Quote:
Originally Posted by Skid Row Joe
Just a hunch - but I think the perpetrator's credit score, and life-profile, would have been a better indicator of her viability as an employee to the Kraft Co., than any "intensive psychological screening test......." That, and why a food processing worker would have need for "a 357 Magnum" handgun in her car?
I'm just sayin'.....
|
correct, many companies employ credit scores, criminal back ground checks, and psychological screening exams to try and weed out the losers. many in management have conflicting ideas as to what type of tests and back ground checks will weed out the whackos. obviously, no testing or back ground check is 100% fail safe. the nub job who killed all the students at Virginia Tech passed the required background checks to purchase a gun. proof once again that one's life may appear to be normal when it is not.
who knows why she had the gun, but as the news reports indicate, she didn't hesitate to use it.
it appears to me that the problem is that many companies have a 'no guns allowed on the premises' policy which is a stated failure. only people who follow the rules follow these policies.
obviously, the 'rule breakers' will simply trot out to their car to retrieve their favorite toy to do damage. and, since the worker bees have been effectively disarmed by the 'no guns allowed on company premises' policies, they are SITTING DUCKS waiting to be plucked, yes?