it impossible for employees to take responsibility for their own safety.


While I can agree it sucks, particularly if somewhere you work either changes the rules or gets acquired (as happened in my case), it’s still the rules and (as a right to work state makes clear) you have a right to A job, but not necessarily THIS job.

At least we agree that it sucks, and to be 100% clear, I do not violate the rules at my job - I just quietly grumble to myself about them and cringe every time I have to take the "active shooter" training because it's so incredibly stupid/tone deaf, possibly even more so than the sexual harassment/everybody is offended all the time about everything training, which is incredibly eye-roll-inducing. I am also VERY thankful for the fact that COVID resulted in essentially my whole department shifting to primarily WFH so carry at work is not really an issue for me anymore. That doesn't mean every time I see an email go by about some employees who actually have to be on site getting mugged on the way in/out of buildings I don't think "geez, if that was me I'd be even more pissed than usual that they tell me I can't carry," though.

Basically my only real disagreement with you is your point about "opting in" - I don't think there's a lot of choice out there in companies to work for which don't have policies banning employees from carrying, and asking about that during the interview process could easily get you deselected at a lot of places, even if you carefully frame the question as just wanting to know what you'd be getting into.

[LOKNLOD]

The issue, in my view at least, is that corporations say one thing and do another in regard to the policies in question. They SAY they care about employee safety, but what they DO is make it impossible for employees to take responsibility for their own safety.


Corporations about minimizing risk to themselves. Sometimes this aligns with keeping employees safe, sometimes with keeping employees "safe". An employee that gets injured/harmed/scared by a policy they endorse (allowing guns) is a much higher risk to them than if someone is injured/harmed/scared by someone violating a policy they endorse (no guns). Simply put, if you're hurt by a gun they allowed someone to have, it's worse for them in court than if you are hurt by a gun they said someone shouldn't have. That's all. Whether or not someone gets hurt is a moot point.

[Le Français]

And I think maybe you DID miss the point, which is that an opinion, considered or not, against a hypothetical and non-experienced threat isn’t exactly the same thing as when one is facing a real threat, or hasn’t experienced the consequence (e.g. his original point about having not served prison time themselves) first hand.

Pretty much. Again, I don’t pretend to know exactly what Cory is contemplating, but some people on this topic engage in some weapons-grade fantasies. And if anyone reads this and gets hot under the collar thinking about their rights, consider what it would actually be like to sit at the defendant’s table, a few rows ahead of your family, waiting to be sentenced to years (or life, depending on how bad the choices were) in a maximum security prison, with all that that entails for everyone in your life.

[olstyn]

Corporations about minimizing risk to themselves. Sometimes this aligns with keeping employees safe, sometimes with keeping employees "safe". An employee that gets injured/harmed/scared by a policy they endorse (allowing guns) is a much higher risk to them than if someone is injured/harmed/scared by someone violating a policy they endorse (no guns). Simply put, if you're hurt by a gun they allowed someone to have, it's worse for them in court than if you are hurt by a gun they said someone shouldn't have. That's all. Whether or not someone gets hurt is a moot point.

100% understood, and have long been disappointed with the fact that that's the world we live in.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I went to seminars on the school shootings. Several points were made. First, the university's priority is the outcome for the university. It is not for you. Besides the ideological opposition to firearms which is strong, they also consider the risks. The risk people say that you have limited liability for the actions of criminal actors who invade the school. Unless the institution has clear knowledge of a threat, they are not reasonable for running an armed and secure camp.

We were told that they may be reasonable for the actions of their campus security officers and some argued for them to be unarmed. However, the enrollment impact of not having security counterbalances this. In TX, campuses had officers who were real LEOs. This sometimes went awry as in the Incarnate Word case where a campus officer decided to act off campus in a traffic stop: https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2020/05/22/texas-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-cameron-redus-family-to-allow-wrongful-death-lawsuit/

However, according to the seminar, if campus carry was allowed and a community member either went nuts or shot an innocent in an incident, the school could be held responsible or have to settle. Given the lack of training of most CCW types, that increased their negative appraisal of carry. Yes, there are courses for campus carry out there. Constitutional carry would make them even more fearful but TX schools that allow carry require a LTC.

The point being from other situations that third party attackers don't have that much liabilty risk as employees screwing up. There are precedents in other domains for that. Gun folk posture that the institution might be liable but that hasn't been clearly demonstrated in denying carry.

Having carry laws that free you from liability in SD actions might help the schools but probably not convincing. They probably wouldn't cover the campus carrier going nuts at the faculty meeting. Anyway the point is that the risk to you doesn't matter, the risk to the school does. It is the same for other institutions, I'm told.

Does an institution have a responsibility for its own armed guards or cops? Don't see that precedent anywhere.

Also, if you are known as the gun guy - folks might expect YOU to protect them. Your instinct might be to hunker down or get out of Dodge, but your colleagues will expect YOU to be Superduperman or woman. I've done what HCM called the hobbyist road in the gun world. I am not HCM, the trained officer - I'll share a burger with him or run into him at B Daddy BBQ, take a class together - but I'm not running to save the day. I don't want my colleagues expecting that. A couple implied I should - I said, NO thanks - I save me. You could train up and you don't.

Anyway, I'm out of that game and now in a smaller town away from college risks. The mall, the store - maybe and I'm legal here. Still not Superduperman. At least, I'm not advocating the open carry of a BP 1851 revolver in a cross drawer holster because I can't hit a target with a 1911 (another forum). LOL on that one.

[octagon]

Pretty much. Again, I don’t pretend to know exactly what Cory is contemplating, but some people on this topic engage in some weapons-grade fantasies. And if anyone reads this and gets hot under the collar thinking about their rights, consider what it would actually be like to sit at the defendant’s table, a few rows ahead of your family, waiting to be sentenced to years (or life, depending on how bad the choices were) in a maximum security prison, with all that that entails for everyone in your life.

But couldn't a reasonable person also consider laying on the coroners table in front of their family with all that entails for everyone in their life because of their choice as well?

It is a tough choice regardless of which way a person chooses. Evaluating the risks/benefits carefully and adjusting as necessary if things change for or against the original choice. After that accept the responsibility and the outcome if you get caught or need to use the tool. It seems fairly straight forward for a number of convenience store employees or Uber/Lyft drivers who made the news. It also isn't the same finding another job as in academia or similar white collar fields. I respect a person's decision either way as it is theirs to make. Hopefully after careful consideration and not just disregard or casual thought.

[Bergeron]

I'm a member of that Facebook group, and I feel really bad for what happened to that guy.

My entire career has happened in extreme NPEs. Office environments, field environments, as a "company man", as a contractor, onshore, offshore, test ranges, campuses, the mere presence of guns has always been deeply forbidden with high consequences for non-compliance. I've been lucky to have a fun and professionally successful career, but a part of my professional "value proposition" is that I'm highly and enthusiastically compliant in all sorts of ways. While I like to be able to carry, I've never tried to carry in any sort of professional setting.

I'd echo the point that off-body carry has negatives that can easily outweigh the positives. There are levels to NPEs, and the work ones that I've been in have all been the most severe. If I was ever going to try anything (and I won't), I wouldn't try anything more than a LCP in a pocket holster designed to both break up the outline of the gun and present a pocket without bulges. I once spent a year, in the middle of a divorce, stringing together various "underemployment" jobs until I could get back into a career-level position. For me, it's just nowhere near worth having to go jobless/underemployed. As an additional plus, getting fired (and, depending on exactly which job, facing real legal consequences as well) for a weapons violation would have made it damn hard to get back into the career fields that I like. A weapons violation would be about as bad as a company-time DUI for me.

One job gave me a company car with free gas and maintenance, and that was explicitly approved for additional personal use. But no guns in the car, ever, and no more car on the first offense. I was good at that job, but I put 40k miles on a company car in 6 months in order to be good at that job. No car would have ultimately meant losing that job.

Firearms, and firearm-adjacent work is salted through my resume. "Gun Systems Engineer" is a part of my resume, and I did some small-arms related work with my current employer back a decade-plus ago that my management and my co-workers already know about. While work is busy, and there's little time for truly useless small talk, I can't avoid being associated with guns.

Employers only see liability, harm, and workplace violence when it comes to guns. If it's a small enough company, or if the insurance terms are atypical, then I could see it, but I've never had, and probably never will experience a pro-gun or gun-neutral workplace. I had a college-level summer job where housing was provided, and guns in that employer-provided housing were very forbidden.:p

The closest I've ever come to a real lethal-force incident was in a gun free zone, a fact that I think will surprise exactly no one on this board. In my current gun free work zone, there have been multiple incidents that required a law enforcement intervention. Those policies and signs still stay in place.

[Le Français]

But couldn't a reasonable person also consider laying on the coroners table in front of their family with all that entails for everyone in their life because of their choice as well?

If we're talking about carrying at work, sure. A convenience store clerk might decide to carry against the company's rules, so as to have better chances of surviving a robbery attempt, and actually being alive to look for another entry-level job afterwards.

However, I was addressing the subject of keeping an AR after a severe ban, which Cory suggested he was more likely to do than to carry at work against the rules. The reasoning I've seen for that kind of decision has not ventured into more convincing territory than "it's my right", which I'm saying is very cold comfort to your wife and kid when you're gone. Fortunately, a ban is unlikely, and so people can fantasize about whatever they want without much of a chance of ever having to face the music.

If they did face the music one day, and either found themselves shot by LEOs after opening fire with their precious AR, or sitting at the defendant's table with their young kid crying in the background, I would be willing to wager that they would regret not turning in the AR and buying a 1301T.

It's extremely doubtful that there would exist a scenario wherein not having a banned AR (versus a hypothetically legal alternative like a semi-auto shotgun, a lever gun, or a handgun) would be the deciding factor that would result in someone's death.

In no way am I arguing for AR bans, of course. But some people are just lying to themselves.

[Bio]

My workplace has a "no weapons" policy, but at least they foot the bill for armed security.

It was really interesting a few years ago: Corporate HQ brought in a couple consultants (former bigwigs in the Boston PD who had formed a consulting company). Their whole 4-ish hour presentation was basically a bunch of scenarios, not all workplace related, and what one might do in those scenarios to stay alive. What kinds of cover to use, improvised weapons, consciously evaluating exit routes in unfamiliar places, etc. It went way beyond the "run, hide, fight" video we get every year.

There was a really interesting turn at the end where one of the guys was like "I know corporate policy is that you're not allowed to carry here, but you've got to decide what you need to do to keep yourself safe". We had a guy hired by corporate HQ not very obliquely telling us to ignore corporate policy if we felt it was necessary. It was an odd situation. I've never heard of anyone getting "made" at work, so I can't guess as to the consequences.

[olstyn]

We had a guy hired by corporate HQ not very obliquely telling us to ignore corporate policy if we felt it was necessary. It was an odd situation. I've never heard of anyone getting "made" at work, so I can't guess as to the consequences.

That's a wacky scenario. You have to wonder what company leadership thought about that part of the presentation.

[BehindBlueI's]

I just want to point out that hypothetically someone could have committed a felony in a state like say NY by purchasing an AR lower (which is not yet semiautomatic, but does have a collapsable stock) and tossing an upper on it.

Hypothetically they could still regularly shoot on private land, and enjoy and practice with the rifle. Some regions are very rural and make this possible. Capable of defense, hunting, and enjoyment. Hypothetically their could be plenty of these people.

Absolutely illegal. And the risks are very real. Not everyone who talks about these topics is discussing "pretend" consequences. The consequences can be very real, and people may still choose to face the risk of them. Sometimes legal, some times career impacting.

-an anonymous member

[Borderland]

I still fail to see the issue.

While I can agree it sucks, particularly if somewhere you work either changes the rules or gets acquired (as happened in my case), it’s still the rules and (as a right to work state makes clear) you have a right to A job, but not necessarily THIS job.

Since my general views on carry are often counter the the majority here, that likely contributes to my opinion on this as well

My general view on carry is I carry where I can. There are lots of places I can't carry in this state. My employers offices was one of them. All clearly posted and enforced. There was no campus security on board when I checked in at 6 AM and the only ones I saw were on a duty desk during the hours that the public was able to access the building. Mostly rent-a-cop. There were lots of cameras around though. Security wasn't what I would call adequate for employee safety. About all they could do is fire someone who violated policy. We had some unstable employees working in my division. Because I was there only briefly early in the morning and a few minutes in the afternoon I wasn't overly concerned about an employee who went postal but I wouldn't have been shocked if one had. A few times I had to divert my assigned parking because of a threat. No access to my assigned parking facility because of a lock down. Easy, I just diverted to the sheriffs compound.

They really should have had 24/7 security like the military but they don't. Some day one of the employees is going to enter those offices with a firearm and the death toll will be yuge. There were a lot of disgruntled employees there, including some supervisors.

I liked hanging out at the agency garage where the sheriffs hung out. I knew there were a few accessible duty pistols available if I needed one.

One thing about being a sheriffs deputy is you have access to a firearm when you need one when you're on duty.

[TGS]

They really should have had 24/7 security like the military but they don't.

Most military installations are pretty soft and many actually use "rent-a-cops," fwiw.

[Bio]

That's a wacky scenario. You have to wonder what company leadership thought about that part of the presentation.

It was a little surreal. I don't know if I was reading too much into comments he made or perhaps misunderstood him, or what. It was a good way to spend a morning of company time, though.

[Cecil Burch]

I recollect an interesting podcast with CW where he (in support of his advocacy of small revolvers as a primary) challenged people to take a seasonal side job at some prohibited place like Home Depot (where it wouldn't end a career to get fired ETA:and includes more physical activity than taking a selfie in front of a mirror) to prove they could go a a few months without being busted with their full size gun in an NPE.


And to this day, only one SINGLE "public gun personality" took him up on that challenge. Everyone else? Crickets.

[BehindBlueI's]

And to this day, only one SINGLE "public gun personality" took him up on that challenge. Everyone else? Crickets.

In fairness, that's a huge ask. There's nothing online I feel the need to "prove" strongly enough to take a part-time retail job for weeks to months.

I'd also say as someone who *did* carry a gov't 1911 at work and university for a significant amount of time, that even if you did all you prove is YOU could do it IN THAT SITUATION for THAT TIME PERIOD. As I'm sure you'd agree, change any key fact (size of person, method of dress, physicality of the job, if they have a heart attack during the test period or not...) and you potentially change the outcome.

[rjohnson4405]

I can honestly say this helped me. We were small and pretty gun friendly, got bought and bought again. Now we're a huge corporation. My habits need to change. I didn't really think about it, same building, same people here, almost nothing changed for me. But things are different and I need to do things differently as I prioritize my wife not working in the future.

[HeavyDuty]

And to this day, only one SINGLE "public gun personality" took him up on that challenge. Everyone else? Crickets.

What idiot would risk prosecution doing this to make a point? All it takes is your part time employer bringing charges.

[WobblyPossum]

What idiot would risk prosecution doing this to make a point? All it takes is your part time employer bringing charges.

I don’t think the premise was to try it with a job where carrying a gun was a crime (a legal NPE), just somewhere that would get you fired or blackballed in the industry (a professional NPE). What “charges” would the employer bring?

[HeavyDuty]

I don’t think the premise was to try it with a job where carrying a gun was a crime (a legal NPE), just somewhere that would get you fired or blackballed in the industry (a professional NPE). What “charges” would the employer bring?

Trespass for starters. Depending on the state, possibly more. If you sign an agreement that it’s a NFZ, you’re potentially on the hook. And are you willing to take the ride?

[Le Français]

I don’t think the premise was to try it with a job where carrying a gun was a crime (a legal NPE), just somewhere that would get you fired or blackballed in the industry (a professional NPE). What “charges” would the employer bring?

It certainly depends on the location, but there are states where trespassing isn’t all or nothing: A person can be allowed on the property, but committing criminal trespass if violating the posted rules of the property owner.

[HeavyDuty]

It certainly depends on the location, but there are states where trespassing isn’t all or nothing: A person can be allowed on the property, but committing criminal trespass if violating the posted rules of the property owner.

Plus the differences between an invitee, licensee and trespasser.

[JCL]

The "damn the NPE, full speed ahead" carry folks have always struck me as being long on tool dependence and short on risk assessment and judgment.

[WobblyPossum]

Trespass for starters. Depending on the state, possibly more. If you sign an agreement that it’s a NFZ, you’re potentially on the hook. And are you willing to take the ride?


It certainly depends on the location, but there are states where trespassing isn’t all or nothing: A person can be allowed on the property, but committing criminal trespass if violating the posted rules of the property owner.

Any state in which entering someone’s property while carrying a gun is a crime, such as trespassing, if it’s done in violation of a sign would fall under the Legal NPE conditions I mentioned in my earlier post. I don’t believe this is the kind of situation that was the purpose of Mr. Werner’s challenge. I feel safe saying he wasn’t daring his peers to break any clearly established criminal laws in their jurisdictions.

[ER_STL]

Since this thread has kinda gone all over the place, I’ll add my thoughts.

I work in cyber security for a Fortune 500 tech company that has a no guns policy in place and I don’t risk breaking it. I accept the risk of working in such an environment, like it or not, and I plan accordingly. If for some reason I were ever to become authorized to carry as part of a say some sort of a rapid response team, I’d likely carry off body since my manner of corporate dress won’t enable me to conceal a full-sized gun well enough for my comfort level to avoid being outed. It would only take one wrong move, posture, accidental shirt lift, etc for the wrong person to notice, and given my luck, they would.

In my particular line of work and career level, the circle of peers and colleagues doing the same thing is small enough that getting canned for breaking the company’s no-guns policy could mean having to move to another part of the country to find a comparable job. It’s just not worth it. Given the political and liability culture in corporate America, I’d be shocked if any large tech company did not have a no guns policy in place. And quite frankly, it’s not likely to change any time soon. The subset of gun owners that appear responsible, trained and able to navigate an active shooter crisis well is small enough to go unnoticeable in the sea of goobers on YouTube, and the latter are likely all that the average left-leaning corporate attorney or policy maker is considering.

[HeavyDuty]

Any state in which entering someone’s property while carrying a gun is a crime, such as trespassing, if it’s done in violation of a sign would fall under the Legal NPE conditions I mentioned in my earlier post. I don’t believe this is the kind of situation that was the purpose of Mr. Werner’s challenge. I feel safe saying he wasn’t daring his peers to break any clearly established criminal laws in their jurisdictions.

If you violate a clearly articulated condition of employment, you definitely stand a chance of being trespassed. It’s not a question of NPE - Home Depot can allow invitees (customers) to carry but prohibit employees.

[LOKNLOD]

And to this day, only one SINGLE "public gun personality" took him up on that challenge. Everyone else? Crickets.

Somebody tried it? Who? More importantly, how'd it turn out?

[rcbusmc24]

I obviously work in a place that is literally covered in government owned guns, yet we have big signs at all the gates telling us in exquisite detail all the ways that we can be federally fooked if we bring our own concealed carry stuff on to the base. I leave it at home. Since I'm in uniform I can't stop out in town on the way to and from work except for drive throughs anyways so while annoying, it's not worth the risk to career at this point... I'd love it if the organization that gives me enough firepower on deployment to end whole cities would trust me with a pistol in the states but after 20 years I understand and at this point just sadly accept how most commanders and their JAG's are going to go about risk mitigation. The chance that a idiot will have an ND is statistically way higher and just as career ending for a senior officer who allowed subordinates to carry than the chance that one of those subordinates would stop a mass shooter to their way of thinking, so it just makes sense to them to tell us to do the same thing as corporate America....

[walker2713]

Yes, I managed to sit through the entire story but kept asking myself: WTF is it with the decanter of whiskey/glass.

Was it to alleviate nervousness? Liquid courage? Stage prop?

I’m not interested in how or when he drinks….it just struck me as an odd setup for his “presentation.”

George

[mmc45414]

Many points to quote, but replying from my phone, so I will just hit a few of them.

IMO our "community" tends to get married to things, be it the 1911 or AIWB G19 or J-frame and people seems to dig in like their way is the "only" way. Most times I carry the G19 equivalent of an M&P, many times (no belt) I carry a J-frame as a primary. Today I drove 700mi/11.5hr to the beach wearing a belt and a J-frame, with an M&P in the console. When I pumped gas and took a leak, I think I was covered by my trusty 638. But if I have to fight my way back to Ohio I got a better pistol to switch out to. But I am more comfortable with a J in appendix, and the J is more comfortable in appendix, and appendix is more accessible from a car seat, so I make that comprise. Not NPE, but when I am stepping back from the urinal getting The Big Guy rearranged I am not so worried about anybody seeing my small well concealed gun. We rolled with food in the cooler, and were never away from the car for longer than it took to wiz.

Second point, in Ohio, it is only a crime if you get trespassed and you do not leave when asked (to the best of my understanding)

[Wheeler]

If you violate a clearly articulated condition of employment, you definitely stand a chance of being trespassed. It’s not a question of NPE - Home Depot can allow invitees (customers) to carry but prohibit employees.

Claude was basically challenging the professional instructors who told students that they needed to carry a certain size gun, ie G19 size or larger in the course of their professional activities, to put their money where their mouths were. The simple fact is that many professional instructors and law enforcement that moonlight as instructors have no real concept of the challenges that folks face carrying firearms outside of their own narrow duel of view. So while you’re lambasting Claude for issuing that challenge it’s prudent to note that many instructors were recommending the same to their students. Those folks are the ones that need to be taken to task.

Phrased differently, while it’s ludicrous to suggest that a professional instructor take on a part time job and carry their service sized gat for six weeks to prove a point, it’s reprehensible for that same instructor to tell their students there is no reason for them to not be able to carry the same sized gat at work and so forth.

[Rex G]

Yes, I managed to sit through the entire story but kept asking myself: WTF is it with the decanter of whiskey/glass.

Was it to alleviate nervousness? Liquid courage? Stage prop?

I’m not interested in how or when he drinks….it just struck me as an odd setup for his “presentation.”

George

I wondered about this, too; strange. I know so little about how well-dressed, professional gentleman drink their amber-brown fluids, so, I did not make any judgements. I accept that some mysteries will remain mysteries.

[Ed L]

Yes, I managed to sit through the entire story but kept asking myself: WTF is it with the decanter of whiskey/glass.

Was it to alleviate nervousness? Liquid courage? Stage prop?

I’m not interested in how or when he drinks….it just struck me as an odd setup for his “presentation.”

It seems to be a thing that some people do on youtube at times. It is done for drama or atmosphere--but I think it has the opposite effect and detracts and makes the person in the video look like someone who is trying to achieve an effect but fails.

[walker2713]

It seems to be a thing that some people do on youtube at times. It is done for drama or atmosphere--but I think it has the opposite effect and detracts and makes the person in the video look like someone who is trying to achieve an effect but fails.

Bingo!

[Le Français]

Any state in which entering someone’s property while carrying a gun is a crime, such as trespassing, if it’s done in violation of a sign would fall under the Legal NPE conditions I mentioned in my earlier post. I don’t believe this is the kind of situation that was the purpose of Mr. Werner’s challenge. I feel safe saying he wasn’t daring his peers to break any clearly established criminal laws in their jurisdictions.

Fair enough; I think I misunderstood the premise.

[DC_P]

In fairness, that's a huge ask. There's nothing online I feel the need to "prove" strongly enough to take a part-time retail job for weeks to months.

Not to mention - in this ridiculous political climate, your current 'career' employer could decide that is grounds for termination from your full time job if they found out about it.

[mmc45414]

I cannot climb into his brain, but my interpretation of the CW challenge was to people that are employed as instructors or commentators advocating people do something that they had never actually done, when the instructor types would not be at the same risk of employer retribution. More of a Put Up Or Shut Up, this was my understanding.

ETA: States vary significantly on this, and I am most familiar with Ohio, and it is a simple tresspass. Someplace like a big box store would not (IANAL) have any more leverage other than telling you to GTFO and never come back, just like a mini mart where you inadvertently walked past the little decal on the door. Could they sue you for violating their employee handbook that they made you sigh a document saying you read it? Yeah, I guess they could, but IMO highly unlikely.

I used to have one of the XD45s with the 5" slide and 14rnd grip frame, and I carried it in a IWB, but mainly back and forth to the range when I was going to shoot it. It was concealed, and I would stop at a mini mart if I needed to, but I wouldn't consider it concealed well enough to do a full grocery run, let alone an NPE, for sure not one where I could get fired or arrested.

People often say "You can dress around it", and you can, but at what level are you willing to alter your garb?...
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210810/7c46a7bd7a9ddc697532192448dc26e4.jpg

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[Trooper224]

Yes, I managed to sit through the entire story but kept asking myself: WTF is it with the decanter of whiskey/glass.

Was it to alleviate nervousness? Liquid courage? Stage prop?

I’m not interested in how or when he drinks….it just struck me as an odd setup for his “presentation.”

George

I skipped through about ten minutes and called it good. His points are valid and it's a worthwhile PSA, especially for all the gun fantasy band campers out there. However, his dramatics are offputting and the whole whiskey decanter/prop thing makes him seem like Mr. Tryhard.

[Borderland]

Yes, I managed to sit through the entire story but kept asking myself: WTF is it with the decanter of whiskey/glass.

Was it to alleviate nervousness? Liquid courage? Stage prop?

I’m not interested in how or when he drinks….it just struck me as an odd setup for his “presentation.”

George

He's wants to look like the guy who tells all of his buddies in the bar over a few drinks what a bad shake he got by his employer, girlfriend, ex. I've got a friend who calls me every now and then with his work problems after a few drinks. We had the same employer. He wants to quit but can't because it's 100K a year with medical and 60% pension. He's 55 so he has a few years left to work.

[BehindBlueI's]

I cannot climb into his brain, but my interpretation of the CW challenge was to people that are employed as instructors or commentators advocating people do something that they had never actually done, when the instructor types would not be at the same risk of employer retribution. More of a Put Up Or Shut Up, this was my understanding.

I understand that, but it's still a huge ask and someone taking him up on it or not is really indicative of if they believe their own statements or the validity of the statements. You could tell me that submarines were originally designed as aircrafts and if I want to prove you wrong go work at Home Depot for 6 weeks. My refusal to do so doesn't make you right. That's my only point.

[mmc45414]

I understand that, but it's still a huge ... That's my only point.

Yes, I think my posts in this thread sound adversarial, but I agree with you, it is not a reasonable thing to ask people to do just to prove something.

But I also think it is unreasonable to urge people to risk THIER job when the "influencer" hasn't risked their's.

As I thought about this a little more, I realized I do sorta have some relevant experience. My father and I operated a couple of coin operated laundromats back when the whole damn state of Ohio was an NPE. There was no provision for getting a CHL, concealed carry was universally illegal, and your only allowance was a potential defense as having gone armed to be "prudent", and that probably depended on the prosecutor that caught the case, you might still be charged and lose. But when I would be in there collecting the cash, in front of a big picture window on a busy street, (after dark in the winter) I thought it would be prudent to be packing. But for sure that meant a PPK or J-frame, probably under three layers of clothing and sweating it the whole time.

[HeadHunter]

Very interesting. Replying to save for later when I have access to my VPN.

[Cecil Burch]

I understand that, but it's still a huge ask and someone taking him up on it or not is really indicative of if they believe their own statements or the validity of the statements. You could tell me that submarines were originally designed as aircrafts and if I want to prove you wrong go work at Home Depot for 6 weeks. My refusal to do so doesn't make you right. That's my only point.


That was exactly the point of the challenge. It is a HUGE risk to do this just. But the people being challenged are the ones who tell EVERYONE ELSE that it is no big deal to do do the same exact thing day after day. The people being challenged are pontificating on aspects of life that they have zero idea about, and stand to lose nothing, but feel no compunction to tell someone else that they should ignore risks that may wipe them out financially.

The challenge is entirely about telling someone to risk it all when you don't have to suffer yourself, and having zero personal experience to advise someone to do so.

It is no different that a celebrity who live their entire life in a show business bubble tell someone in middle America that they should give up their guns.

[Moylan]

I might have missed it, but I don't think Werner's original blog post got linked here. So here it is: https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress.com/2016/11/14/people-skills-and-personal-protection/

There's also a podcast about it, IIRC, with Johnston and Lauer but I don't have time or energy to listen to a podcast right now.

The context of the 'challenge' is a discussion of Dale Carnegie's Win Friends and Influence People stuff. Here's where the longish post gets to the challenge part:


Another aspect of the training community I often see is a lack of connection to the everyday lives that our students live. There are several worthwhile items from Secrets of Success in this regard.


Become a Friendlier Person

Be a good listener. Encourage others to talk about themselves.
Talk in terms of the other person’s interests.

Win People to Your Way of Thinking

Try honestly to see things from the other person’s point of view.
Be sympathetic with the other person’s ideas and desires.
Throw down a challenge.

So, I’m going to throw down a challenge to the training community.

Get a job; a real job where you have to fill out a W-4 when you get hired. Just like the jobs your students have.

Right now is a golden opportunity, no pun intended. The end of the year is a relatively slow time for training and there are numerous seasonal positions available in the retail sector. Target, WalMart, and Sears, among others, are all hiring for temporary positions through the end of the year. If you don’t like wearing a uniform, Macy’s and other high end retailers are hiring and will give you an even better environment to test your hypotheses. Get a temporary job in a retail store for a couple of months. Walk a mile in your students’ moccasins while carrying the heater and all the gear you tell them to EDC. See how it works out for you.

If you get fired (or arrested) for a weapons violation or you decide you can’t carry all that crap while working and interacting with people all day without getting made, you owe me a drink. If you work at least 30 hours a week for six weeks in the retail environment with your full EDC loadout, I’ll buy you dinner. Full time sworn LEOs, 16 hours a week will fulfill the challenge. Totally on the honor system; I’ll accept whatever outcome you tell me you had.

So my take on this is that Werner is trying to win people--specifically, certain firearms trainers who tell their students to carry a G34 at work every day--to his point of view, and he's putting one of Dale Cargegie's methods to work. I don't think the point is to actually get trainers to get a job. I think the point is to get trainers to "try honestly to see things from the other person's point of view," and the way he's doing that is to challenge them to imagine what it would actually be like to carry this stuff all day every day in an NPE. After all, many of them have no such concerns at all. It's a pretty good point, I think. How can I help my students do X if I have no idea what it would be like for them to try to do X? It's not: you trainers need to prove to me that you can hide your stuff at a real job. It's: I find that many trainers are insufficiently alert to the real lives of their students, and so to help them improve in that respect I'm going to push on them a bit with this "challenge." That's what I got out of it, anyway.

I'd be keen to know who took up the "challenge" and what the result was.

[Totem Polar]

I do not carry at work, and if I did I wouldn’t tell you. I don’t welcome discussions of a personal nature in the workplace, and definitely don’t discuss self defense topics.

My early career training included the concepts that no one at work can be purely a friend, that every interaction with a coworker has professional consequences. Might sound cynical, but I think it’s actually better to see it that way.

Concur. Words of wisdom, above.


Aaaaand… I’m interested to see HeadHunter ‘s response to this thread, since he has skin in all aspects of this thread game.

[BehindBlueI's]

That was exactly the point of the challenge. It is a HUGE risk to do this just. But the people being challenged are the ones who tell EVERYONE ELSE that it is no big deal to do do the same exact thing day after day. The people being challenged are pontificating on aspects of life that they have zero idea about, and stand to lose nothing, but feel no compunction to tell someone else that they should ignore risks that may wipe them out financially.

The challenge is entirely about telling someone to risk it all when you don't have to suffer yourself, and having zero personal experience to advise someone to do so.

It is no different that a celebrity who live their entire life in a show business bubble tell someone in middle America that they should give up their guns.

I understand that and agree with the point. My point remains it's a huge ask and the fact someone didn't do it is really not indicative of the point being made. To me it's not a huge ask because of the risk because there is none in my situation, it's a huge ask because WTF would I want to work a part-time retail job for a few months? The time factor is where I was going with it.

[Trooper224]

Concur. Words of wisdom, above.


Aaaaand… I’m interested to see HeadHunter ‘s response to this thread, since he has skin in all aspects of this thread game.

I don't think CFs point can be stressed enough. First rule of gun club is, you don't talk about gun club. If you don't know me well, you have know idea I carry a gun. You don't even know that's an interest of mine. Especially now that I no longer hang around with a bunch of cops. It's like being a prepper, no one should know what you have in your basement because you shouldn't be volunteering that information.


I don't think Claude was actually challenging anyone to get a job, but rather speaking metaphorically to get people to think.

[Guerrero]

I might have missed it, but I don't think Werner's original blog post got linked here. So here it is: https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress.com/2016/11/14/people-skills-and-personal-protection/

There's also a podcast about it, IIRC, with Johnston and Lauer but I don't have time or energy to listen to a podcast right now.

Here:

http://ballisticradio.com/2018/02/14/dear-instructors-get-a-real-job-podcast-season-5-ballistic-radio-episode-241-february-11th-2018/

[HeadHunter]

I had a long diatribe written about it but here’s the short form.

He’s completely right and being far more intellectually factual and honest than almost anyone else in the industry. A few of us having been saying this for over a decade but we’re considered iconoclasts howling at the moon.

The video is very long but owning up to making a major mistake that’s entirely your fault is incredibly painful. Getting fired because of your own fuckup is traumatic. Ask me how I know this. When you have a family, it’s even worse. I give him credit for doing that just like I give Tex Grebner credit for posting the video about how he shot himself.

[frank]

Agree. The delivery is a bit overwrought but it's a good message. Do not talk about what you do or what you believe outside of your people.

Every conversation you have with a regime informant is potentially the mostly costly interaction you will ever have.

[HeadHunter]

Every conversation you have with a regime informant is potentially the mostly costly interaction you will ever have.

Not the first time in human history that's been true and won't be the last. Current times are eerily reminiscent of some unpleasant aspects of the 20th Century. But don't worry, "it can't happen here."

[45dotACP]

Agree. The delivery is a bit overwrought but it's a good message. Do not talk about what you do or what you believe outside of your people.

Every conversation you have with a regime informant is potentially the mostly costly interaction you will ever have.See I vacillate between this and "we need to get more people interested in shooting and training to defend themselves"

I'm still not sure which one I land on mostly, but I figure if my coworkers ask about gun stuff or say out loud "I want to go shooting sometime" I will define it more as a social event and reply with something like "Dude yes we should totally go!"

Note, I don't do this with coworkers I wouldn't ordinarily hang out with. You need to have a rapport if you want to produce an asset.

Yes, regime informants are out there, but it's not exactly James Bond or The Wire level counter-intel work to turn a work buddy that you have beers with sometimes, into a buddy you go shooting with sometimes. You just gotta hope you can win at playing the long game and he/she will want to buy their own gun and stop bumming your ammo :D

Just realize that yeah if you work at an NPE, you're gonna be known as the "gun guy" by at least some folks. You should reconsider A.) Carrying at work B.) Working at a stupid Job or C.) Having an ironclad means of concealment that can withstand an active search for a weapon

Note, I am not recommending you break the law. The suited shootist could have very easily had worse consequences if there were legal repercussions.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk