TexasCHLforum.com

In Philadelphia on Thursday a 43-year-old female employee with 21 years at a Kraft Foods plant was fired after a series of disciplinary issues that included accusing other employees of spraying her with toxins and deer scent.

She returned a short time later with a .357 Magnum that she had legally bought earlier this year, and entered the plant by intimidating two unarmed security guards.

She sought out two coworkers with whom she had long-running disputes and fatally shot them. She wounded another who is in critical condition.

During the confrontation she reportedly ranted about the supposed poisoning, 9/11, and Muslims.

She fired at and missed two other employees, then barricaded herself in a room with other employees.

Police forced entry and arrested her with an empty weapon, though she had more ammunition.

She was charged with murder, attempted murder, and other felonies.

This is a well-written article with many interesting details. Note the links to other stories and video on the right.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_pa ... avior.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/2 ... thers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I normally don't recirculate this kind of lunacy, but this case is particularly bizarre. Women this age, even if mentally ill, rarely commit such acts.

The typical profile for "going postal" is younger males with a history of poor job performance, criminal history, mental illness, and substance-abuse problems.

- Jim

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/loc ... 24529.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This article has some information the other two articles did not mention (on purpose?)

The shooter was a very spiritual Muslim.

I mentioned that to a co-worker and he said "well that doesn't matter" and he is right. It does not matter. Its important to not stereotype.

But you know after a while......its hard to not try and connect the dots. It recently does seem that postal workers are getting a bum rap.

I did not see that religious aspect mentioned.

Normally I assume someone with a name like Hiller would be American, Christian, or possibly Jewish. Maybe she was a convert.

I have to add, from reading the first article, what she seemed to have long-term mental problems and her religion had no direct relationship. The event appeared to have been triggered by her firing, which is usually the case.

You are correct about postal employees. They have a better record in terms of employee violence than the average workplace. The term was invented by the press because a series of multiple-victim post-office shoot-ups took place in a short time, years go.

I changed the subject line, as you can see.

- Jim

philip964 wrote: I mentioned that to a co-worker and he said "well that doesn't matter" and he is right.

How does your coworker know it doesn't matter? Does he know this person? In reality it is TBD.

If anything, the "stereotyping" works in reverse for muslims involved in violent acts in the US -- the press and government go to great lengths to immediately disclaim any possibility of it meaning anything, long before they could possibly know. That guy that shot up El Al at LAX comes to mind...


Back to the OP -- I'll bet Kraft had a "No Weapons" policy for its employees (and its guards, apparently). Worked great. She had to go all the way home and back.

I understood the article I read to have said she actually had it in her car in the parking lot.

I don't understand why the guards hadn't done anything as soon as she was past them, why the building wasn't on lock-down, why no one was announcing an active shooter in the building over the intercom... it took one brave employee to run around behind her and holler for people to flee at the great risk to his own life and safety.

She sounds like she had paranoid delusions. While other things can also have the same symptoms, the mention of her flat affect and her troubled history would point to schizophrenia being a likely diagnosis. Schizophrenia is usually a late-onset disorder, and on average has an older onset in women than in men (women in their late twenties to early thirties for onset, men throughout their twenties). Most schizophrenics are not violent, but her history of interpersonal conflict would put her in the risk category for being among the small population who are, especially if she had trouble in school, low IQ, or early drug use as well.

It does seem like there were a lot of ignored red flags.

Hoi Polloi wrote:I don't understand why the guards hadn't done anything as soon as she was past them, why the building wasn't on lock-down, why no one was announcing an active shooter in the building over the intercom...

Good points

Someone wasn't trained well or panicked (which is often a result of not being trained well).

Big companies like Kraft have contingency plans for everything short of the Apocalypse. However, most have outsourced their security personnel to third parties that are mostly interested in maximizing their profit and paying as little as possible to their own employees—the guards.

I could be entirely wrong in this case, but most the places where I have worked or done business have outsourced security.

- Jim

I dunno'? I'm well past 40 and not qualified to engage in any kind of psycho-babble discussions but those of you past 40 might recall some interesting behaviors/changes in, or around, your families/friends at age 40 (+/-). Those of you not yet at that magic age have something to look both forward to and out for.

Back on point, we live in trying times. If everyone there had a .44 magnum locked in their cars in the parking lot, would it have done any good?

At age 40 to 50, they might go through the so-called midlife crisis, get divorced, change careers, go to an ashram in India, or something.

Unless they have existing problems like depression or alcoholism, they rarely become violent. Even then, they tend to commit suicide and possibly kill family members.

It's more around age 60 to 80 that I see people who have led normal lives go off the deep end due to dementia.

If everyone there had a .44 magnum locked in their cars in the parking lot, would it have done any good?

In a plant that size, most likely not. I've worked in big plants where I could not have made it from the middle of the plant to my car in the parking lot and back in less than several minutes at my best speed.

And with the cops arriving in a high state of alert ...

- Jim

Yep, that's what I'm talking about! That menopause thinghy can do strange stuff to female and male alike:

and; last, but not least,

seamusTX wrote:At age 40 to 50, they might go through the so-called midlife crisis, get divorced, change careers, go to an ashram in India, or something.

Unless they have existing problems like depression or alcoholism, they rarely become violent. Even then, they tend to commit suicide and possibly kill family members.

It's more around age 60 to 80 that I see people who have led normal lives go off the deep end due to dementia.

If everyone there had a .44 magnum locked in their cars in the parking lot, would it have done any good?

In a plant that size, most likely not. I've worked in big plants where I could not have made it from the middle of the plant to my car in the parking lot and back in less than several minutes at my best speed.

And with the cops arriving in a high state of alert ... - Jim

According to the protocol of non-Batman CHLs, they would run to their car where their .44 Magnum was stored. They would only be interested in saving themselves [and their family] and not go back into a plant where there was a crazy person shooting people.

If he did go back and the cops arrived before he shot the BG, he might get shot rather than being able to save a co-worker. Of course, the real Batman would just blind them with a smoke capsule from his utility belt and then lasso them with his silken cord.

Some of this is, of course, tongue and cheek. Some CHLs might run to the parking lot and come back to try to save the lifes of friends. When you have worked at a company for a long time you can have relationships with co-workers that are as close as family.

WildBill wrote:Some CHLs might run to the parking lot and come back to try to save the lifes of friends. When you have worked at a company for a long time you can have relationships with co-workers that are as close as family.

This has happened successfully a few times—very few.

I think they were cases where the vehicles were very close to the crime scene. People would have to use their best judgment about it.

The main point of parking lot laws is not to equip a bunch of Batman wannabees. It is to allow employees to legally transport weapons and defend themselves if need be traveling to and from work.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:

WildBill wrote:Some CHLs might run to the parking lot and come back to try to save the lifes of friends. When you have worked at a company for a long time you can have relationships with co-workers that are as close as family.

This has happened successfully a few times—very few.

I think they were cases where the vehicles were very close to the crime scene. People would have to use their best judgment about it.

The main point of parking lot laws is not to equip a bunch of Batman wannabees. It is to allow employees to legally transport weapons and defend themselves if need be traveling to and from work.

- Jim

I understand and totally support parking lot laws.

Hoi Polloi wrote:I understood the article I read to have said she actually had it in her car in the parking lot.

I don't understand why the guards hadn't done anything as soon as she was past them, why the building wasn't on lock-down, why no one was announcing an active shooter in the building over the intercom... it took one brave employee to run around behind her and holler for people to flee at the great risk to his own life and safety.

The specifics have not yet been reported in this case, but the usual reasons for a failed response like the one that apparently took place in PA are:

1. There was no plan in place for a situation like this. When something this unusual happens, most people are too stunned to be able to come up with an effective action plan in time to do any good.

2. If there is a plan in place, it's in a 3 ring binder with about 1/2 inch of dust on it in the office of the safety director or HR manager. No one has opened the binder in years, and few people know it exists - sorta like the New Orleans hurricane plan during Katrina.

3. If there is a plan, no one has been trained on it and full drills have never been conducted. Without this fundamentally basic activity, it's a virtual certainty that things would go as reported in this instance. It's not just typical, it's classic.

4. Security guards have an extremely high turnover rate. 300% per year or more is not at all unusual. Even if some guards had received some training at some time, it is highly unlikely that all guards on duty on any given day have received that training. It is much more likely that none have.

Most unarmed security guards are trained and directed to carry out the functions of observation and reporting only, and are strongly prohibited from intervening directly during an event. It would be rare to find them trained to a level where they would be capable of instantaneously and competently responding to an active shooter situation in a manner that would change the outcome for the better.

Please understand that this is not a knock on security guards. Their selection, instructions and training are built around what client businesses most want and are willing to pay for. Providers of security officer services can't sell a higher level of service than what clients will buy.

The way businesses see things, courtesy officers are not expensive and competent emergency responders are. They usually don't realize that during a serious emergency, the economics of the two approaches reverse until they learn the hard way.

It's easy to criticize this thinking until you realize that it's just another version of trying to guess right instead of carrying 24/7.

Excaliber wrote:

....The way businesses see things, courtesy officers are not expensive and competent emergency responders are....

IOW, kinda' like the greeters at Wal-Mart?

Oldgringo wrote:

Excaliber wrote:

....The way businesses see things, courtesy officers are not expensive and competent emergency responders are....

IOW, kinda' like the greeters at Wal-Mart?

Uh, well, I was more thinking of the uniformed folks you might find at the lobby desk in an office building or at the gate of a plant like the one in PA.