October 29, 2013, 06:23 PM | #51 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 27, 2013
Posts: 1,139
|
While I understand all the arguments offered, I'm perplexed why the word "morality" is thrown around. Morals are personal - you might share them with other people in your culture, but they are yours alone to have and either adhere to or violate. If you don't think what you're doing is immoral, it isn't.
Integrity speaks more to the problem - if you imply that you are going to follow a set of rules and you don't, then anyone who questions your integrity wouldn't be wrong. I don't think it makes sense with something like violating rules (or even laws) to worry about what that says about you as a person. Your feelings on the matter trump anyone else's. If you have a good reason to break the rules and are okay with the consequences of doing so, that's all that needs to be said. Most of what I've read in this thread are justifications for breaking the rules. Either break the rules and live with that, or don't. Attempting to justify it won't change what you've done or change a bad decision into a good one because you've played a philosophical game in your mind. As far as Aguila's experience goes, it sounds like he's the victim of gender discrimination, being forced to work at a more dangerous hour than his female colleagues. That's illegal. |
October 29, 2013, 09:21 PM | #52 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
Quote:
I am not going to turn this into a religious discussion but think about religious leaders who broke laws for justifiable reasons. If you're Christian, think of Jesus breaking a good number of laws, such as healing on the Sabbath. While I am a "rules follower" by nature, there are times when breaking rules is justified. The law even acknowledges this. Breaking the speed limit to get someone in cardiac arrest to a hospital justifies the violation. Self-defense is another form of justification. Now, I do think that agreeing to a policy and then violating it is normally an integrity issue. You are giving your word and then breaking it. However, merely acknowledging that you have received notice of an employer's policy does not mean you have given your word to follow it. Of course, you have to live with the consequences if you violate it. |
|
October 29, 2013, 09:32 PM | #53 | ||
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,685
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
||
October 30, 2013, 12:51 AM | #54 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 27, 2013
Posts: 1,139
|
44Amp,
Ah, no. I wasn't suggesting that everyone do whatever you want. But very few individuals share identical mores of behavior or their reasons for having them. My post was to point out that the choices you make are your own. No appeal to a higher "moral power" absolves you of that responsibility. I'm much more disturbed by people who break the rules using some convenient philosophy to dump the blame on. Rigid morals are a crutch for people who can't decide right from wrong on their own. Sociopaths don't care about doing right at all. |
October 30, 2013, 01:20 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 7, 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 293
|
Depends on the work envirnment imo..if you work in a large office in a nice area and have nothing worth taking (i.e money valuables goods) then why not obey there policy leave it in your car and dont risk your job..on the other hand if you work graveyard at a convienent store in a bad neighborhood i say to hell with there policy id rather be alive and unemployed than dead knowing atleast i "followed the rules". All in all though if you can legally carry and choose to at work more power to you you are not breaking any laws.
|
October 30, 2013, 08:20 AM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Quote:
You left out the part where the one ignoring the rule is okay with accepting the consequences. There is a proud history of civil disobedience in this country, and I find your use of the word "sociopath" offensive in this context. __________________ "Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward." --Thoreau |
|
October 30, 2013, 08:46 AM | #57 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,436
|
Quote:
Regardless of how strict your moral code is, a personal moral code is based in personal choice and is not backed by force of any law (although it may or may not coincide closely with adopted law. It may also be stricter than adopted law). On the other hand, abdicating decision and just following the laws because it's easier than making a morality-based value judgment (example: zero tolerance school rules that punish the victim of an assault as severely as the assailant) is a crutch. |
|
October 30, 2013, 09:07 AM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 14, 2012
Posts: 331
|
When you hire in, you accept the conditions. If you accept the conditions, it is your responsibility to abide by them. You will know within a few weeks whether or not you want to keep the job or move on.
- The rub is having a job and then a new wave of managers come in and makes new rules. Once again the decision to leave is still there, but now the loss of time, any pay raises, and potential retirement pensions com into play. - If you get caught violating company policy, you end up fired (lost pension). You lose a paycheck instantly and have to deal with rent, etc You may have a record which will prevent future good jobs. You will have to go thru hoops to get unemployment, which they may deny. - Lots of variable to consider. Consider where you work. If they tend to have shootings, you may want to leave anyway. If they have never had a shooting, may be adjust perspective and go with the odds. The odds are safe at work than on the road that we take for granite every time use a cell phone, go over the limit, etc etc. Pick anything else we do and apply the same logic. - If married, X10 the effects of violating policy. If kids, X100. If both, really evaluate the need and maybe suck it up. - I use to be an emt after I retired from the military, you are placed in crazy situations some times because or you and your partner missed the clues, you hope you get out safe. No guns there either. Think of the number of crazy people out there an why you carry and try to avoid those places. The medics go into that frequently with "THOSE" people. |
October 30, 2013, 10:56 AM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
I might suggest that the views of moral theory expressed here are folk wisdom. There is a philosophical and psychological literature on morality.
A few reads into Wikipedia might focus the folk theories. It is easy to say you would do XY or Z. It is also well known that verbal expression of moral virtue may have little correlation with actual behavior.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
October 30, 2013, 11:34 AM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
If you work for a company then be loyal to that organization. If you cannot abide by the company rules then quit.
After repeated warnings, i fired two employees of my company for carrying concealed weapons on US Army bases against the rules. Those guys jeopardized my contracts with the US Army. |
October 30, 2013, 12:59 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,288
|
Lets not lose sight of the moral responsibility of the company. If they want to strip the right for their employee to take responsibility of their own peraonal safety then dont they have a moral obligation to provide that safety not just at work but to and from?
We can debate our individual moral and integrity but where is the companies?
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2 |
October 30, 2013, 01:59 PM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Companies and institutions have responsibility for the survival and success of the corporate or institutional structure over that of the individuals who work for it.
What else is new? It is very easy to say Quit. That's why these internet moral debates can be silly. Let me give you real corporate circumstances that I know of personally. It is the Depression - jobs are scarce. A company will not hire you because of your religion. Thus, you fake membership in a church to get the job. Your other choice - starve. Your company demands that you join a particular political party to keep your job. Your choice in the Depression - starve. Thus, be a moral tough guy and watch those dependent on you go down the economic drain because of a company policy which is seen by many as controlling or immoral. Note the policy was just social tyranny and had no effect on company success. Thus, I repeat that this 'moral' preaching is a particular stage of moral beliefs in a more complex set of decisions. You can go sell Apples on the corner and proclaim that on the Internet if we ever get to that extreme circumstance.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
October 30, 2013, 03:44 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,288
|
Then weve lost the same battle
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2 |
October 30, 2013, 04:34 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 514
|
Company Policy
Electronics technician in his lab lamented to me that HSE had come by and confiscated his X-acto knife. It was "theirs" to confiscate, supplied and owned by the Company. New policy was that X-acto knives are banned company-wide.
Turns out someone at another plant had sustained a puncture wound in a finger from a sharp X-acto knife, failed to clean the puncture wound adequately, it got infected, almost lost the finger. X-acto knives banned at all plants, in production and in labs. This guy needs to use an X-acto knife in his work. He went and bought one, brought it to work, uses it as needed, and hides it in his desk when he is not using it. Company knew this would be the outcome - but if he ever cuts himself, they are covered because "we banned those knives company-wide in 2012." So is he immoral or unethical for violating company policy? Just to do his job? |
October 30, 2013, 05:14 PM | #65 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
October 30, 2013, 05:29 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 140
|
My brother-in-law works at a plant that has the panty-waist "no gun" policy. I told him there is mo way I'd take my gun out of the truck just to drive to work. I'd quit first...but I'd prolly just keep it in there and not mention it. Your vehicle is an extension of your home, and they have NO RIGHT telling employees what they can or cannot have in their vehicle.
__________________
Don't invest in idiots....the market's flooded!!! |
October 30, 2013, 05:29 PM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,288
|
Self defense is a civil right.
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2 |
October 30, 2013, 05:59 PM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 647
|
Quote:
|
|
October 30, 2013, 06:06 PM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
Slight detour:
Quote:
|
|
October 30, 2013, 06:53 PM | #70 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
October 30, 2013, 07:26 PM | #71 |
Member
Join Date: September 30, 2012
Posts: 25
|
Carry at Work
There is really only one thing to consider:
Why does anyone carry a firearm? Nuff said! |
October 30, 2013, 07:26 PM | #72 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
Quote:
Explaining to the folks in the unemployment office that I simply won't accept work with a company that doesn't respect my right to keep and bear arms at all times could also be a bit of a challenge.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
||
October 30, 2013, 07:40 PM | #73 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: The "Gunshine State"
Posts: 1,981
|
Their house, THEIR rules - don't like them? Go elsewhere. If you cannot be trusted as an employee to follow company policy, then I would have zero use for you as an employee.
If I cannot trust you to follow the rules without me searching you or your vehicle then why should I employ you? Character is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching That said, with a few exceptions, it is illegal in Florida for an employer to prevent a gun locked in a car, but carrying INSIDE the building is easily prohibited |
October 30, 2013, 09:09 PM | #74 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
||
October 30, 2013, 10:07 PM | #75 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 140
|
I can only say that this country would never have been founded if everyone were so concerned with "following the rules"...
In reply to several points... "If I cannot trust you to follow the rules without me searching you or your vehicle then why should I employ you?"...Why do you need me to be unarmed? What is it hurting for honest men to have firearms in their vehicles? The bad guys certainly aren't overly concerned with following these rules. "Character is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching"...The "right" thing is often VERY different from different perspectives. Then again, maybe the 2nd is not as precious as we thought it was. Maybe it can be interpreted away like just so much ink on paper...
__________________
Don't invest in idiots....the market's flooded!!! |
Tags |
carry at work cothran |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|