Talk about a total waste of State Tax payer money.....

So, now all full time and temporary CDOT employees must attend a mandatory 4 hr. training class on, Wait for it, "Active Shooter" training. Just think of all the wasted salary, the expence of hiring the training instructors for all the classes to accommodate all of CDOT's employees state wide and lost production this will cause.
I know there are those of you here that think that guberment employees don't do anything but collect a paycheck anyway, so at least you can rest assured that these employees are getting quality training on your tax dollars.

4 hours to teach someone to run & hide?

You know they won't say to fight back.

Duck and Cover
http://youtu.be/IKqXu-5jw60

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rbeau30

Duck and Cover
http://youtu.be/IKqXu-5jw60

---

Some of us here are old enough to remember that from grade school, especially those of us that went to grade school on a military base.

The above two posts nail it.
I can tell ya right now it will be a "secure in place" scenario.
That way they have a nice and contained crime scene.
Maybe if they didn't have such a screwed up upper echelon doing stupid shit they wouldn't be so concerned..
The only thing I miss is the paycheck.......

Probably not a bad idea. You CDOT workers are a little "off" anyways. Present company included of course. [LOL]

My work has 'active shooter' training and exercises. It's basically hide and seek. We hide silently, behind closed and hopefully locked, doors, and let the shooter seek others who weren't locked out of the offices (in hallways, restrooms, break areas, etc). Eventually, we'll be 'rescued'. There's no training added for fighting back, protecting one's self, or even for the aftermath. All said...worthless. And worse, it's a place that doesn't allow CCW, nor any knives beyond certain length.

Yeah we go through this shit every year, in the video it's always a whacked out old white dude with a mullet wearing camo wielding an ak. Why can't it be a black dude with a hi point? Or better yet get realistic with it and have some skinny white kid that looks like he hasn't taken his zombie pills for 4 days with nothing but the liberal agenda and a 9th place ribbon on his mind.

Sonsabitches.

This class is actually 1.5 hours long and taught by the CDOT safety officer, so no money was wasted on instructors, but lots of wasted time & salary to attend.

The class was not too bad. Some didn't know that state employees could carry while at work. Very puzzled looks when I said if you take out the shooter, to holster the gun before the swat shows up.

RUN. HIDE. FIGHT.® Surviving an Active Shooter Ev…: http://youtu.be/5VcSwejU2D0

This is what they'll watch. Like someone mentioned, common sense for those not armed.

We did a mandatory one at the last job. One of the members here was the instructor. FWIW: it only does what one want's it to do. For the unarmed / un gun friendly, it just increases their paranoia, but forces them to think. . For the armed among us it was like, ok who handles what.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric P

This class is actually 1.5 hours long and taught by the CDOT safety officer, so no money was wasted on instructors, but lots of wasted time & salary to attend.

The class was not too bad. Some didn't know that they state employees could carry while at work. Very puzzled looks when I said if you take out the shooter, to holster the gun before the swat shows up.

---

The last time I checked, you couldn't even have a firearm in your vehicle on CDOT property. Please do tell where it says that state employees can carry while at work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SideShow Bob

The last time I checked, you couldn't even have a firearm in your vehicle on CDOT property. Please do tell where it says that state employees can carry while at work.

---

I was actually hoping you could shed some light on your claim. What State employee manual covering all State employees prohibits firearms in the workplace? I've not seen it. Maybe CDOT has their own special rules, I don't know.

They had a rule after the Greeley shooting, but their rule was wiped out by the CCW law. I and many more carry everyday in CDOT vehicles and in the office.

It was fun to watch some reactions when they realized that someone in their workgroup may have a gun less than 10 ft away from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aardvark

My work has 'active shooter' training and exercises. It's basically hide and seek. We hide silently, behind closed and hopefully locked, doors, and let the shooter seek others who weren't locked out of the offices (in hallways, restrooms, break areas, etc). Eventually, we'll be 'rescued'. There's no training added for fighting back, protecting one's self, or even for the aftermath. All said...worthless. And worse, it's a place that doesn't allow CCW, nor any knives beyond certain length.

---

We just got to watch a video. There was a fight back scenario, but it was after the run or hide choices. In this video, when trapped in a conference room, it's evidently corporate policy to throw potted plants at an AK armed attacker. Of course, our company is based in California, so who would expect anything any different.

The instructor, a high mucky muck, said in the class in Cali, when he asked who had fired or held a gun or heard gunfire, maybe 2 out of 30 raised their hands. In our CO class, it was 100%. I've formally requested a company approved and provided potted plant for my cube, and I wonder if I can get away with bringing it to meetings.

CDOT has a very clear policy of NO "weapons" on CDOT property at any time unless it is a requirement of your job duties.
This also applies to private contractors on CDOT projects and property.
I as well would like to know just what position a weapon is a requirement for CDOT job duties.
Unfortunately I have been out of the system for a year so I cannot quote the exact policy/directive. I would like to see in writing where the No Weapons policy has been rescinded.
The CCW statute came into effect when I was a TMIII, I would have known in a change in policy/directive.
I even pushed the fact up the chain- how can a state entity forbid a permitted concealed permit holder from carrying on state property? The statute is clear that private property owners may forbid the carrying of a concealed weapon but there is no such provision for state property. In addition how can a state entity openly defy state law and constitution?
I never got a coherent answer and even Legal never provided any insight.
I also asked if CDOT denies a lawfull and permitted individual from carrying, what duty does CDOT have to protect their employees?
Crickets.
Hell, they even gave me grief at headquarters for my Gerber Fairburn/Applegate I carried daily.
If they only knew....

When I worked at AAA (across the street from CDOT) they used an example of someone keeping a gun in his desk, and being a jerk to his co-workers and openly talking about how he kept a gun in his desk. They told this story as an example of a "see something, say something" type deal because supposedly he had a gun at his desk for years and everyone was just too cowardly to say anything. Anyway, that all supposedly happened at CDOT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

CDOT has a very clear policy of NO "weapons" on CDOT property at any time unless it is a requirement of your job duties.
This also applies to private contractors on CDOT projects and property.
I as well would like to know just what position a weapon is a requirement for CDOT job duties.
Unfortunately I have been out of the system for a year so I cannot quote the exact policy/directive. I would like to see in writing where the No Weapons policy has been rescinded.
The CCW statute came into effect when I was a TMIII, I would have known in a change in policy/directive.
I even pushed the fact up the chain- how can a state entity forbid a permitted concealed permit holder from carrying on state property? The statute is clear that private property owners may forbid the carrying of a concealed weapon but there is no such provision for state property. In addition how can a state entity openly defy state law and constitution?
I never got a coherent answer and even Legal never provided any insight.
I also asked if CDOT denies a lawfull and permitted individual from carrying, what duty does CDOT have to protect their employees?
Crickets.
Hell, they even gave me grief at headquarters for my Gerber Fairburn/Applegate I carried daily.
If they only knew....

---

Thanks Bert, and guess what, CDOT' does not have any public links ( at least that I could find ) to this policy on the interwebz. Guess I'll have to dig up a current Employee handbook, then copy and paste it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SideShow Bob

Thanks Bert, and guess what, CDOT' does not have any public links ( at least that I could find ) to this policy on the interwebz. Guess I'll have to dig up a current Employee handbook, then copy and paste it.

---

You will have to look on the internal website Bobbo, under Policy and Procedure, more than likely under the Personnel tab. It may be contained in Workplace Violence, which IIRC is 17 and 17.1

That being said prior to the Greeley incident in which Charlene Nail was killed and Karla Harding was wounded we used to shoot our pistols in the salt dome at the old Wadsworth Shed that housed patrols 13,14 and 25 on snow shift at night.
There were a lot of 230gr pumpkin heads that were tossed out on 36 in a drop box sander.
Oh, and a .45 is really, really loud in a salt dome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kidicarus13

RUN. HIDE. FIGHT.® Surviving an Active Shooter Ev…: http://youtu.be/5VcSwejU2D0

This is what they'll watch. Like someone mentioned, common sense for those not armed.

---

I was just trying to remember that video to post myself LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kidicarus13

RUN. HIDE. FIGHT.® Surviving an Active Shooter Ev…: http://youtu.be/5VcSwejU2D0

This is what they'll watch. Like someone mentioned, common sense for those not armed.

---

Ours was an internally developed presentation, nowhere near as engaging as that dramatization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rucker61

We just got to watch a video. There was a fight back scenario, but it was after the run or hide choices. In this video, when trapped in a conference room, it's evidently corporate policy to throw potted plants at an AK armed attacker. Of course, our company is based in California, so who would expect anything any different.

The instructor, a high mucky muck, said in the class in Cali, when he asked who had fired or held a gun or heard gunfire, maybe 2 out of 30 raised their hands. In our CO class, it was 100%. I've formally requested a company approved and provided potted plant for my cube, and I wonder if I can get away with bringing it to meetings.

---

Co. I work for is based out of NYC... So same attitude, it did use the the "RUN. HIDE. FIGHT." Mantra... It actually said in the FIGHT section "throw something heavy, like a stapler"
My requests for tactical stapler training went unanswered

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

CDOT has a very clear policy of NO "weapons" on CDOT property at any time unless it is a requirement of your job duties.
This also applies to private contractors on CDOT projects and property.
I as well would like to know just what position a weapon is a requirement for CDOT job duties.
Unfortunately I have been out of the system for a year so I cannot quote the exact policy/directive. I would like to see in writing where the No Weapons policy has been rescinded.
The CCW statute came into effect when I was a TMIII, I would have known in a change in policy/directive.
I even pushed the fact up the chain- how can a state entity forbid a permitted concealed permit holder from carrying on state property? The statute is clear that private property owners may forbid the carrying of a concealed weapon but there is no such provision for state property. In addition how can a state entity openly defy state law and constitution?
I never got a coherent answer and even Legal never provided any insight.
I also asked if CDOT denies a lawfull and permitted individual from carrying, what duty does CDOT have to protect their employees?
Crickets.
Hell, they even gave me grief at headquarters for my Gerber Fairburn/Applegate I carried daily.
If they only knew....

---

When they posted an internal blog on our forced homepage about the training, they had many (including me) posted what a joke it was, and that the company should defer to local laws on ccw... I received a call from the CSO (chief security officer) of Corporate... We agreed to disagree. Thankfully, I work from my home 80+% now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

I even pushed the fact up the chain- how can a state entity forbid a permitted concealed permit holder from carrying on state property? The statute is clear that private property owners may forbid the carrying of a concealed weapon but there is no such provision for state property. In addition how can a state entity openly defy state law and constitution?

---

The state can make it a condition of employment that employees or contractors may not CCW on duty on state property. CDOT cannot arbitrarily prohibit private persons from carrying concealed on CDOT property unless they comply with the screening requirements (security personnel and electronic screening permanently in place at each entrance to the CDOT facility).

My coworkers and higher ups either don't believe in guns, or don't believe in wasting time worrying about "what if"...... So I'm totally safe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

CDOT has a very clear policy of NO "weapons" on CDOT property at any time unless it is a requirement of your job duties.
This also applies to private contractors on CDOT projects and property.
I as well would like to know just what position a weapon is a requirement for CDOT job duties.
Unfortunately I have been out of the system for a year so I cannot quote the exact policy/directive. I would like to see in writing where the No Weapons policy has been rescinded.
The CCW statute came into effect when I was a TMIII, I would have known in a change in policy/directive.
I even pushed the fact up the chain- how can a state entity forbid a permitted concealed permit holder from carrying on state property? The statute is clear that private property owners may forbid the carrying of a concealed weapon but there is no such provision for state property. In addition how can a state entity openly defy state law and constitution?
I never got a coherent answer and even Legal never provided any insight.
I also asked if CDOT denies a lawfull and permitted individual from carrying, what duty does CDOT have to protect their employees?
Crickets.
Hell, they even gave me grief at headquarters for my Gerber Fairburn/Applegate I carried daily.
If they only knew....

---

Whoever in the chain who told you CCW was not allowed was clearly not knowledgeable about CDOT policy. CDOT only prohibits illeagal possecion of firearms:

From the current workplace violence PD:

"Illegal possession of a firearm(s) or weapons(s) of any kind, including those defined by Colorado Revised Statute (C.R.S.) Title 18, Article 1 (firearms) and Article 12 (dangerous and illegal weapons), is prohibited at work or on state property including state vehicles."

Attachment 45707 <== not sure if this worked, its the CDOT PD on workplace violence.

I had confirmed this with HR a few years ago and re-confirmed when they started notifying us that we will be taking this class. The instructor even said CDOT could not prevent any citizen including CDOT employees from carrying on state property unless the facility met the security requirements in the law.

That sounds like a pretty reasonable policy, especially for a state entity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

That sounds like a pretty reasonable policy, especially for a state entity.

---

That is just the brief policy, the actual procedural directive is about 20 pages long.
I am not sold on it.
I rearranged my office about a month ago, I will try to go through some boxes and see what I can find on hard copy.

Gonna make a couple of phone calls and see what I can find.

Definitely...I'm sure there's more to it than just a few sentences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

That is just the brief policy, the actual procedural directive is about 20 pages long.
I am not sold on it.
I rearranged my office about a month ago, I will try to go through some boxes and see what I can find on hard copy.

Gonna make a couple of phone calls and see what I can find.

---

Here you go:

Says the same thing.

Attachment 45713

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric P

Here you go:

Says the same thing.

Attachment 45713

---

Eric- Color me shocked! I just got off of the phone with one who would know, he even took it to the AG's office for clarification.
The policy 80.10 Workplace Violence was realigned to conform to the Colorado statute on concealed carry. As was noted in what you posted it only addresses "Illegal Weapons".
A lawful holder of a Concealed Carry permit may carry on CDOT property and assets.
I am totally floored that TPTB would actually employ some common sense when it comes to this issue.
You have my apologies Eric.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

I as well would like to know just what position a weapon is a requirement for CDOT job duties.

---

My first thought is for the State Patrol people who help on the jobs at times. My dad works for CDOT out of Loveland, and sometimes they need ST assistance (for instance, on night job sites they sometimes have a SP car sitting in a job area, in part I think to encourage drivers to drive more safely, but also so that errant drivers will hit the SP cruiser rather than hit the workers).

Sounds like your getting paid for playing hide and seek.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric P

Here you go:

Says the same thing.

Attachment 45713

---

Thank you, my jaw is on the floor. I will try and find a copy of the memo / directive that was given out about 2-3 years ago with an accompanying signature sheet that all supervisors were to have all employees sign after reading.
This was in the former Region 6.