The department of education had a real winner employed at their technology offices in Brooklyn, recently. He had the cops called on him, because he was showing signs of being obsessed with the nutjob that shot up a showing of the new Batman movie. "He told police Holmes reminded him of him when he was younger and that he sympathized with the accused killer because he doesn't like his co-workers."
Wow. I think I'd be insisting that this guy be either forced into therapy and put on a midnight shift created especially for him where he didn't come into contact with coworkers, or fired. 'Cause with a statement like that on record, if he does go on a shooting spree at work, the DOE is certainly ripe for a lawsuit for sacrificing its other employees' safety to protect the "rights" of the crazy person.
39 minutes ago
Being _forced_ into therapy isn't a very liberty-oriented notion, even if it is obvious that the guy might benefit from it. Being fired in order to protect his co-workers would certainly be more reasonable, although even there, he would be being punished for something he hasn't actually done. He has implied that he could consider killing his co-workers, but he hasn't actually threatened them.
ReplyDeleteThe best outcome would be for his armed co-workers - and they should have the right to arm and protect themselves, shouldn't they? - to cap this creature if he makes any move toward realizing his fantasy. Self-defense is more appropriate than posting armed guards in his vicinity any time he is at work.
Note that I didn't say the government should do it, but that his employers should give him one of three choices.
DeleteI do agree that letting his coworkers arm themselves would be better (not to mention more cost-effective than hiring armed guards to follow him around), but we all know that ain't gonna happen.
He's obviously not stable. Best thing to do would be fire him--since he's not a teacher, he's not tenured. Second best? Remove him from temptation by isolating him: make him telecommute,if nothing else.